Growing knowledge: Epistemic objects in agricultural extension work

We introduce a novel form of experimental knowledge that is the result of institutionally structured communication practices between farmers and university- and local community-based agronomists (agricultural extension specialists). This form of knowledge is exemplified in these communities’ uses of the concept of grower standard. Grower standard is a widely used but seldom discussed benchmark concept underpinning protocols used within agricultural experiments. It is not a one-size-fits-all standard but the product of local and active interactions between farmers and agricultural extension specialists. Grower standard is in some ways similar to more familiar epistemic objects discussed in philosophy of experiment, such as controls or background conditions. However, we argue that grower standard is epistemically novel, due to how knowledge arising from it is coproduced by farmers and agricultural extension specialists. Further, in the United States, this knowledge coproduction is institutionally structured by federal legislature dating back to the 19th century. We use our analysis of grower standard to focus a discussion of the positionality of the coproducers as well as the epistemic products of this form of knowledge coproduction, and we explore the role extension work plays in shaping agricultural science more broadly.     

Philosophy in the trenches: from naturalized to experimental philosophy (of science)

Recent years have seen the development of an approach both to general philosophy and philosophy of science often referred to as ‘experimental philosophy’ or just ‘X-Phi’. Philosophers often make or presuppose empirical claims about how people would react to hypothetical cases, but their evidence for claims about what ‘we’ would say is usually very limited indeed. Philosophers of science have largely relied on their more or less intimate knowledge of their field of study to draw hypothetical conclusions about the state of scientific concepts and the nature of conceptual change in science. What they are lacking is some more objective quantitative data supporting their hypotheses. A growing number of philosophers (of science), along with a few psychologists and anthropologists, have tried to remedy this situation by designing experiments aimed at systematically exploring people’s reactions to philosophically important thought experiments or scientists’ use of their scientific concepts. Many of the results have been surprising and some of the conclusions drawn from them have been more than a bit provocative. This symposium attempts to provide a window into this new field of philosophical inquiry and to show how experimental philosophy provides crucial tools for the philosopher and encourages two-way interactions between scientists and philosophers.     

State of the field: Latin American decolonial philosophies of science

Today, new histories of science are producing skeptical questions about the supposedly international philosophies of science that prevail in the North. The conceptual resources of such philosophies seem inadequate to enable them to interact effectively with how sciences and their philosophies do, could, and should function in today's economic, political, social and cultural, local and global contexts. How international, or universal, are these philosophies of science in reality? Here the focus will be on just one strain of these challenges. This one has emerged from Latin Americans who are creating anti-colonial histories and philosophies of knowledge production. They have named it modernity/coloniality/decolonial theory (MCD). They intend to develop a philosophy of science adequate for its own, Latin American needs. In the process, they transform typical Northern assumptions about modernity, its origins and its effects on Northern philosophies of science, as these are understood in both Latin America and around the globe.Five aspects of the MCD accounts will be discussed here. The first is historical differences between the worlds of the Spanish and Portuguese colonization of the Americas in the sixteenth century and of the worlds of the mostly British colonization of India and Africa in the ‘long nineteenth century’. Second is feminist and anti-racist issues in these Latin American histories. Third is the neglect of these histories in the North. Fourth is the continuing effects of the rise and fall of a positivist philosophy of science in Latin America. The fifth is two progressive post-positivist tensions for Northern philosophy of science produced in this work.     

知识论批判:一种教育哲学的反思

知识论不仅是近代哲学的中心问题,也是近现代教育的精神基础。知识论是近现代教育的理论,近现代教育则是知识论的实践。知识论的知性思维方式对近现代教育产生了弥散性影响,而教育世界的知识论化在本质上却是一种价值颠覆,即科学知识取得了对其他知识类型的优先性。知识论放逐了本真的心灵问题,这是近现代教育问题之根源。从教育哲学的角度反思与批判知识论,是对知识论批判的必要补充。     

消除主义、读心术与实验哲学：访斯蒂芬·斯蒂奇教授

斯蒂芬·斯蒂奇(Stephen Stich)教授是美国人文与艺术科学学院院士、美国罗格斯大学哲学与认知科学讲席教授,是美国科学哲学研究的重要代表人物。2018年12月份,斯蒂奇教授受邀访问了北京大学、华东师范大学等高校,通过相关学术活动,他与中国哲学家们交流了彼此的哲学理念与研究成果。受中国现代外国哲学学会知识论专业委员会的委托,我们在厦门大学对其进行了专访,希望借此让读者进一步理解其富有影响的心灵哲学、知识论与实验哲学的研究成果。     

社会支持对大学生心理健康的影响：基于心理压力的中介作用

对武汉高校265名学生心理健康的问卷调查结果表明：（1）朋友工具性支持、朋友情绪性支持能改善大学生的心理健康状况。其中,朋友工具性支持对心理健康产生直接影响,朋友情绪性支持则通过缓解环境压力和学习与生活压力间接影响心理健康。（2）师长工具性支持对大学生的心理健康有不利的影响,学习与生活压力在师长工具性支持和心理健康之间有完全中介作用。     

从思维方式角度看马克思哲学的变革

马克思哲学变革的实质是思维方式的变革，即实践论思维方式的提出。马克思的新哲学超越了以往传统哲学，使哲学返回现实生活中来。马克思哲学思维方式变革的意义具有生存论的维度，且使其与西方哲学平等对话成为可能。     

论实践理性的环境法哲学观——基于当代环境法哲学中三个重要命题的思考

环境法哲学的首要问题是环境伦理问题。环境伦理价值的丰富性、冲突性、选择性特征要求环境伦理价值的最基本的规范性表达是环境权利,但是,环境法的制度构建在内容上更多的是要细致而全面地规定社会主体的环境义务,这一义务是必要的和有限的。在经济社会环境发展政策的选择上更加倾向于适度污染的公共政策。实践理性的环境法哲学观本质上是马克思辩证唯物主义法哲学观,是一种将科学主义和人文主义有机统一,权利与义务统一起来的法哲学观,是一种在尊重客观规律的基础上,充分肯定人类的主观能动性的指导方法。在明白实践理性的环境法哲学观本质的基础之上,将其运用于我国环境法制建设有其必要性、可能性与可行性。