学习科学发展观,探索思想政治教育的方法化

方法化是贯通主体内化、外化和实践的能动发展过程和机制,是人的主体能动性的独特表现。思想政治教育的方法化对思想政治教育发展、受教育者的成长成才、思想政治教育有效性具有重要意义,是对思想政治教育工作者的时代要求。学习科学发展观,坚持以人为本,坚持全面、协调、可持续发展原则,探索思想政治教育的方法化。     

从认知心理学到认知神经科学:范式检讨与文化自觉

过去40年间,认知心理学对人类信息加工过程进行精细的实验研究,概括出许多心理过程的基本特性,提供了理解心理过程个体差异的科学基础.从当初的认知科学到现如今的认知神经科学,它大体经历了三个主要研究范式:符号范式、联结主义范式和具身认知范式.以库恩范式论来观照,从认知科学到认知神经科学每一种范式的转变,实际上都内在地蕴含了其自身研究理念、研究方式与研究技术的深刻变革.对每一种范式演变历程予以深度反思,一方面可以启发范式检讨,这是加深对其理解与应用,使之走向文化自觉的重要步骤,同时也是引领心理学从认知革命到认知神经科学演变进程更趋合理化、语境化与文化化,从而使人能够获得更为立体、全面的解读.     

Legal System on Continental Shelf beyond 200 Nautical Miles VS China

联合国第三次海洋法会议经过艰苦卓绝的谈判诞生了人类历史上迄今为止最为全面、最为完整的海洋法典——1982年《联合国海洋法公约》.《公约》创设了以第76条和附件二为核心的200海里以外大陆架的法律制度,使沿海国得以在大陆架界限委员会的指导和协助下依据国际法建立范围最大、也是最后的国家管辖海域.地理位置相对不利的中国虽然存在一定的机遇.但来自周边各国的严峻挑战使得中国在东海、南海的200海里以外大陆架的划界异常艰难.中国需要在国家层面从历史性权力和全球战略的视角提出中国未来海洋权益的目标和对策.     

论身份混同背景下我国外资并购中国家安全审查程序的完善

我国现有的外资并购中的国家安全审查程序主要是站在资本输入大国的立场设计的,没有考虑到我国既是"引进来战略"下的资本输入大国,又是"走出去战略"下的资本输出大国的混同身份。已有的审查程序在启动审查、申报前磋商、重新启动审查等方面不完善,减缓协议、申报撤回、监督机制、权利救济机制等制度缺失。借鉴国外成熟的经验,考虑身份混同对审查程序的新要求,我国应完善关于启动审查、申报前磋商、重新启动审查的规定,增加减缓协议制度、申报撤回制度、监督机制、权利救济机制。     

The Study on Richard Shusterman's Philosophy of Art

Shusterman's philosophy of art based on the pragmatism philosophy and the reconstruction of aesthetic experience, and with “inclusively disjunctive stance” as its theoretical method reinterpreted the issues such as “the end of art” and the definition of art and the popular art and so on. His philosophy of art focused on strengthening the understanding and experience of art. It also emphasized the continuity between art and life, so it reflected the vivid and pragmatic color.     

刑事侦查中犯罪嫌疑人权利论纲

刑事侦查中,犯罪嫌疑人处于受追诉地位,其权利容易受到代表国家的侦查权的侵害,因而对其权利进行保护就非常重要。犯罪嫌疑人享有的权利包括实体性权利和程序性权利,这些权利不是固定不变的,而是具有开放性的。     

关于“航海过失免责”的再思考

“航海过失免责”是海商法中一项特有的制度．它对合理分担船货双方的风险、促进国际贸易和国际航运的发展起到了积极的促进作用。值得注意的是,已在联合国贸法会通过三读的《联合国统一运输法草案》废除了“航海过失免责”,实行的是与《汉堡规则》一致的承运人严格责任制度。面对这一形势,是否应当修改我国《海商法》的规定,取消航海过失免责夺款？通过对有关历史、现实、立法价值取向的分析,我国取消航海过失免责,还为时尚早。     

秘密侦查的多维解读与功能诠释

传统上我国学者对秘密侦查的概念也进行了研究,但对其概念的本质内涵及与临近概念的相互关系上还有待进一步界定。按照不同标准,可对秘密侦查可作不同的划分。秘密侦查具有诉讼、防卫两大功能,我们必须平衡这两大功能之价值。     

事件相关电位客观评估视敏度的法医学应用

目的研究不同视敏度水平的事件相关电位(event-related potential,ERP)成分特征,以期为视敏度的客观评定提供理论依据。方法选取16名被试进行单眼刺激。要求被试眼平视前方屏幕,注意屏幕中央的视觉刺激并对朝向不同的刺激进行计数。屏幕的中央会显示3种不同视敏度水平所对应的视标刺激图片,分别记录其ERP结果。结果 (1)阈上视敏度水平一致刺激的P_1振幅高于阈值、阈下视敏度水平一致刺激的P_1振幅,阈值和阈下视敏度水平一致刺激的P_1振幅差异无统计学意义,冲突刺激与一致刺激在3种视敏度水平的趋势类似。(2)阈上和阈值视敏度水平都出现了潜伏期在340~500 ms内的P300成分;阈下视敏度水平在相应的时间窗内无P300成分。3种视敏度水平的P_(300)振幅差异有统计学意义,振幅由大到小分别为阈上、阈值、阈下视敏度水平。结论 ERP技术可以成为法医学客观评定视敏度的新手段。     

RESEARCH ON THEORY,LEGISLATIONS AND PRACTICES ABOUT REGULATING NON-PRACTICING ENTITIES IN CHINA

Non-Practicing Entities (NPE), as a subject, is a neutral concept, but the derogatory sense of translation and understanding on this concept and the chaos of understanding make the legal regulation of NPE encounter more difficulties and challenges. In fact, NPE issues are concerned, discussed and researched in China within quite a long period, however, it would not become an outstanding legal issue nowadays. NPE as a market entity, its existence is legitimate per se, and what the law should focus on is the unfair conduct that NPE might be engaged in rather than the subject of NPE itself. It is not necessary to make specific articles and provisions on the subject of NPE at present in the Patent Law of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the PRC which are revised in China, and a serial of rules and guidelines for Anti-Monopoly Law of the PRC which are formulated in China. It proved that the unfair conducts of NPE should be regulated according to Patent law, Anti-Unfair Competition Law and Anti-Monopoly Law as well as, reconfirmed that the conclusion that the regulation of NPE in China laws focus on conducts rather than subject in a serial of cases such as the anti-monopoly investigation case against INTERDIGITAL Corporation initiated by the National Development and Reform Commission, the case that the Ministry of Commerce imposed restrictive conditions to approve that Microsoft acquired Nokia equipment and service business, and the commercial defamation case that Shenzhen Libang Precision Instrument Co., Ltd vs Shenzhen Mairui Biological Medical Electronic Co., Ltd which was reviewed by the Supreme People’s Court.