Postmodern Jurisprudence: Contesting Genres

It has become a common place of contemporary legal theory, particularly postmodernist legal theory, to reject modernist jurisprudence’s assumption of law’s disciplinary autonomy. Within this enthusiasm for interdisciplinary approaches to law, what is less common is detailed analysis of precisely how interdisciplinarity is figured, rhetorically and epistemologically, in the discourse of contemporary legal theory. It is with a view to detailed analysis of this kind that this paper emerges. Its aim is to explore in detail how interdisciplinarity might be figured, and with what consequences, in the jurisprudence of postmodernity. The particular site of this exploration will be Costas Douzinas and Ronnie Warrington with Shaun McVeigh’s Postmodern Jurisprudence: the Law of Text in the Texts of law. Published in 1991, this text remains widely influential – it has become a contemporary classic in its genre. It is not the intention of this paper, however, to represent this text as exemplary. Rather, this paper intends to read this text in its particularity, to focus on its particular vision of postmodern jurisprudence. Specifically, this paper argues that Postmodern Jurisprudence figures interdisciplinarity in terms of genre; and that this understanding of interdisciplinarity is problematised by the unacknowledged contradictions between the different conceptions of genre – one associated with Jacques Derrida and the other associated with Jean-François Lyotard – which the text invokes. This paper argues that the project of postmodern jurisprudence – as title and as label – appears rather differently if it is imagined, on the one hand (following Derrida) according to the logic of the passe-partout and, on the other hand (following Lyotard), according to the logic of the differend. The paper concludes that this internal tension should at least give us pause for thought when approaching the complex phenomenon of interdisciplinarity in postmodern legal scholarship more generally.     

关于企业边界的理论评述与思考

企业边界理论存在的不足主要有:交易成本经济学缺乏环境变化的动态分析;新古典理论对不少现象缺乏解释力;竞争优势理论缺少深度分析;迈克尔的分析框架不能解释中国的现实问题。鉴于企业边界问题复杂而动态,因此企业边界的理论研究有待进一步深化。     

党校重视对学员学风的培养与教育--回忆在党校学习的时候

山西省委党校培训干部 ,主要学习马克思主义基本理论 ,也有历史、语文、逻辑学等课程。培训目的是帮助干部确立正确的世界观、人生观、价值观 ,培养良好的思想、工作、生活作风 ,从而坚定社会主义、共产主义的必胜信念     

Karl Marx and the economics of communism: anniversary recollections

This paper grew out of the author's Karl Marx studies and his practical knowledge of Soviet-type communist economies. It covers a broad spectrum of ideas and practices prevalent in those economies, which— rightly or wrongly—have become associated with Marx's teaching and predictions. Chapter I tries to explain the reasons for Marx's continuous popularity. Chapter II critically examines the validity of the claim about Marxian socialism being “scientific” as opposed to “utopian”. The article, especially in chapter III elaborates on a number of other Marxian ideas, like that of the so-called “anarchy of the market”, which for many decades exerted a negative influence on his followers—theoreticians and practitioners engaged in building what they believed to be a communist economy and society. One of the quintessential features of Marx's teaching, which he took over from Smith and Ricardo, was the labor theory of value and the “law of value” in particular. The latter, interpreted by Stalin as “the law of value under socialism”, was used by him for ideological and propaganda purposes, but after his death has in turn been utilized by Marxists, non-Marxists and anti-Marxists to discredit the Stalinist economic system, and to advance propositions ranking from profound, relevant and commendable to vague and frivolous. Tracing in Chapter IV the peripetia of this “law” provides a deeper insight into both the essential weaknesses of the Marxian theory and the acute dilemmas of the Soviet-type economies.     

中国特色社金主义理论钵系科学性橼

判断理论体系科学性可以依循规律性标准、逻辑性标准和实践性标准。以这个体系作为判断标准对中国特色社会主义理论体系进行分析，可以看到其中包含的三个重大战略思想在各自的理论领域中都正确地揭示了该领域的基本规律；它们有机联系在一起，构成一个彻底的、严整的科学体系；它们都来自实践，在卖践中发展，接受实践的检验。可见，中国特色社会主义理论体系是一个科学的理论体系。     

中国特色社金主义理论钵系科学性橼

判断理论体系科学性可以依循规律性标准、逻辑性标准和实践性标准。以这个体系作为判断标准对中国特色社会主义理论体系进行分析，可以看到其中包含的三个重大战略思想在各自的理论领域中都正确地揭示了该领域的基本规律；它们有机联系在一起，构成一个彻底的、严整的科学体系；它们都来自实践，在卖践中发展，接受实践的检验。可见，中国特色社会主义理论体系是一个科学的理论体系。     

科学发展观是一个科学的理论体系

从党的十六届三中全会第一次提出科学发展观的概念至今已有八年时间,科学发展观已初步形成了一个由一系列相互联系的基本观点构成的科学理论体系。作为马克思主义中国化的最新成果和中国特色社会主义理论体系的重要组成部分,科学发展观内容丰富、博大精深。贯彻落实科学发展观必须全面理解和把握科学发展观的科学理论体系。     

回忆录的写作与当代史的存史

当代人要写当代史。回忆录具有档案资料不可替代的存史价值,是历史研究的重要史源,对中国当代史的研究尤其重要。回忆录可以提供许多重要的历史细节,记录历史情态和现场感,同时也不免带有回忆者自我合理性的成分。这就需要各类当事人从不同角度进行历史回忆,在相互印证中去伪存真。参与历史回忆的人越多,越能给后人留下一个客观真实的历史。     

中西绘画理法比较论

历史上形成的中国与西方两大绘画理法，分别渊源于各自的哲学与美学体系，它们之间具有鲜明的差异性。中国传统的“天人合一”的哲学观，决定了中国绘画崇尚“优美”，注重表达国家的主观精神和理想，艺术创作中遵循“以诗为法”、“以书为骨”的原则，力求在绘画中达到“气韵生动”的艺术效果，西方传统的“天人相胜”的哲学观，决定了西方绘画崇尚“壮美”，偏重描绘客观对象的外在形态，采用科学方法，塑造绘像的立体感，力求达到真实地再现客观世界的艺术效果。通过相互比较研究，有助于艺术家和鉴赏运用不同的艺术观念和方法，创造和鉴赏不同民族的绘画艺术，获得各不相同的思想启迪和审美享受，也有利于我们立足于本民族艺术之根，借鉴一切有益于我们民族艺术发展的外民族艺术，以创造我们新的艺术。     

论安全法学理论基础研究的必要性及主要框架内容

本文从安全法学理论基础研究概况;安全法学理论基础问题研究的意义;安全法学在安全学科中的地位和安全法学在法学学科中的地位;安全法学的概念、调整对象、研究方法及其科学技术体系框架等方面论述了安全法学的理论基础研究中的主要问题。