scholarly journals 一個氣功科學工作者的札記: 氣功科學的問題與思考

2001 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 99-121
Author(s):  
Peihua NI
Keyword(s):  
Human Health ◽  
Scientific Inquiry ◽  
Scientific Theories ◽  
Scientific Attitude ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
Scientific Investigations ◽  
Digital Commons ◽  
Scientific Experiments ◽  
Take All

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.修煉氣功大有益於人的健康。但對於氣功那些令人震撼的效應，還沒有提出一套比較完整的氣功科學理論來加以解釋。然而，無法用當代已接受的科學理論來說明的現象不應一概斥之為迷信。當我們說“氣功科學”時，我們並不是說氣功已經是一門科學，而是說要以科學的態度、方法、手段和精神來對待氣功，研究氣功，努力開創一個科學探索的新領域。在這一探索中，還要注意從氣功的理論、世界觀和方法論出發來設計氣功科學實驗，而不是以常規科學的方式為萬能的或唯一正確的研究方式。Many people have noticed that practicing qigong is beneficial to human health. However, how does it work is not quite clear. Especially, there is no way to use the contemporarily accepted scientific theories to explain some strikingly impressive effects and phenomena that qigong practitioners have brought out. But we should not take all of them as superstitious simply because they cannot be brought to light by currently accepted scientific theories. Instead, we should seriously explore qigong science.When we speak "qigong science", we do not mean qigong is already a science. Rather, we mean that we ought to study qigong through scientific methods and in scientific attitude and spirit in order to open a new area for scientific inquiry. The basic spirit of science is honesty: truth is truth, and false is false. Science is not static. It is always developing. In scientific investigations of qigong, we must take notice to the special characteristics of qigong: its own theories, worldviews as well as methodologies. In designing scientific experiments on qigong, we should not take currently common scientific designing procedures and rules as absolute and universal standards. Rather, we should adapt them in ways of suiting the peculiar features of qigong practice so that useful information and results can be brought about.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 46 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

scholarly journals 當代科學與迷信之哲學反思

2001 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 45-60
Author(s):  
Dachun LIU
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Discovery ◽  
Empirical Science ◽  
Methodological Principle ◽  
Chinese Society ◽  
Contemporary Society ◽  
Scientific Theories ◽  
Scientific Hypothesis ◽  
Digital Commons ◽  
Scientific Experiments ◽  
Contemporary Chinese

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.可檢驗性是區分科學與偽科學的一個關鍵。它至少包含三層意思：第一，它意味着科學實驗是最基本的科學實踐活動，實驗方法是科學的標誌。第二，它為科學假說提供了一個基本的方法論原理，不論是提出假說還是鑒別假說。第三，它是科學發現獲得社會承認的基本條件。如果一個假說在原則上是不可檢驗的，那它就不能稱為科學。偽科學乃是打着科學旗號、冒充科學的虛假的東西，我們需要仔細分辨，予以揭露。同時，我們也需要認識到，在現代社會的複雜系統中，雖然科學起着主導作用，但科學不是全體，是不是一切。有許多非科學的東西，如宗教、藝術、習俗等，對於社會發展是十分重要的，不能一概否定。但它們也不必硬說成是科學。There is an important way to distinguish science from pseudo-science：empirical testability. It has three basic implications. First, scientific experiments are the fundamental scientific activities, and the method of experiment marks empirical science. Second, empirical testability constitutes the first methodological principle for proposing or affirming a scientific hypothesis. Finally, it is also a basic condition for a scientific discovery to be accepted by society. If a hypothesis cannot be tested even in principle, it cannot be termed as a scientific hypothesis.In contemporary Chinese society, there are varieties of pseudo-sciences. They use the name of science to identify themselves, but cannot pass the serious requirement of empirical testability. We should carefully examine such pseudo-sciences and disclose the nature of their hypotheses and activities as non- or anti-science. At the same time, we should also recognize that, although science is dominant in contemporary society, it is not everything valuable. There are a great deal of other items, such as religion, art, and customs, which are nonscientific but are extremely important to the development of society. We should not deny the value of non-scientific theories or activities. Neither should we mark them as science.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 28 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

scholarly journals Notes on Common Misconceptions in Microplastics Removal from Water

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (13) ◽  
pp. 5833
Author(s):  
Pavel Krystynik ◽  
Katarina Strunakova ◽  
Michal Syc ◽  
Petr Kluson
Keyword(s):  
Human Health ◽  
Scientific Attitude ◽  
Common Misconceptions

Occurrence of microplastics in the environment has become a serious problem with too many variables and unknowns regarding their relationship not only with human health but also with other parts of the environment. The toxic and ecotoxic properties are still a subject of interest and the scientific attitude to their threat is not unified. There are numerous review papers which report on microplastic particles occurrence in water, but similarly complex reviews on methods of their removal are not that frequent. This paper aims to provide a brief overview summarizing the most tested methods of microplastics removal and intends to critically evaluate them accordingly and advert to their discrepancies.

Understanding

Philosophy ◽  
2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Grimm ◽  
Michael Hannon
Keyword(s):  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Philosophy Of Mind ◽  
Scientific Inquiry ◽  
Philosophy Of Language ◽  
Scientific Explanation ◽  
Central Issue ◽  
Scientific Theories ◽  
Central Concern ◽  
Science Understanding

Understanding is a kind of cognitive accomplishment, and the objects of understanding—from people, to languages, to scientific theories, to logical proofs—are strikingly varied. As this variety suggests, debates about the nature and value of understanding occur across philosophy. In the philosophy of science, understanding is typically taken to be one of the main goods at which scientific inquiry aims; it is therefore intimately related to issues concerning scientific explanation and to debates about what it is that makes scientific inquiry distinctive. In epistemology, the interest lies in characterizing what kind of cognitive accomplishment understanding is, exactly, and how (if at all) it differs from other cognitive accomplishments such as knowledge and wisdom. In the philosophy of language, a central concern is characterizing what is involved in understanding (or grasping) linguistic items like words, sentences, or languages as a whole; similar questions about what is involved in our understanding or grasp of concepts are crucial to the philosophy of mind. Debates in additional areas will be discussed in this article, but one overarching question is whether the sort of understanding we have of scientific theories, languages, people, and the like are similar in name alone or whether they share certain essential traits. For example, one common thought is that across all of these areas understanding involves the discernment of structure of some kind. It is also commonly thought that to achieve understanding this structure must not be discerned in just any old way, but that it must be “seen” or “grasped.” Just how to understand the metaphors of “seeing” and “grasping” has been a central issue in work on understanding across disciplines.

Imaginative Frames for Scientific Inquiry

2019 ◽  
pp. 304-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Camp
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Inquiry ◽  
Scientific Practice ◽  
Model Construction ◽  
Cognitive Tools ◽  
Scientific Theories ◽  
Half Century ◽  
Scientific Representations ◽  
The World

Philosophers of science in the last half century have emphasized that scientific theories are not sets of transparently interpretable, logically connected true descriptions; rather, they involve implicit appeal to only partially articulated theoretical, practical, and empirical assumptions, and depart from stating the truth in various ways. One influential trend treats scientific theorizing as largely a process of model construction, and analyzes models as fictions. While this chapter embraces the increased role accorded to imagination and interpretation in scientific practice by the models-as-fictions view, it argues that different scientific representations relate to the world in importantly different ways. It distinguishes among a range of distinct representational tropes, or “frames,” all of which function to provide a perspective: an overarching intuitive principle for noticing, explaining, and responding to some subject. Starting with Max Black’s metaphor of metaphor as a pattern of etched lines on smoked glass, the chapter explains what makes frames in general powerful cognitive tools. It then distinguishes metaphor from some of its close cousins, especially telling details, just-so fictions, and analogies, first in the context of ordinary cognition and then in application to science, focusing on the different sorts of gaps that frames or models can open up between scientific representations and reality.

Scientific discovery based on belief revision

1997 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 1352-1370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Martin ◽  
Daniel Osherson
Keyword(s):  
Belief Revision ◽  
Scientific Inquiry ◽  
Scientific Discovery ◽  
Scientific Theories ◽  
Deductive Logic ◽  
Kernel Contraction ◽  
The Face ◽  
Belief Dynamics ◽  
Belief States

AbstractScientific inquiry is represented as a process of rational hypothesis revision in the face of data. For the concept of rationality, we rely on the theory of belief dynamics as developed in [5, 9]. Among other things, it is shown that if belief states are left unclosed under deductive logic then scientific theories can be expanded in a uniform, consistent fashion that allows inquiry to proceed by any method of hypothesis revision based on “kernel” contraction. In contrast, if belief states are closed under logic, then no such expansion is possible.

scholarly journals 道家的生命倫理思想及其現代價值

2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 35-52
Author(s):  
Kezhou JI
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Physical Health ◽  
Human Health ◽  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Ethical Dimension ◽  
Ancient China ◽  
Digital Commons ◽  
The Many

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.道家學派產生於中國歷史上的春秋戰國時期，他的代表著作主要包括《老子》、《莊子》、《列子》等。道家豐富的生命倫理學思想主要包括崇尚自然的生命觀、保身盡年的生命價值觀、少私寡欲和崇尚無為的養生觀、尊道積德和崇尚自由的道德觀，以及提倡天人合一的生態觀。在現代社會發展過程中，道家生命倫理學思想對尊重人性、堅持生命至上，維護人的發展；對人類社會整體的健康和諧發展；對適度消費、保持資源有序利用和推動社會可持續發展；對維護人類社會協調發展；對人類修德養生以及對現代生態觀和環境保護都有著重要的借鑒價值。通過對道家生命倫理思想的研究，我們可以看到東方哲學智慧的閃光點，歷史證明東方哲學思想有著和西方一樣光彩奪目的歷史，在現代社會發展過程中，我們面臨著許多新問題，而西方工具主義對此則顯得力不從心，因此借鑒東方智慧，發掘東方先哲思想則顯得尤為重要，歷史的現實已經證明東方智慧，尤其是中國古代哲學，所具有的思想智慧有更為重要的現實意義和參考價值。Daoism was one of the major philosophical traditions of ancient China, based on the teachings of Laozi and Zhuangzi. This essay focuses on the Daoist view of human life and its relation to the environment, and argues that the ethical dimension of Daoism is still relevant to life today. Given the many ecological and bioethical crises we are now confronting, it is important that we re-evaluate Daoism, especially its view on the unity between humans and nature.This essay deals with human health in terms of physical health, mental health and environmental health. These aspects correspond to the three dimensions of the Daoist concept of “harmony”: harmony with oneself, harmony with other people, and harmony with the environment. Uncovering the traditional roots of Daoism will help us to reconstruct a moral philosophy that values life, especially in a world that has become dominated by capitalism and consumerism.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 15276 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

scholarly journals 中醫現代化研究: 證實與證偽

1998 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 45-59
Author(s):  
Hongzhong QIU
Keyword(s):  
Chinese Medicine ◽  
Traditional Chinese Medicine ◽  
Experimental Research ◽  
Medical System ◽  
The Body ◽  
Chemical Components ◽  
Scientific Theories ◽  
Chinese Drugs ◽  
Scientific Experiments ◽  
Traditional Chinese Drugs

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.本文回顧總結了近幾年中國本土中醫現代化研究的基本狀況和學術焦點，認為邏輯實證只是中醫現代化研究的一個主流方面，中醫還需要證偽。去偽存真是不可分割的兩面。目前許多爭議與分歧源出民族文化的自尊和認知偏見，確立一種公正的文化比較觀和認知方法對於糾正中醫現代研究中的那些“唯科學主義”和民族偏見都是至關重要的。中醫現代化研究的重新定位是走向後現代的思維。Most contemporary research concerning modernizing traditional Chinese medicine is aimed at confirming the effectiveness of certain traditional doctrines, methods, and treatments through scientific experiments designed in terms of modern scientific theories and approaches. This paper argues that such research should also consider the issue of falsification. Not everything in traditional Chinese medicine can be confirmed. We need a complete mechanism through which to reject the false and maintain the true.By investigating several major academic journals in the field published in mainland China, we find that there have been several different types of research concerning modernizing traditional Chinese medicine. First, the modern Western pattern of clinical trial has been used to test the effectiveness of traditional Chinese drugs. Second, modern Western medical ways have been employed in administering traditional Chinese drugs to patients. Third, modern scientific experiments have been designed to analyze the chemical components of traditional Chinese drugs and disclose their functional mechanisms at the micro-level of the body. Fourth, efforts have been made to explain and reformulate traditional Chinese medical theories and clinical experience in terms of modern scientific and medical theories. Finally, modern medical methods and technologies have been chosen to test particular traditional Chinese clinical doctrines and principles. All of this research has been very helpful for us to understand traditional Chinese medicine in terms of modern science and technology.However, some scholars are worried that such research has abandoned the identity of traditional Chinese medicine as a peculiar medical system. They doubt that the diagnostic and therapeutic doctrines and approaches of traditional Chinese medicine can be subject to the investigation and test of modern scientific theories and methods without destroying their very characteristics. However, these scholars fail to see a crucial role played by the method of experimental research in selecting scientific hypotheses and theories. Traditional Chinese medicine, as a medical system, ought to be open to the test of experimental research to confirm its useful parts and falsify its false components. Only through this process of differentiation can traditional Chinese medicine become a real scientific system in the modern sense.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 25 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

scholarly journals USING THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE TO TEACH SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-47
Author(s):  
Fatma Önen Öztürk
Keyword(s):  
Science Teacher ◽  
Science Teaching ◽  
History Of Science ◽  
Scientific Inquiry ◽  
Teacher Candidates ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Implementation Process ◽  
Scientific Investigations ◽  
Analysis Methods ◽  
History Of

The aim of the research is to detect the views of the science teacher candidates about the nature of scientific inquiry before and after a history of science based teaching process. The research was made with the participation of 18 teacher candidates, who were enrolled in the primary science-teaching department of an Istanbul-based university. The qualitative data collection and analysis methods were used in the research, which was based upon the “case studies” to uncover the views in more details. Data of the research were collected by using the document analysis and interview. The data were assessed through the content and descriptive analysis methods. The results of the research represented that the teacher candidates’ views about the guidance of the scientific questions to the scientific investigations, the multiple purposes of the scientific investigations and the justification of the scientific knowledge were “weak” in the pre-test, and their views about the remaining aspects were at the level of “informed.” The teacher candidates could not express “sophisticated” views about any aspect. After the implementation process, it was seen that the teacher candidates’ views about the method diversity and the distinctions between the data and the evidence improved, but there was no difference in their views about other aspects. Key words: history of science, nature of scientific inquiry, science teacher candidate, science teaching.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document