罗隆基人权理论阐释及其质疑

在20世纪20年代末、30年代初,罗隆基不仅仅反对国民党的一党专制和个人独裁,也不同意马克思主义理论和暴力革命。在人权概念上,罗隆基创造性提出了人权是做人的必要条件,并在人权与国家、人权与法律、人权时空性等问题上,构建了一系列人权理论。罗隆基主张人权与反对暴力革命是其人权理论应有之义,目的在于对中国加以改造,使之走上宪政之路。     

后马克思主义语境中的法律思想及其法理脉络

后马克思主义宣称他们的理论内在于马克思主义的谱系学之中,但是,不遗余力地撕裂经济基础与上层建筑的叙事方式,使得他们的理论与马克思主义的"阶级"、三个层面(经济、政治和意识形态)、生产力与生产关系之间的矛盾关系等理论其实无关,无可撼摇的法律理论根基与正当性基础荡然无存。由于后马克思主义撕裂并消解经济基础与上层建筑的关联,赋予法律"政治"本体论属性、把"话语"看成是"法律"生成的主要元素,同时认为"法律"是伴随人类永恒存在的社会事实等认知,严重腐蚀了马克思主义法律理论根基,后马克思主义对"法"的主张与马克思主义法律思想及其法理脉络相去甚远,偏离多于继承。     

论西方马克思主义法学的基本特征与现实价值

西方马克思主义是指除了经典马克思主义和列宁主义之外的马克思主义。其特征是:在形式上,它是多线索、多形态展开的理论形态;在内容上,它既批判资本主义制度,也批判传统的社会主义制度;在方法论上,它突出了其法学理论的非无产阶级的主体性倾向。从总体上看,它可以分为以下四个时期:思想准备时期(19世纪末——20世纪20年代);创立时期(20世纪20年代——30年代);发展时期(20世纪30年代——70年代);“多元化”时期(20世纪80年代至今)。它具有重要的理论意义:扩大了马克思主义法学研究的视域;丰富了马克思主义法学的理论资源;有助于坚持和发展马克思主义法学的理论宝库。     

三个虚构矛盾和一个事实矛盾——评凯尔森《布尔什维主义的政治理论》

奥地利法学家汉斯·凯尔森创立了“纯粹法学” ,他反对在法学研究中掺入任何价值标准和意识形态的因素 ,一贯倡导法学研究的纯粹性。在《布尔什维主义的政治理论》一书中 ,凯尔森认为布尔什维主义的政治理论中存在三对矛盾 ,因而得出布尔什维主义在实践上是极权主义的结论。但是事实上 ,凯尔森所谓的三对矛盾都是他主观臆造的产物。因此 ,凯尔森以主观判断得出的结论代替客观事实进行政治学研究 ,恰恰违背了他自己所提倡的方法论准则。     

邓小平与马克思主义美学中国化——《祝词》中的美学思想

邓小平是构建毛泽东思想的积极参与者,是中国改革开放的总设计师。在文化大革命的十年浩劫之后,他坚持马克思主义、毛泽东思想,拨乱反正,正本清源,继续丰富和发展中国化马克思主义美学,为迎接中国新的文艺春天,吹送东风,焕发精神,形成氛围。他继承和发扬了毛泽东思想美学的党性原则、工农兵方向、人民至上论、"洋为中用,古为今用"和"百花齐放,百家争鸣"方针,废止了"文艺为政治服务"的口号,正确处理了文艺与政治的关系,提出了"文艺为社会主义服务,为人民服务"的方针。他在思想文化战线上坚持"四项基本原则",注意运用实事求是的辩证方法,反对资产阶级自由化,为中国新时期社会主义文艺的繁荣和发展,进行了马克思主义美学中国化的实践和理论总结。     

政治、审议民主与司法审查:论青年桑斯坦的宪法理论

凯斯·桑斯坦是当代美国最具学术影响力的宪法学家。作为20世纪80年代美国宪法共和主义复兴的理论主将,桑斯坦建构了以审议民主为中心的政治、宪法与司法审查理论。在政治理论中,审议民主构成了共和主义政治区别于多元主义政治的关键;在宪法理论中,美国宪法规定了以审议民主为核心的政治结构和决策过程,私人的"赤裸偏好"不是政府行为的正当性依据;而在司法审查理论中,法院的角色是审议政治的审议者,因此要求一种能动的司法审查。     

19、20世纪的德国民法学

19、20世纪的德国民法学对包括我国在内的世界各国近现代民法立法和民法理论产生了重大影响。即使在今天,我国的民法研究在诸多方面仍然是围绕它而展开的。德国19、20世纪的民法学,大致可以分为四个时期:一是19世纪前半期的"法典论争"和"历史法学"时期;二是19世纪后半期的"概念法学和德国民法典"时期;三是20世纪前半期的"自由法运动"和"法社会学"时期;四是20世纪后半叶的"现代私法学"时期。研究德国19、20世纪的民法学,对于反思和总结我国今天的民法研究,把握未来民法学发展的方向,具有重要意义。     

西方马克思主义法学的源流、方法与价值

自奥地利马克思主义者卡尔.伦纳的《私法制度及其社会功能》在20世纪初出版以来,西方马克思主义法学不仅成果颇丰,其研究中心也经历了从欧陆到英美的转变。西方马克思主义法学在方法论和认识论方面呈现出丰富多彩的多元化状态,众多流派的学者从批判的、概念分析的、自然主义的、社会理论的、结构主义的、女权主义的视角对马克思主义法律理论做出了新的解读。探索和思考西方马克思主义法学,可以拓宽马克思主义法律理论的研究向度,促进我国马克思主义法学理论与西方马克思主义法学的沟通与交流,并对西方马克思主义法学中尊重历史的文化遗产与理论成果加以吸收和借鉴。     

高兹的生态学马克思主义哲学思想及其启示

法国著名学者安德烈·高兹(Andre Gorz)是20世纪70年代到90年代重要的生态学马克思主义的代表人物,他提出了很多马克思主义式的生态学思想和观点,它的政治生态学理论、经济理性批判理论,异化消费理论,小规模、分散化的技术思想以及他对资本主义生态危机的根源的揭示和对生态社会主义建设的构象,在西方生态学马克思主义阵营中产生了深刻的影响,同时对我国构建可持续发展的和谐社会主义社会具有非常重要的启示作用。     

论本·阿格尔生态学马克思主义思想内在逻辑

"生态学马克思主义"概念,是由本·阿格尔首次提出的。本·阿格尔用生态危机理论补充马克思经济危机理论的不足,认为生态学马克思主义的起点是马克思的辩证法理论,提出了以生态危机取代经济危机的思想,认为生态危机根源于异化消费。阿格尔同时还提出了"期望破灭的辩证法",开启了20世纪西方马克思主义发展的新阶段。对《西方马克思主义概论》中本·阿格尔的生态学马克思主义思想进行分析,旨在厘清阿格尔生态学马克思主义思想的内在逻辑,进而把握阿格尔生态马克思主义思想的理论价值及局限性。     

Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana on Avidyā

The concept of avidyā is one of the central categories in the Advaita of Śaṇkara and Maṇḍana. Shifting the focus from māyā, interpreted either as illusion or as the divine power, this concept brings ignorance to the forefront in describing duality and bondage. Although all Advaitins accept avidyā as a category, its scope and nature is interpreted in multiple ways. Key elements in Maṇḍana’s philosophy include the plurality of avidyā, individual selves as its substrate and the Brahman as its field (viṣaya), and the distinction in avidyā between non-apprehension and misapprehension. A closer investigation shows that Maṇḍana is directly influenced by Bhartṛhari’s linguistic non-dualism in developing the concept of avidyā. This study also compares other key constituents such as vivartta and pariṇāma that are relevant to the analysis of avidyā. As the concept of counter-image (pratibimba) emerges as a distinct stream of Advaita subsequent to Maṇḍana, this study also compares the application of pratibimba in the writings of Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana.     

Unraveling the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Kāvyaprakāśa</Emphasis>: Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa’s idiosyncratic sequence of topics in the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Candrāloka</Emphasis>

In his twelfth century alaṃkāraśāstra, the Candrāloka, Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa reverses the sequence of topics found in Mammaṭa’s Kāvyapr-akāśa, an earlier and immensely popular work. With such a structural revisionism, Jayadeva asserts the autonomy of his own work and puts forth an ambitious critique of earlier approaches to literary analysis. Jayadeva investigates the technical and aesthetic components of poetry in the first part of the Candrāloka, prior to his formal semantic investigations in the latter half of the text, thus suggesting that aesthetic evaluations of poetry beneficially inform scientific investigations of language. Jayadeva’s organization of his chapters on the semantic operations, moreover, intimates that the study of suggestive and metaphoric functions of language clarifies our understanding of denotation, which is conventionally understood to be the primary and direct path of verbal designation.     

The Supreme Array Scripture: A New Interpretation of the Title “Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra”

This article argues for a new interpretation of the Sanskrit compound gaṇḍa-vyūha as it is used in the common title of the Mahāyāna text the Gaṇḍavyūha-Sūtra.The author begins by providing a brief history of the sūtra’s appellations in Chinese and Tibetan sources. Next, the meanings of gaṇḍa (the problematic member of the compound) are explored. The author proposes that contemporary scholars have overlooked a meaning of gaṇḍa occurring in some compounds, wherein gaṇḍa can mean simply “great,” “big” or “massive.” This general sense is particularly common in the compound gaṇda-śaila (a “massive rock” or “boulder”) and is found in such texts as the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the Harivaṃśa and the Harṣacarita. Following the discussion of Gaṇḍa, the author examines the term vyūha (“array”) as it is used in the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra. The article concludes with the suggestion that a more appropriate translation of the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra would be “The Supreme array Scripture.”     

Evaluation of six presumptive tests for blood, their specificity, sensitivity, and effect on high molecular-weight DNA

Luminol, leuchomalachite green, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, Hemident, and Bluestar are all used as presumptive tests for blood. In this study, the tests were subjected to dilute blood (from 1:10,000 to 1:10,000,000), many common household substance, and chemicals. Samples were tested for DNA to determine whether the presumptive tests damaged or destroyed DNA. The DNA loci tested were D2S1338 and D19S433. Leuchomalachite green had a sensitivity of 1:10,000, while the remaining tests were able to detect blood to a dilution of 1:100,000. Substances tested include saliva, semen, potato, tomato, tomato sauce, tomato sauce with meat, red onion, red kidney bean, horseradish, 0.1 M ascorbic acid, 5% bleach, 10% cupric sulfate, 10% ferric sulfate, and 10% nickel chloride. Of all the substances tested, not one of the household items reacted with every test; however, the chemicals did. DNA was recovered and amplified from luminol, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, and Bluestar, but not from leuchomalachite green or Hemident.     

Turning a Madhyamaka Trick: Reply to Huntington

Huntington (2007); argues that recent commentators (Robinson, 1957; Hayes, 1994; Tillemans, 1999; Garfield and Priest, 2002) err in attributing to Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti a commitment to rationality and to the use of argument, and that these commentators do violence to the Madhyamaka project by using rational reconstruction in their interpretation of Nāgārjuna’s and Candrakīrti’s texts. Huntington argues instead that mādhyamikas reject reasoning, distrust logic and do not offer arguments. He also argues that interpreters ought to recuse themselves from argument in order to be faithful to these texts. I demonstrate that he is wrong in all respects: Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti deploy arguments, take themselves to do so, and even if they did not, we would be wise to do so in commenting on their texts.     

Monks Who Have Sex: Pārājika Penance in Indian Buddhist Monasticisms

In the study of Buddhism it is commonly accepted that a monk or nun who commits a pārājika offence is permanently and irrevocably expelled from the Buddhist monastic order. This view is based primarily on readings of the Pāli Vinaya. With the exception of the Pāli Vinaya, however, all other extant Buddhist monastic law codes (Dharmaguptaka, Mahāsāṅghika, Mahīśāsaka, Sarvāstivāda and Mūlasarvāstivāda) contain detailed provisions for monks and nuns who commit pārājikas but nevertheless wish to remain within the saṅgha. These monastics are not expelled. Rather, they are granted a special status known as the śikṣādattaka. In this paper I explore the rules. concerning pārājika penance and the śikṣādattaka with specific regard to monastic celibacy. Given that five out of six extant law codes recognise this remarkable accommodation to the rule of celibacy, I argue that we must look to Vinayas other than the Pāli Vinaya if we are to arrive at a nuanced and representative view of Indian Buddhist monasticism.

Grant me chastity and continence, but not yet. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.)

     

Family breakdown and the ‘Welfare Child’ in 19th and 20th century Britain

This article traces new cycles of interest in past children as distinct from past childhood. Recent work highlighting that a conceptualisation of childhood existed even in periods with few written records closes the chapter begun by Philippe Ariès in 1960. Instead, there has been a new surge of interest in children on the edges of family life, as well as children in similarly liminal positions between the worlds of adults and children: runaways, delinquents and orphans. Several themes in the literature are identified, based on the conflicting ideas of ‘body/mind’, ‘victim/threat’, ‘needs/rights’. It is noted that researchers are using more imaginative ways of reaching the lived experience of children than the family or institutional framework, and that an increasing link is drawn between historical and modern concerns such as child abuse and the care of ‘at risk’ children.     

Vedic Language and Vaiṣṇava Theology:Madhva’s Use of Nirukta in his Ṛgbhāṣya

This article explores the way in which Madhva (1238–1317), the founder of the Dvaita Vedānta system of Hindu thought, reformulates the traditional exegetic practice of nirukta or “word derivation” to validate his pluralistic, hierarchical, and Vaiṣṇava reading of the Ṛgvedic hymns. Madhva’s Ṛgbhāṣya (RB) is conspicuous for its heavy reliance on and unique deployment of this exegetical tactic to validate several key features of his distinctive theology. These features include his belief in Viṣṇu’s unique possession of all perfect attributes (guṇaparipūrṇatva) and His related conveyability by all Vedic words (sarvaśabdavācyatva). Such an understanding of Vedic language invokes the basic nirukta presupposition that words are eternally affiliated with the meanings they convey. But it is also based onMadhva’s access to a lexicon entitled Vyāsa’s Nirukti with which his critics and perhaps even his commentators seem to be unfamiliar.While the precise status of this text is the subject of ongoing debate, Madhva’s possession of special insight into the sacred canon is established in part by his unique claim to be an avatāra of the wind god Vāyu and a direct disciple of Viṣṇu Himself in the form of Vyāsa₁. Thus, Madhva’s use of nirukta invokes his personal charisma to challenge not only conventional understandings of the hymns but traditional exegetic norms. Madhva’s provision of an alternative tradition of nirukta provoked sectarian debate throughout the Vijayanagara period over the extent to which one could innovate in established practices of reading the Veda. Articulating the Veda’s precise authority was a key feature of Brahmin debates during this period and reflects both the empire’s concern with promoting a shared religious ideology and the competition among rival Brahman sects for imperial patronage that this concern elicited. By looking at how two of Madhva’s most important commentators (the 14^th-century Jayatīrtha and the 17^th-century Rāghavendra) sought to defend his niruktis, this article will explore how notions of normative nirukta were articulated in response to Madhva’s deviations. At the same time, however, examining Madhva’s commentators’ defense of his niruktis also demonstrates the extent to which Madhva actually adhered to selected exegetic norms. This reveals that discomfort with Madhva’s particular methods for deriving words stemmed, in part, from a more general ambivalence towards this exegetical tactic whose inherent open-endedness threatened to undermine the fixity of the canon’s very substance: its language. Vyāsa’s Nirukti is one of several ”unknown sources” cited in Madhva’s commentaries whose exact status continues to be debated. Some scholars (e.g. Rao, Sharma, Siauve) maintain that these texts are part of a now lost Pāṅcarātra tradition that Madhva is attempting to preserve. This may be true for many of these citations. However, in addition to claiming to be both an avatāra of Vāyu and Viṣṇu-as-Vyāsa’s student, Madhva states in several places (e.g., VTN 42, RB 162) that the canon has suffered loss during transmission and that only Viṣṇu can reveal it in its entirety. Thus, it is possible that Madhva intends texts like Vyāsa’s Nirukti to be viewed as part of an ongoing and corrective revelation, a notion that is compatible with many Vaiṣṇava traditions (Halbfass, 1991: 4).     

Student mentoring to enhance graduates’ employability potential

This paper considers whether the adoption of a subject-specific, classroom-based, voluntary extra-curricular student mentoring scheme could provide an effective mechanism and andragogic approach to enhance higher education students’ employability potential pre-graduation.Over the three-year pilot, 26 more advanced (second to fourth year) undergraduate students actively mentored nearly 400 first year undergraduate students during workshops delivered annually within forensic and policing focused courses. In total, 17 mentors anonymously completed online, post-scheme surveys. Survey data was quantitatively analysed to evaluate the scheme, establish which skills and attributes mentors had developed and investigate whether mentors could appropriately identify example skills within professional terminology used during employer recruitment. In addition, this paper reflects on the implementation of remote student mentoring during the COVID-19 pandemic and its adoption within a blended learning framework.The results from this research strongly support mentoring as an effective mechanism to develop undergraduate employability skills, significantly developing mentors’ self-confidence and self-efficacy in their interpersonal and communication skills. Although mentors were aware of university graduate attributes and thought they could evidence these with appropriate examples, in practice this was not necessarily the case. As a result, a framework is proposed to enable mentors to identify their skills and how they may align with competencies sought by relevant forensic and policing employers. However, other andragogic practices may need to be implemented to maximise the potential for successful graduate employment.     

The Mūlāvidyā Controversy Among Advaita Vedāntins: was Śaṅkara Himself Responsible?

The concept of avidyā or ignorance is central to the Advaita Vedāntic position of Śȧnkara. The post-Śaṅkara Advaitins wrote sub-commentaries on the original texts of Śaṅkara with the intention of strengthening his views. Over the passage of time the views of these sub-commentators of Śaṅkara came to be regarded as representing the doctrine of Advaita particularly with regard to the concept of avidyā. Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati, a scholar-monk of Holenarsipur, challenged the accepted tradition through the publication of his work Mūlāvidyānirāsaḥ, particularly with regard to the avidyādoctrine. It was his contention that the post-Śaṅkara commentators brought their own innovations particularly on the nature of avidyā. This was the idea of mūlāvidyā or ‘root ignorance’, a positive entity which is the material cause of the phenomenal world. Saraswati argues that such an idea of mūlāvidyā is not to be found in the bhāṣyas (commentaries) of Śaṅkara and is foisted upon Śaṅkara. This paper attempts to show that although Śaṅkara may not have explicitly favoured such a view of mūlāvidyā, his lack of clarity on the nature of avidyā left enough scope for the post-Śaṅkara commentators to take such a position on avidyā.