Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author王丽
dc.date.accessioned2016-05-17T03:11:13Z
dc.date.available2016-05-17T03:11:13Z
dc.date.issued2014-4-20
dc.identifier.citation中国高教研究,2014,(4):48-53
dc.identifier.issn1004-3667
dc.identifier.otherZGGJ201404009
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.xmu.edu.cn/handle/2288/110229
dc.description.abstract作为伦理的学术延续了古希腊以来的学术传统,而作为技术的学术在二战期间才发展起来,两种学术从内容到形式上都存在着异乎寻常的差异。作为伦理的学术代表着伦理、道德和真理的力量,而作为技术的学术背后是政治、经济和技术的力量。前者合乎价值理性,后者合乎目的理性;前者服从真理的逻辑,后者服从资本或权力的逻辑;前者以探寻真理和满足精神之需为宗旨,后者以追求实用和因循世俗之需为前提。由于二者本质上是对立的,故二者并存形成一种互相抗衡的力量,即两种学术之间内在的张力。对张力的争论不仅取决于辩论者的立场和态度,也受制于当今社会主流的价值取向和历史哲学。张力的存在是不可避免的,但张力的最佳状态是保持平衡。
dc.description.abstractScholarship as ethical lasted since the tradition of ancient Greece, and scholarship as technical was developed at the beginning of the World War II.They have great differences whatever content and form.Scholarship as moral represents the power of ethical and truth, and scholarship as technical means the power of politics, economies and technique.The former meets the value rationality, the latter meets the objective reason.The former follows the logic of truth, and the latter the logic of capital and power.The former respects the truth, and the latter the facts.The two scholarships are opposite in nature, and a rival power developed for they exist at the same time, which form the inner tension finally.The arguments about the tension depend not only on the debater's position and attitude, but also hindered by nowadays value orientation and philosophy of history of social mainstream.The tension is inevitable, but the best is to keep its balance.
dc.language.isozh_CN
dc.subject学术
dc.subject学术类型
dc.subject学术张力
dc.subjectscholarship
dc.subjecttype of scholarship
dc.subjecttension of scholarship
dc.title论两种学术类型及其张力——作为伦理的学术和作为技术的学术
dc.title.alternativeResearch on the Tension of Two Scholarships ——Scholarship as ethical and scholarship as technical
dc.typeArticle


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record