密尔功利主义对我国当今道德教育的启示

我国当今的道德教育 ,在教育内容、教育实践、教育结果上均存在一些问题。密尔的功利主义伦理观 ,给我们的道德教育提供了一些有益的启示 :在道德教育中应肯定个人利益存在的合理性 ,追求个人利益应不侵犯他人利益 ;道德教育要强调精神幸福优于物质幸福 ;道德评价在注重行为结果的同时还应考虑行为的动机     

科学发展 关注民生——以江西为例看科学发展与改善民生的关系

科学发展观同民生直接相关,解决民生问题必须深入贯彻落实科学发展观。深入贯彻落实科学发展观,要求我们坚持以人为本,加快推进以改善民生为重点的社会建设。只有科学发展观落实好了,民生问题才能解决好;只有着力解决好民生问题,才能把科学发展观落到实处。     

Relationship of the Family Environment to Children's Involvement in Bully/Victim Problems at School

Previous studies regarding the relationship of the family environment to children's involvement in bully/victim problems at school primarily focused on children's perceptions of family dimensions. No studies were known using data from multiple reporters within 1 family (parents and children) on family characteristics of bully/victim problems. The aim of this study was to investigate differences between families of victims, bullies, bully/victims, and noninvolved children on family functioning, child-rearing practices, and problem-solving strategies in hypothetical conflict situations and perception differences between children and their parents on those dimensions. The findings revealed important perception differences between children and their parents, with parents holding up a more positive picture of their family. Important differences between families of bullies, victims, and bully/victims were documented looking at the family functioning and parent–child interactions from the perspective of the children. In contrast, almost no differences between the groups were observed if parents' reports were considered. Discussion leads to suggestions for further antibullying interventions at the school.     

建国初期毛泽东的国防建设思想

国家利益体现了国家意志的价值取向与需求 ,关系到国家存亡、利益得失 ,加强国防建设应坚持以国家利益为最高原则 ;必须在国民经济不断发展的基础上 ,确定并保持合理的国防投入 ,使军费所占的比重 ,既不影响国家经济建设大局 ,又能满足国家安全利益的需要 ,坚持国防建设与经济建设协调发展的原则 ;“主要依靠自力更生 ,同时不放松外援之争取”,是毛泽东在发展国防经济力量过程中正确处理自力更生与依靠外援的关系的科学概括     

A CONSUMER-WELFARE APPROACH TO NETWORK NEUTRALITY REGULATION OF THE INTERNET

"Network neutrality" is the shorthand for a proposed regimeof economic regulation for the Internet. Because of the trendto deliver traditional telecommunications services, as wellas new forms of content and applications, by Internet protocol(IP), a regime of network neutrality regulation would displaceor subordinate a substantial portion of existing telecommunicationsregulation. If the United States adopts network neutrality regulation,other industrialized nations probably will soon follow. As aresult of their investment to create next-generation broadbandnetworks, network operators have the ability to innovate insidethe network by offering both senders and receivers of informationgreater bandwidth and prioritization of delivery. Network neutralityregulation would, among other things, prevent providers of broadbandInternet access service (such as digital subscriber line (DSL)or cable modem service) from offering a guaranteed, expediteddelivery speed in return for the payment of a fee. The practicaleffect of banning such differential pricing (called "accesstiering" by its critics) would be to prevent the pricing ofaccess to content or applications providers according to priorityof delivery. To the extent that an advertiser of a good or servicewould be willing to contract with a network operator for advertisingspace on the network operator's affiliated content, anotherpractical effect of network neutrality regulation would be toerect a barrier to vertical integration of network operatorsinto advertising-based business models that could supplementor replace revenues earned from their existing usage-based businessmodels. Moreover, by making end-users pay for the full costof broadband access, network neutrality regulation would denybroadband access to the large number of consumers who wouldnot be able to afford, or who would not have a willingness topay for, what would otherwise be less expensive access. Forexample, Google is planning to offer broadband access to end-usersfor free in San Francisco by charging other content providersfor advertising. This product offering is evidently predicatedon the belief that many end-users demand discounted or freebroadband access that is paid for by parties other than themselves.Proponents of network neutrality regulation argue that suchrestrictions on the pricing policies of network operators arenecessary to preserve innovation on the edges of the network,as opposed to innovation within the network. However, recognizingthat network congestion and real-time applications demand somedifferential pricing according to bandwidth or priority, proponentsof network neutrality regulation would allow broadband Internetaccess providers to charge higher prices to end-users (but notcontent or applications providers) who consume more bandwidthor who seek priority delivery of certain traffic. Thus, thedebate over network neutrality is essentially a debate overhow best to finance the construction and maintenance of a broadbandnetwork in a two-sided market in which senders and receivershave additive demand for the delivery of a given piece of information—andhence additive willingness to pay. Well-established tools ofRamsey pricing from regulatory economics can shed light on whethernetwork congestion and recovery of sunk investment in infrastructureare best addressed by charging providers of content and applications,broadband users, or both for expedited delivery. Apart fromthis pricing problem, an analytically simpler component of proposednetwork neutrality regulation would prohibit a network operatorfrom denying its users access to certain websites and Internetapplications, such as voice over Internet protocol (VoIP). Althoughsome instances of blocking of VoIP have been reported, suchconduct is not a serious risk to competition. To address thisconcern, I analyze whether market forces (that is, competitionamong access providers) and existing regulatory structures aresufficient to protect broadband users. I conclude that economicwelfare would be maximized by allowing access providers to differentiateservices vis-à-vis providers of content and applicationsin value-enhancing ways and by relying on existing legal regimesto protect consumers against the exercise of market power, shouldit exist.     

Social and Scientific Influences on the Measurement of Criminal Victimization

The National Crime Victimization Survey has been informed by decades of methodological research on the measurement of victimization. Yet most criminologists have little knowledge of the process or outcomes of this research or its effects on the characteristics of the survey. Using in-house reports, conference papers, agency memoranda, and other documents, this paper describes some of the important methodological research that has taken place since the 1992 redesign of the survey. Much of the more recent research is the consequence of new initiatives for the survey, such as the measurement of hate crime victimization and victimization among the developmentally disabled, as well as periodic supplements. This research finds that the current characteristics of the NCVS reflect decisions made on the basis of methodological research, broader social and political factors, and budgetary constraints.     

新加坡“人才立国”思想探析

通过人才培养分流、奖学金、双语教育、终身教育方式精心育才;政策优惠,吸引外才;精英治国,人尽其才,这就是新加坡政府“人才立国”的思想特点。因此,我们应发展现代国民教育、在职教育、终身教育,实施全民培训工程;以人为本,营造良好政策环境、激励环境、工作生活环境和人文环境;以法为本,树立正确的用人思想,营造公平竞争环境,合理使用人才,完善用人机制。     

交通事故认定书作为证据存在的问题及解决途径

交通事故认定书是认定交通事故的事发经过、事故成因和事故责任的重要证据,并在很大程度上影响事故责任人的行政责任、民事赔偿责任和刑事责任的承担,极易成为争议的焦点。然而根据现行的法律,当事人对该认定书不服,没有直接的救济途径。其根本原因在于现行立法的设计造成交通事故认定书不符合证据的特性。应对交通事故认定书这一证据重新进行立法设计,使其符合证据的特性。     

制定民法典人格权法编需要解决的若干问题——“中国民法典制定研讨会”讨论问题辑要及评论（一）

制定民法典人格权法编,应当集中精力解决我国民事主体人格权的保护范围和保护方法.在立法和实践中已经规定和保护的人格权,应当继续予以肯定和完善,没有规定但是应当予以保护的人格权和人格利益,也应当予以规定,例如信用权、形象权、知情权、环境权、平等就业权、信息权和商品化权等.在保护方法上,应当确立人格权请求权的保护方法,与侵权请求权相配合,更好地保护我国民事主体的人格权.     

论学校管理中的教师管理

教师管理是学校管理的中心任务之一 ,它对提高学校的教学质量和水平有着重要作用。教师管理包括政治、思想、职业道德、心理素质、业务水平、科研活动、行为能力等多方面内容。针对教师管理中存在的问题 ,需要加强即有科学性又有艺术性的管理。