Lin Zhang

Inquiry-based science teaching has been advocated by many science educational standards and reports from around the world. Disagreements about and concerns with this teaching approach, however, are often ignored. Opposing ideas and conflicting results have been bouncing around in the field. It seems that the field carries on with a hope that someday they can reconcile. Unfortunately, over half a century, the opposing views have never been reconciled. Rather, they have become clearly divided, as shown in a recent debate. As such, this article intends to serve as a bridge between people holding different views and to identify key disagreements that have been sustaining the tension. The purpose is to improve science education. Suggestions for future research are also provided for a discussion.

© 2014 American Chemical Society.Attempts to apply artificial nano/micromotors for diverse biomedical applications have inspired a variety of strategies for designing motors with diverse propulsion mechanisms and functions. However, existing artificial motors are made exclusively of synthetic materials, which are subject to serious immune attack and clearance upon entering the bloodstream. Herein we report an elegant approach that turns natural red blood cells into functional micromotors with the aid of ultrasound propulsion and magnetic guidance. Iron oxide nanoparticles are loaded into the RBCs, where their asymmetric distribution within the cells results in a net magnetization, thus enabling magnetic alignment and guidance under acoustic propulsion. The RBC motors display efficient guided and prolonged propulsion in various biological fluids, including undiluted whole blood. The stability and functionality of the RBC motors, as well as the tolerability of regular RBCs to the ultrasound operation, are carefully examined. Since the RBC motors preserve the biological and structural features of regular RBCs, these motors possess a wide range of antigenic, transport, and mechanical properties that common synthetic motors cannot achieve and thus hold considerable promise for a number of practical biomedical uses.

In this paper, the West, "Mao Zedong study" some scholars exaggerate the impact of traditional culture of Mao Zedong, Marxist Philosophy in China as "Confucianism" point of view, by focusing on traditional Chinese philosophy of Mao Zedong and the creative transformation of the absorption of specific analysis, reveals the philosophy of Mao Zedong's cultural identity. On this basis, that: exaggerate the impact of traditional culture of Mao Zedong, Mao Zedong's philosophy of originality exaggerated and its Marxist philosophy dissimilarity between, in fact, is a fragmented Marxism-Leninism Mao Zedong Thought, to the historical development, see also Marxism is not a continuous open system, which also reduces Marxism in China's cultural significance, does not help us to correctly understand and grasp the philosophy of Mao Zedong's cultural identity. In response to some western Maoist scholars who overstate the role of traditional Chinese cultural ingredients in the ideology of Mao and attribute the development of Marxism in China totally to the process of "Confucianization", the essay aims at revealing the cultural characteristics of Mao's philosophy by way of a detailed analysis of Mao's indebtedness to and innovation of traditional Chinese philosophy. Furthermore, the essay holds that various overstatements of the role that traditional Chinese culture has played in Mao Ze-dong's idea and of the discrepancy between Maoist philosophy and Marxist philosophy mean to cut off the connection between Marx-Leninism and Mao's thought. In consequence they overlook the openness of Marxism, and degrade the significance of the development of Marxism in China and also prevent us from understanding the dual influence of Mao's philosophy.

In order to deepen the studies on the philosophy of practice, it is essential to explore the political significance of Marx's philosophy of practice. Marx's philosophy of practice is rooted in the problem of modernity and the separation between "individual subjectivity" and "societal community" in the modern context is the basic background of Marx's practical philosophy. It is the basic interest of Marx's philosophy of practice to find a way to end this separation via critique of civil society. Therefore, Marx's philosophy of practice has a clear significance, which manifests in the following aspects: one is "liberation politics," and the other, "the regulatory mode of the socio-political institution." /// 探讨马克思实践哲学的政治意蕴是深化实践哲学研究的一个重要方向。马克 思的实践哲学深植于现代性问题域中，现代性背景中个人主体性与社会共同体的分 裂与冲突构成了其深层的理论背景。通过市民社会批判，来寻求克服这一分裂和冲 突的现实道路，构成了马克思实践哲学的基本课题与深层旨趣。围绕这一课题解 放政治"与‘社会政治制度的规范模式"构成了马克思实践哲学政治意蕴的两个基本 向度。.

Levinas subverts the traditional "ontology-epistemology," and creates a "realm of difference," the realm of "value," "ethic," and "religion," maintaining that ethics is real metaphysics. According to him, it is not that "being" contains the "other" but the other way round. In this way, the issues of ethics are promoted greatly in the realm of philosophy. Nonetheless, he does not intend to deny "ontology" completely, but reversed the relationship between "ontology (theory of truth)" and "ethics (axiology)," placing the former under the "constraint" of the latter. Different from general empirical science, philosophy focuses more on issues irrelevant to ordinary empirical objects; it does have "objects," though. More often than not, the issues of philosophy cannot be conceptualized into "propositions"; nevertheless, it absolutely has its "theme." As a discipline, philosophy continuously takes "being" as its "theme" and "object" of thinking. The point is that this "being" should not be understood as an "object" completely. Rather, it is still a "theme-subject." In addition to an "object," "being" also manifests itself in an "attribute" and a kind of "meaning" as well. In a word, it is the temporal, historical, and free "being" rather than "various beings" that is the "theme-subject" of philosophy. /// 列维纳斯颠覆了传统的 "存在论一知识论" 开创了一个 "异域", 即 "价 值"、"伦理" 和 "宗教" 的领域，强调伦理学才是形而上学。不是 "存在" 包容 了 "他者" 而是 "他者" 包容了"存在"。伦理学问题得到了哲学上大幅度的提 升。他不是完全否定 "存在论" 而是把 "存在论一真理论" 和 "价值论→仓理学" 的关系颠倒了过来，将前者置于后者的 "制约" 之下。哲学作为一门学科，仍以 "存 在" 为研究主题与思考 "对象", 只是这个 "存在" 作为 "对象" 并非完全在 "客 体" 意义上来理解，而仍是一个 "主题一主体", 该存在不仅展示为一物，展示为 一 "属性", 而且展示为一种 "意义"。作为哲学 "主题一对象" 的不是 "诸存在 者", 而是 "时间性的一历史性的一自由的" "存在"。.

To grasp the truth in traditional Chinese classics, we need to uncover the long obscured "xiang" 象 (image) thinking, which has long been overshadowed by Occidentalism, "xiang thinking" is the most fundamental thought of human beings. The logic of linguistics all comes from "xiang thinking". Through conceptual thinking, people can understand Western classics on metaphysics, yet they may not completely understand the various schools of Chinese classics. The difference between Chinese and Western ways of thinking originated in the difference of the basic views developed in the "Axial period". Since Aristotle, Western metaphysical ideas have all been manifested in substantiality, objectivity, and being ready-made, whereas Chinese Taiji, Dao, Xin-xing, and Zen were manifested in the non-substantiality, non-objectivity, and non-ready-made-ness of a dynamic whole. To grasp substance, rational and logical thinking such as definition, judgment, and reasoning is necessary. On the other hand, to grasp Taiji, Dao, etc., which is a dynamic whole or non-substances, "xiang thinking", which is related to perception and rich in poetic association, is essential. History has taught us a lesson, i.e., when we opened the window to logical thought, we closed that of "xiang thinking". We should remember the words of Xu Guangqi, i.e., "To mingle harmoniously and understand thoroughly so as to excel". /// 重新打开被西方中心论长期遮蔽的 "象思维" 是把握中国传统经典本真的 需要。"象思维" 是人类最本原的思维。语言逻辑部经过 "象思维" 孕育而产生。 用概念思维可以透彻解读西方形上学经典，却未必能透彻解读中国诸家经典。中西 两种思维的不同，源于在 "轴心时期" 产生的基本理念的不同。西方形上学理念从 亚里士多德以降均为不同实体，显示为实体性、对象性、现成性。而中国的太极、 道、心性、禅则显示为动态整体的非实体性、非对象性、非现成性。把握实体，需 要用理性的、逻辑的概念思维，如定义、判断、推理等。而把握动态整体或非实体 的太极、道等，则需要用悟性的、诗意联想的 "象思维"。历史的经验教训是:在我 们打开逻辑概念思维这扇窗户时，却错误地关闭了 "象思维" 这扇窗户。我们应记 住徐光启的箴言 "会通以超胜"。.

This essay reveals five points in which Heidegger misreads Hegel in "Hegel's Concept of Experience": (1) By forcedly introducing the concept of "will", he interprets Hegel's phenomenology of spirit into Metaphysics of Presence; (2) interprets concepts such as "statement" and "the road of skeptics" as the process of phenomenological reduction; (3) reduces Hegel's Sein to Seiende; (4) replaces "Contradiction" with "Ambiguity" so the active Dialectics become passive; (5) exaggerates conscious experience and puts it into a real ontology, regardless of the significance of Logic and Encyclopedia of Philosophy. By an analysis of this misreading we can find the internal connection between Heidegger's thought and that of his philosophical forerunner, Hegel. /// 在"黑格尔的经验概念"一文中，海德格尔对黑格尔有五个方面的有意误读: (1)用强行引入的"意志"概念将黑格尔的精神现象学解释为在场的形而上学;(2) 将黑格尔的"陈述"、"怀疑之路"等概念解释为现象学还原的程序(3) 将黑格 尔的"存在(Sein) "贬为仅仅是指"存在者(4) 将"矛盾"置换为"模棱两 可使黑格尔的辩证运动从主动变为被动(5) 将意识的经验夸大为真正的本体 论，无视《逻辑学》和《哲学百科全书》的意义。通过分析这样的误i卖，有助于我 们了解海德格尔和黑格尔思想之间的内在联系。.

The concept of right or fit is an important element entailed, but not fully articulated, in the concept of action or practice in Aristotle's theory of virtue; which, however, turns to be of the utmost importance in later Western ethics. Right is concerned with both feelings and actions, and is not the same for all individuals. It lies in between the two extremes of the spectrum of practical affairs, yet by no means equidistant from them. This account of the concept of fitness or right is derived from the categories of quantity, relationship, and quality rather than from that of substance. Thus, it seems that virtue is relative to vice or error within a continuous existence. If, however, the right of passion and action is environmental and concrete, is it multiple and not singular? To this question, Aristotle gives his reply on two levels: On the level of concrete practitioners, what is right and fit to one man might not be so to another man, and hence the right of practice is not singular but multiple; whereas on the level concerned with the only right choice compared with the two extremes or errors, the right of practice will always be singular. /// "正确"是隐含于亚里士多德的德性学说中的一个重要而未充分展开的，在 后来的西方伦理学中却变成极为重要的关于行为或实践的概念。"正确"与感情和 行为都相关。"正确"并不是对所有人同样的。它是两端间的那个中间，但井不始 终与两端距离相等。对适度或正确的这种说明基本上是从数量、关系与性质范畴引 出，而不是从实体范畴引出的述说。所以，德性似乎始终是在一种有连续性的存在 中相对于恶或错误而言的。感情与行为的正确如果是环境的、具体的，它是否是多 而不是一?亚里士多德在两个层面上回答这个问题。在相对于具体实践者的层面， 对我而言的适度或正确很可能不同于对你而言的，实践的正确不是一而是多:在相 对于两端或错误唯有一个正确的选择而言，实践的正确始终只是一。.

The concept of human dignity and the relationship between dignity and human rights have been important subjects in contemporary international academia. This article first analyzes the different understandings of the concept of dignity, which has left great influences in history (including the "theory of attribution-dignity", the "theory of autonomy-dignity" or the "theory of moral completeness/achievement-dignity", and the "theory of end-in-itself-dignity"); it then exposes the obvious defects of these modes of understanding; finally, it tries to define dignity as a moral right to be free from insult. Meanwhile, the relationship between human dignity and human rights is clarified as a result of this research: Rather than being the foundation of human rights, human dignity is one of human rights. The idea of dignity nevertheless has a particular status in ethics in that it embodies a kind of core moral concern, representing a basic demand rooted in the human self or individuality, and hence representing an important aspect of human rights. We may anticipate that sooner or later, the idea of human dignity will become, together with other human rights, the only intangible cultural heritage of human society. /// "尊严"这一概念以及尊严与人权的关系己成为当今国际学术界的一项重要 的前沿课题。在历史上，出现过几种有着重大影响的有关尊严概念的不同理解(包 括"属性一尊严说"、"自主性一尊严说"或"道德自主性一尊严说"以及"自我 目的一尊严说" )，这些理解模式在解释力上存在着明显缺陆。人的尊严应当是一项 道德权利，即不被侮辱:尊严是人权的一部分，而不是人权的根基。但尊严这个理 念在伦理学中拥有一种特殊的地位，因为它体现了一种核心的道德顾及，代表着一 种根植于人的自我或个体性的最基本的需求，展示了人权的一个重要方面。可以预 期的是，人的尊严这个理念或许会有一天同人权的其它内容一起，成为人类社会仅 存的非物质的文化遗产。.

Judging Gadamer's theoretical stance is a complicated matter, and his ontological hermeneutics is usually regarded as a text-centered theory of understanding. Through an analysis of the phenomenological premises from which his theories take off, however, we can clearly see his reader-centric stance. On the basis of this stance some cease to seek for the original intention of the author or the original meaning of the text, which ineluctably leads to the ignorance of an understanding methodology. As far as people's intentional understanding is concerned, however, the important as well as essential task is still that of striving for a certain kind of understanding that is relatively correct, with universally effective methodology as its necessary prerequisite. What is more, herein lies the significance of the epistemology of hermeneutics. This article aims to re-insert a sense of methodology after hermeneutics went through a period of ontological reflection, and hence clarify that it is of necessity that hermeneutics resumes its text-centric methodological stance. /// 判定加达默尔的理论立场是一个复杂的问题。他的本体论诠释学一般被视为 一种文本中心论的理解理论，然而通过对他所从出发的现象学前提之分析，可以清 楚地看出他的读者中心论的立场.正是基于这一立场，放弃了对作者原意或文本原 义之诉求，必然导致对理解方法论的漠视。但是，就人们有意识的理解活动而言， 首要的以及根本的任务仍然是努力获得某种相对正确的理解，而普遍有效的方法论 就是其必要的前提，诠释学的认识论意义便在于此.在诠释学经历了本体论的反思 后，应重新注入一种方法论的意识，回到以文本为中心的方法论立场.

In this paper, the West, "Mao Zedong study" some scholars exaggerate the impact of traditional culture of Mao Zedong, Marxist Philosophy in China as "Confucianism" point of view, by focusing on traditional Chinese philosophy of Mao Zedong and the creative transformation of the absorption of specific analysis , reveals the philosophy of Mao Zedong's cultural identity. On this basis, that: exaggerate the impact of traditional culture of Mao Zedong, Mao Zedong's philosophy of originality exaggerated and its Marxist philosophy dissimilarity between, in fact, is a fragmented Marxism-Leninism Mao Zedong Thought, to the historical development, see also Marxism is not a continuous open system, which also reduces Marxism in China's cultural significance, does not help us to correctly understand and grasp the philosophy of Mao Zedong's cultural identity. In response to some western Maoist scholars who overstate the role of traditional Chinese cultural ingredients in the ideology of Mao and attribute the development of Marxism in China totally to the process of "Confucianization", the essay aims at revealing the cultural characteristics of Mao's philosophy by way of a detailed analysis of Mao's indebtedness to and innovation of traditional Chinese philosophy. Furthermore, the essay holds that various overstatements of the role that traditional Chinese culture has played in Mao Ze-dong's idea and of the discrepancy between Maoist philosophy and Marxist philosophy mean to cut off the connection between Marx-Leninism and Mao's thought. In consequence they overlook the openness of Marxism, and degrade the significance of the development of Marxism in China and also prevent us from understanding the dual influence of Mao's philosophy