Eco-politicalTheoreticalAnalysisontheCommonProsperityPhilosophy

YUAN Chao-yue, ZHU Yun-chan

Common prosperity is an essential requirement of socialism with Chinese characteristics and an important subject of China’s economic modernization theory. Common prosperity has profound theoretical implications in political economy. The concept of “general prosperity” in classical political economy is based on the division of labor and capital accumulation, with capital as the axis, which has distinct class limitations in the theory of distribution. Marxist political economy, starting from the logic of humanity, with labor as the axis and public ownership as the premise, has realized the qualitative change of the ideological connotation of common prosperity. The political economy of socialism with Chinese characteristics inherits and innovatively develops the thought of common prosperity in Marxist political economy, establishes the theory of common prosperity in the primary stage of socialism, takes the overall leadership of the Communist Party of China as its political premise and views the basic economic system as its institutional support to lay the material foundation for building a moderately prosperous society in all respects, and promote coordinated development of material and spiritual civilization. Its value purport is the all-round development of human beings. To achieve common prosperity in the new era, we must always adhere to the people-centered attitude, strike the right balance between efficiency and equity, development and distribution, give full play to the guarantee role of the basic economic system, balance material and spiritual prosperity, and maintain the dialectical unity between stage and inevitability of common prosperity.

AnalysisonANewTypeofHuman-machineRelationshipandItsConstructionintheAIAge

SUN Wei-ping

With the anthropomorphic or autonomous development of intelligent robots, the traditional human-machine relationship is vulnerable to revolutionary and subversive impacts. Especially the dominance of human beings, which has been stable for thousands of years, becomes precarious. In the context of social informatization and intelligence, the relationship between man and machine is diverse and complex. Namely, intelligent robots may be the “new tools” or “new slaves” of human beings, the tamed “AI God” friendly to humans, the partners or friends, the competitors or enemies, the inheritors or “descendants” of human beings and the new intelligent life of human-machine integration. Only by adhering to the principle that “people are the purpose” and developing human-oriented artificial intelligence will intelligent robots become “moral machines” that can pass the Moral Turing Test. Be good at using advanced biology, intelligent technology and equipment to strengthen and shape themselves into “newcomers of the times” with the characteristics of the intelligent era. Be good at communication, cooperation and integration with various intelligent systems(intelligent robots), creative exploration of human-machine relationship and operation mechanism. Only then can human beings “strangle the throat of destiny” and build a new type of human-machine relationship with human-machine cooperation, human-machine harmony and human-machine integration.

ReviewofLogicalPluralism:AnArgumentfromNormativity

Pascal Engel

According to Beall and Restall’s logical pluralism, there are as many logics as there are consequence relations. In addition to various objections from formality and the status of the metalanguage, this kind of logical pluralism faces two objections from normativity. The first has to do with the relation between consequences and truth: if consequence is understood in terms of truth, then logical pluralism entails truth pluralism, which has a number of partisans, but which has problematic consequences for the normativity associated to truth. The second argument also bears on normativity: logical pluralism entails pluralism about normativity, which renders the normative force of logic powerless. Claiming that logic is not normative does not successfully refute argument from nomativity, because normative claims related to valid reasoning are presupposed by claims about validity and are essential to the use of logic. Moreover, if purely descriptive claims about logic imply that logic is irrelevant to reasoning, they amount to an admission of logical nihilism. The normativity argument could also be extended to knowledge argument against logical pluralism, which could entail the knowledge we obtain from deduction is fragmented, and if one is not a relativist of knowledge, then one must reject the logical pluralism leads to this consequence.

Critiqueof“TheThird”ProbleminthePureJudgmentofTastefromthePerspectiveofCommonSense,InteresttoAestheticIdea

LU Chun-hong

The problem of the third originates from Kant’s transformation of logic. From the traditional analytic judgment to synthetic judgment a priori, due to the heterogeneity of the two factors that make up this judgment, the emergence of the third factor related to “synthesis” is what it is. Due to the special requirements contained in “synthetic judgment”, however, the connotation of “the third” also shows multiplicity, from which the argument about the problem of the third stems. The review of the first two critiques shows that the focus of exploring the third is not to obtain a more reasonable solution, but to identify its interrelated &different identities so as to manifest the logical essence of synthesis. They respectively point to the different identities of the third and jointly form the complete connotation of the third. Focus on Critique of Judgment, “the third” also presents its own three levels in a special way. If the common sense points to the result of synthetic judgment “a priori”, and the concept of “interest” points to the inevitable condition for “synthesis”, then the concept of aesthetic idea constitutes the universal basis for the possibility of synthetic “judgment”. In Critique of Judgment, clarifying the different identities of the third can restore the original state of “synthesis” and help to clarify the relationship between the core concepts of the text. More importantly, clarifying the different identities of the third in pure judgment and revealing its special reflexive connotation constitute an effective supplement to the transcendental logic which is the basis of modern thought, but also present the original panorama of phenomenology which is the basis of contemporary thought.

InheritanceandDevelopment:StudyofImplicationandSignificanceofHOUWailu’s“ConformtoTextualExegesisforErrorDetection”

XU Guo-li

Textual research in the Qing Dynasty was a fine tradition of Chinese scholarship, which had been inherited and developed by modern Chinese historians from different levels. Hou Wailu not only adhered to a combined approach to textual research and falsification, but also made a historical and dialectical analysis and evaluation of the Qing-Dynasty textual research. He unified it with Marxist, endowed it with many new connotations, and made it an organic part of his historical methodology. Hou Wailu’s views were not only different from those of Neo-textual historians and cultural conservative historians, but also from those of other five Marxist historians. His theoretical method provided a new paradigm for the modern transformation of traditional textual research, that was, under the guidance of Marxist theories, to critically inherit and develop the tradition of Chinese historiography, which combined positivism and doctrine, truth and application.

AnalysisonHusserl’sEvidencefromPhenomenologicalPerspective

WANG Lu

Evidence,an important concept used by Husserl throughout his works, links directly with “S is P”,therefore with knowledge. Making use of the concept “evidence”,one can discuss what logic concerns, such as “yes” and “true”,and also discuss what is beyond logic, such as what is related to “is” and “true”;Still,one can discuss what is related to language expression,such as judgment,subject and predicate, and also discuss what is signified in language expression, such as object, attributes and meaning. Furthermore, one can also discuss intention, including the object of intention, the behavior of intention and the content of intention. The use of evidence by Husserl shows clearly that his work relies on his knowledge about logic and his phenomenology has close links with logic.

AnalysisonNewChallengesofDigitalJusticeinDigitalAgeandJudicialAssurance

ZHANG Ling-han

How to achieve digital justice is a critical issue facing the justice system in modern times. The connotation of digital justice becomes increasingly rich, reflecting the characteristics of the digital society and economy, as well as the needs for justice. Technological innovation is an important driving force and foundation for building digital justice and legal systems in the digital age. However, digital technology has inherent features that focus on efficiency, which may sometimes conflict with the original intention of achieving digital justice. Implementing digital justice requires balancing the benefits of technology and the values of justice. The basic approach to achieving digital justice is to utilize digital technology effectively and rationally at every stage of the judicial process and in every aspect of the judicial system, to enhance judicial power. Implementing digital justice also requires cognitive collaboration, resource coordination, and institutional collaboration. The realization of digital justice depends on judicial protection systems, which should build a judicial model of eliminating digital divides, promoting judicial openness, and multi-party governance to improve dispute resolution efficiency, respond to social governance needs, and enhance the active role of justice as the goal of judicial supply construction.