虚拟现实技术概论

一、虚拟现实的概念 近年来虚拟现实(virtual reality)不仅是信息领域科技工作者和产业界研究、开发和应用的热点,而且也是多种媒体竞相报道的热点。事实上,虚拟现实并不是一项新技术,更不是一门新兴学科。在回答什么是虚拟现实技术之前,让我们简要回顾该项技     

虚拟现实:新的实践领域

虚拟现实在引起技术领域轰动的同时,也引发了人们哲学层面上的思考：虚拟现实中的事物是物质吗？虚拟现实给社会实践带来了什么样的意义？本文观点是：虚拟的事物非物质,但虚拟开创了一个新的实践领域,正是这个基础上,虚拟现实张扬着它的现实意义,也孕育着它的未来意义。     

性生活的三大误区

据调查,夫妻性生活不和谐绝大多数不是由于疾病或生理障碍,也不是心理问题,往往是由于一方或双方在性观念方面存在着某些误区,才导致具体行为上的矛盾与冲突.     

从信息本质到信息哲学—对半个世纪以来信息科学哲学探讨的回顾与总结

从申农信息论到虚拟现实,信息科学已经走过了半个多世纪的历程,与此相应,哲学的反思也从信息本质发展到虚拟哲学。本文试图对这两个历程的演变和探讨的问题做一初步的分析和总结,并提出建立信息哲学的必要性。     

从遮蔽到彰显生态存在:生态意识新进展

生态意识来源于人类社会生存与发展的生态存在,特别是基于生态存在的生态实践活动及其实践活动的生态化。从生态哲学维度审视,生态意识表征从传统意识遮蔽自然向现代意识彰显生境的时代转换,其深层实质乃是关于人们的生态存在的观念反映。不是人们的生态意识决定人们的生态存在,相反,是人们的生态存在决定人们的生态意识。     

自由的智力和自由的科学

中国当前发展面临创新焦虑,症结在于培养具有创造力的创新人才,但创造力的根本是智慧而不是知识。本文从自由的哲学反思出发,说明创新是自由科学的事业,其基础在于与功利智力迥异的自由智力的养成,进而指出中国教育的误区在于迷失了培养自由智力的宗旨,教育改革的任务是回归教育的本性。     

心与身的交汇--柏格森"二元论"及其实质

柏格森的"二元论"重新定义了物质,并利用当时的大脑神经科学的最新成果,提出了自己的身心观--即身体不是精神或记忆的仓库,而仅仅是生命体行动的工具,精神或记忆无论如何都不是大脑的产物.他的"二元论"本质上不是传统意义上的二元论.实际上是一种现代哲学的典型思维方式.其一方面来自于对传统问题的解决,另一方面又是他的新体系得以成立的必要条件.它跨越了新旧两个时代,这也使柏格森成为跨越新旧两个时代的现代哲学的伟大先行者.     

从技术思辨到社会哲学——关于虚拟世界研究的方法论转向问题

关于虚拟世界的哲学论争,无论其逻辑起点如何,都步入了一个技术思辨误区。实际上,虚拟技术不仅仅是一种技术工具,更重要的是它嵌入到人类生活的社会文化系统之中,带来了社会关系和人类生活方式的改变。为此,虚拟世界研究的方法论应该从技术思辨转向社会哲学,即在实证基础上对虚拟世界进行形而上的建构。从社会哲学的视野来审视虚拟世界中的一些哲学问题,是有待拓展的新领域。     

奇点革命：从胡塞尔的“游戏场”看“元宇宙”领域构建——兼论斯蒂格勒的“第三持存”

实现真实现实与虚拟现实交互穿越临界点是元宇宙领域构建的第一个入口平台，因此，穿越临界点意味着真实现实与虚拟现实交互以及元宇宙自身系统等所有事情之间都互相连接，达到现实本身的“奇点”。胡塞尔的内时间意识理论，以点性现在揭示内时间意识既构成原感觉单独的个体，又使个体在整体连续中受到内在秩序统一。而时间位置此时的“现在”作为时间意识的唯一性，成为视觉感觉领域一种内在秩序的先天朝向。受此启发得出，穿越奇点的根本在于真实现实与虚拟现实相融合于内在统一秩序中。而其中人尽管受控于数字化技术，但其自身意识无论如何都不会如斯蒂格勒所说因受数字化化技术影响而被改变，永远都是以其自身系统与客观对象建立联系，构建自身统一。     

数字新世界背景下的虚实之分

虚拟现实技术迅速发展,逼真的虚拟体验使人们产生笛卡尔式的追问:"如果虚拟环境足够逼真,如何证明我此刻不是在虚拟现实里?"虚拟世界与现实世界中产生感觉材料的物理过程在形而上学的意义上是相同的,很可能无法以此分辨"现实世界"和"虚拟世界".那么,如何恢复直觉上的区分?通过对科学表征的分析,论证"虚拟现实"在认识论上被当作是...     

复杂的实在

本文认为,在复杂性研究的视野中,复杂的实在概念,其基础的哲学观点是一种"结构-关系"并存的实在论;是一种"条件-过程"实在论;是一种"历史-语境"的实在论.复杂性研究丰富了实在的概念.     

Living in Conceivable Worlds

Certain cognitive and philosophical aspects of the concept of conceivability with intended or established diversion from (putative) reality are discussed. The “coherence gap problem” arises when certain fragments of the real world are replaced with imaginary situations while most details are (intentionally or not) ignored. Another issue, “the spectator problem”, concerns the participation of the conceiver himself in the world conceived. Three different examples of conceivability are used to illustrate our points, namely thought experiments in physics, a hypothetical world devoid of consciousness (zombie world), and virtual reality. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

A Proposal for a Coherent Ontology of Fundamental Entities

We argue that the distinction between framework and interaction theories should be taken carefully into consideration when dealing with the philosophical implications of fundamental theories in physics. In particular, conclusions concerning the nature of reality can only be consistently derived from assessing the ontological and epistemic purport of both types of theories. We put forward an epistemic form of realism regarding framework theories, such as Quantum Field Theory. The latter, indeed, informs us about the general properties of quantum fields, laying the groundwork for interaction theories. Yet, concerning interaction theories, we recommend a robust form of ontological realism regarding the entities whose existence is assumed by these theories. As an application, we refer to the case of the Standard Model, so long as it has proved to successfully inform us about the nature of various sorts of fundamental particles making up reality. In short, although we acknowledge that both framework and interaction theories partake in shaping our science-based view of reality, and that neither would do by itself the work we expect them to accomplish together, our proposal for a coherent ontology of fundamental entities advances a compromise between two forms of realism about theories in each case.     

塞尔论社会实在的建构

社会实在建构理论是塞尔著作的一个重要主题。集体意向性、功能的施加和建构性规则是建构社会实在的三个必要条件。塞尔从哲学角度探讨这一问题富有新意，为我们从哲学角度探讨社会科学问题树立了典范。     

计算复杂性、量子计算及其哲学意义

量子计算机具有超越经典计算机的能力。量子计算具有并行性和整体性,某些量子算法具有加速性。量子计算揭示了:数学与物理学之间的紧密关系,量子力学的波函数具有实在性。量子计算具有克服计算复杂性的能力。     

社会建构论与质化研究

质化研究和量化研究建立在不同的本体论、认识论和方法论的哲学基础上。量化研究主要以实证主义为基础,而质化研究更多建立在社会建构论的原理上。社会建构论有关实在是社会的建构、建构过程的多元化和方法多样化主张契合了质化研究的需要。质化研究扎根于具体的文化情境,在社会互动和人际交往中,在动态和发展的过程中了解被研究者的主体体验,具有量化研究无可比拟的优势。     

“有”拒斥“无”和“有”生于“无”——海德格尔论科学中“有”和“无”的问题

在科学看来,应该得到研究的只是作为有的存在者,无作为非存在则是应该被排斥的东西,因而不愿与闻无。海德格尔对此予以批判,他认为,科学的这种认识是由于科学对无的误解造成的,科学在无的问题上是无能的。实际上,无就是存在之无化,科学恰恰是以这个无为基础的,在本质上归属于无。为了克服科学本身的缺陷及其带来的危险,必须超越有而进入无,由此把握存在者整体,开辟一片新的天地。     

Quantum Theory and the Nature of Consciousness

Our interest focusses on the idea, that consciousness is a powerful acting entity. Up to now there does not exist a scientific concept for this idea. This is not due to problems within the field of psychology or brain research, but rather in resisting theories of modern physics. That is, why we have to search for a solution in the field of physics. A solution can be found in a new understanding of the basics of physical theory. That could be given by abstract and absolute quantum bits of information (AQI bits). To avoid the popular misunderstanding of “information” as “meaningful” it was necessary to find a new word for the free-of-meaning AQI bits: the AQI bits establish a quantum pre-structure termed “Protyposis” (Greek: “pre-formation”), out of which real objects can be formed, starting from energetical and material elementary particles. The Protyposis AQI bits provide a pre-structure for all entities in natural sciences. They are the basic entities, whereof the physical nature of the brain, on the one hand, and the mental nature of consciousness, on the other hand, were formed during the cosmological and the following biological evolution. A deeper understanding of quantum structures may help to overcome the resistance against quantum theory in the field of brain research and consciousness. The key for an understanding is the concept of Protyposis, which means an abstract quantum information free of any definite meaning. With the AQI bits of the Protyposis, both, massless and massive quantum particles can be constructed. Even quantum information with special meanings, in example grammatically formulated thoughts, eventually could be explained. As long as the fundamental basis of quantum theory is misunderstood as being formed by a manifold of some small objects like atoms, quarks, or strings, the problem of understanding consciousness has no solution. If instead we understand quantum theory as based on truly simple quantum structures, there would be no longer fundamental problems for an understanding of consciousness.     

Displacing Epistemology: Being in the Midst of Technoscientific Practice

Interest the Erklären?CVerstehen debate is usually interpreted as primarily epistemological. By raising the possibility that there are fundamentally different methods for fundamentally different types of science, the debate puts into play all the standard issues??that is, issues concerning scientific explanation and justification, the unity and diversity of scientific disciplines, the reality of their subject matter, the accessibility of various subject matters to research, and so on. In this paper, however, I do not focus on any of these specific issues. I start instead from the fact that the very existence of the debate itself is an issue; in fact, it poses a philosophical problem that almost everyone but the hardest line logical empiricists has come to realize cannot be resolved epistemologically. In my view, however, that it cannot be resolved ontologically, either. I think the problem is at bottom hermeneutical, and its resolution requires that we focus first, not on the objects of science or the methods of studying them, but on the character of the philosophical orientation assumed by those who would try to resolve it. In this paper, I explain why I think this is so by analyzing (1) Dilthey??s contribution to the original debate, (2) Husserl??s reaction to Dilthey, and (3) Heidegger??s critical evaluation of both. This line of philosophical development??this movement of self-understanding from critiques of objectivism to hermeneutical phenomenology??is of course already a central feature of much work in continental philosophy of science. In my conclusion, however, I argue for the less well-established??even if apparently approved??idea that it ought to be a central feature of technoscience studies as well.     

The Liar-paradox in a Quantum Mechanical Perspective

In this paper we concentrate on the nature of the liar paradox asa cognitive entity; a consistently testable configuration of properties. We elaborate further on a quantum mechanical model (Aerts, Broekaert and Smets, 1999) that has been proposed to analyze the dynamics involved, and we focus on the interpretation and concomitant philosophical picture. Some conclusions we draw from our model favor an effective realistic interpretation of cognitive reality.