The Socio-Cognitive Dynamics of Entrepreneurial Ideation

Sociology,as a discipline,is the scientific study of society,patterns of social relationships,social interaction,and culture that surrounds everyday life.It seeks to understand how societies are structured,how they function,and how they change over time.Here are some key aspects that can be explored in an essay on sociology:1.Definition and Scope:Begin by defining sociology and its scope,explaining how it differs from other social sciences.Discuss the various subfields within sociology,such as urban sociology,family sociology,and industrial sociology.2.Historical Development:Trace the history of sociology from its early roots in the works of thinkers like Auguste Comte and Herbert Spencer to the establishment of sociology as a distinct academic discipline in the late19th and early20th centuries.3.Major Theoretical Perspectives:Explore the main theoretical frameworks in sociology, including functionalism,conflict theory,symbolic interactionism,and critical theory. Discuss how each perspective views society and social problems differently.4.Research Methods:Describe the various methods sociologists use to study society, such as surveys,experiments,participant observation,and content analysis.Discuss the strengths and limitations of each method.5.Sociological Concepts:Discuss important sociological concepts like socialization, social stratification,social mobility,and social institutions.Explain how these concepts help to understand the dynamics of society.6.Social Issues:Address current social issues that sociology can help to understand,such as poverty,crime,gender inequality,racial discrimination,and environmental concerns. Discuss how sociological theories and research can inform policy and social change.7.Sociology in Everyday Life:Illustrate how sociology is relevant to everyday life by providing examples of how sociological concepts can be applied to understand personal experiences and social interactions.8.The Role of Sociology in Society:Reflect on the role of sociology in society,including its contribution to public policy,education,and social reform.Discuss the importance of sociological knowledge in promoting social justice and understanding diversity.9.Ethical Considerations:Discuss the ethical considerations that sociologists must take into account when conducting research,such as informed consent,confidentiality,and the potential impact of their work on participants and society at large.10.Future Directions:Conclude by considering the future of sociology,including emerging areas of research and the challenges that sociologists may face in the coming years.Remember to support your essay with examples,case studies,and relevant sociological theories.Writing in clear,concise language and providing a wellstructured argument will help to make your essay engaging and informative.。

收稿日期:2005-10-01作者简介:1.卞建华(1969-),女,山东德州人,青岛大学副教授,博士,主要研究方向为翻译理论及翻译教学;2.崔永禄(1942-),男,河北任丘人,南开大学教授,博士生导师,主要研究方向为翻译理论和语言学。

功能主义目的论在中国的引进、应用与研究(1987 2005)卞建华1,崔永禄2(1.青岛大学外国语学院,山东青岛266071;2.南开大学外国语学院,天津300071)摘 要:中国译界对功能主义目的论的研究从引进、发展、直至深入,历经10余年,成果累累,而各家意见纷纭,有待梳理,以利于开展今后的研究。

基于此,本文对功能主义目的论在中国的传播、接受与研究做了较为系统的回顾和梳理,对其中存在的问题进行了反思,并对今后的研究提出了建议和展望。

关键词:功能主义目的论;引进;应用;研究中图分类号:H 059 文献标识码:A 文章编号:1002 722X (2006)05 0082 07A R evie w of the Introducti on ,App licati on and Study ofFuncti onalist Skopos Theory i n Chi na (1987-2005)B I AN Ji an hua 1,CU I Y ong l u 2(1.Co ll ege o f Fo re i gn L anguages ,Q i ngdao U n i v ers it y ,Q i ngdao ,Shandong P rov .,266071,Ch i na ;2.Co lleg e o f F ore i gn Languages ,N anka iU n i versity ,T ian ji n ,300071,Chi na)Abstrac t :It has been m ore than ten years si nce f unc tiona list skopos theory was first i ntroduced into Ch i na .G reat ach i eve m ents have been m ade i n its i n troduction ,appli cation and study .V ar i ous po i n ts o f view and t he proble m s that occurred in the pro cess o f its introduc tion ,appli ca tion and study need to be su mm ar i zed and ana l yzed f o r the sake o f a better st udy o f th i s theo ry .K ey word s :f uncti onali st skopos theo ry ;i ntroduction ;applica ti on ;study以赖斯(Kathar i n a Reiss)、弗米尔(H ans J .V e m eer)、曼塔莉(Justa H olz -M ntt ri)和诺德(Christi a ne Nord)为主要代表的功能主义目的论(functi o na list skopos theory),是 自20世纪70年代以来德国最具影响的翻译学派!(谭载喜,2004:255),是 西方翻译理论中的一支劲旅!(杨晓荣,2001),也是当今世界颇有影响力的翻译理论学派之一。

Sociology专业英语AActionAdaptationAgencyAlienationAnomieAuthoritarianismAgeismAssessmentAnimismAccounting practices Affectivity affective neutrality Achieved statusActing crowdActual social identity Affectual actionAge normsAge structureAnticipatory socialization Ascription—achievement Autopoietic system Authority bureaucratic Authority charismatic Authority dual行动适应能动力异化失范权威主义歧视评估泛灵论项目过程的实践情感中立自治地位行动群体社会认同情感性活动年龄规范年龄结构预期社会化先赋成就自我再生系统个体权威魅力感召性权威双重性权威BBehaviorismBiculturalismBureaucracyBureaucratizationBourgeoisieBreaching experimentsBecause motivesBehavioral illnessBehavioral oganismBehavioral roleBilateral descentBehavioral geneticsBorn criminalsBaby boom行为主义双重文化主义官僚体系科层制资产阶级破坏性实验原因动机行为缺陷行为有机体行为角色双边继嗣行为遗传与生俱来的罪犯婴儿潮CCapitalist Capitalism Census CharismaCode Communism Consummation Conflict perspective Conformity Correlation CrowdCult Counterculture Case studyCaste system资本家资本主义人口普查魅力符号共产主义完成冲突论视角遵从相关集群宗派反文化个案研究种性制Class divisionsClinical—activist modelCommunity controlComparative analysisConspicuous consumptionCrude birth rateCrude death rateCultural diffusionCultural integrationCultural lagCultural pluralismConversation of gestureConstuctivist perspectiveCollective conscienceCultural capitalCulture of poverty阶级分化临床行为者模式社区控制比较分析炫耀性消费粗出生率粗死亡率文化传播文化整合文化堕距文化多元论姿势对话建构观点集体意识文化资本贫穷文化Civic privatismD Deinstitutionalization Democracy Demography Denomination Depersonalization DelianceDeviant DiscriminationDogmaDualismDyadDysfunction Discourses Developmental questions Dual—earner families Dramaturgical perspective Disaster behavior Deviant subculture Disciplinary society Derian career Descriptive studies Dependent variable Dependency theory Dependent chains Democratic socialism Demographic transition Definition of the situation公民个人主义去机制化民主政体人口统计学宗派去个人化越轨行为越轨歧视教义教条二元论对偶组二人群体反功能话语演讲依赖比率拟剧论双职工家庭灾后行为越轨亚文化训规社会越轨生涯描述性研究因变量依赖理论依赖链民主社会主义人口转型情境定义EEcologyEcosystemEmigrationEndogamyEthnocentrismEthnomethodologyExogainyExploitationExpulsionEcological segregationEconomic capitovlEconomic concentrationEgalitarion familyEmpirical methodEstate systemEthnic groupExchange relationshipExtended family生态学生态系统处境移民内婚制种族中心主义本土方法论外婚制剥削驱逐生态隔离经济资本经济集中平权家庭经验性方法等级制民族群体交换关系拓展家庭FFedFecundityFertilityFieldFieldwork FigurationFormsFolkwaysFordismFalse consciousness Family of orientation Family of procreation Feminist theory时尚繁衍能力生育率场域理论田野调查构形形式社会习俗福特主义虚假意识出身家庭生育家庭女性主义理论Formal organizationFormal structureFunctionalist perspectiveFront stageFunctional differentiation正式组织正式结构功能主义视角前台功能式分化F lexible—system production GGangGayGemeinschaftGenderGenocideGerontology Governmentalities Generalized other Generation gapGenetic structuralism Group consciousnessHHomogamyHypothesisHysteresisHomaphobiaHealth care system Hawthorne effect Hierarchical observation HLVHorizontal mobility Horizontal stratificationLLatencyLobbyingLabeling theoryLabor theory of value Latent functionsLatent interestsLegal-rational authority Legitimate powerLevels of functionalLife expectancyLife spanLooking-glass selfMMeMegalopolis 弹性生产制度帮派男同性恋公社性别灭绝老年学治理性一般他人代沟本源结构主义群体意识同类婚假设滞后同性恋恐婚症医疗保健系统霍桑效应阶层式监视人体免疫缺陷病毒水平/横向流动水平分化潜在功能院外活动标签理论劳动价值理论潜功能/隐功能隐形利益法理性权威合法权益功能分析层次预期寿命生命跨度镜中自我客我大都会带IIdeologyIncestImpulseIndustrializationIngroupsInstinctsIntegrationInternalizationInvasionIdeal typeIllegitimate powerImpression managementIncest tabooIndependent variableIn—order—to motiveIndividual cultureInfant mortality rateInformal structureInstitutional racismInteractionist perspectiveInterest groupJJuvenileJuvenile delinquencyJob enlargementKKinshipNNativeNegotiationNetworksNonfunctionsNormalizationNeonatal mortality rateNonmaterial culture意识形态乱伦冲动工业化内群体本能整合内化侵入理想类型非法动机印象管理乱伦禁忌自变量企图的动机个人文化婴儿死亡率非正式结构制度化种族主义理解/理解社会学利益群体青少年青少年犯罪扩展工作亲属关系本国的协商谈判网络非功能正常化标准化新生婴儿死亡率非物质遗产Migration移民核心家庭Nonverbal communicate非语言沟通Nuclear familyMethodologyMobMonogamyMoralize ModernizationMale dominance Manifest function Manifest interests Market socialism Marriage gradientMass behaviorMass ultureMaterical social facts Matriarchal family Matrilineal descent Matrilocal residence Mechanical solidarity Means-ends rational action Migration rateMinority groupMixed economy Multicariate analysisOObjective culture OligarchyOutgroup Overurbanization Opportunity costs Organic solidarityQQualitative methodsQ uantitative methodsRRacism Rationalization ReflxicityReliabilityReligiosity ResocializationRole expectationRiot方法论暴民一夫一妻制道德论现代化男性装扮显功能显现利益市场社会主义婚姻倾度大众行为物质文化物质性社会事实母家庭母亲祭祀从妻居机械团结目标手段理性行为年移民率少数名族群体混合经济多变量分析客观文化寡头政治外群体过度城市化机会成本有机团结定性方法定量方法种族主义理性化反身性信度宗教虔诚再社会化角色期待骚乱PParticipant observationPartitionPatriarchyPersonalityPoliticsPolyandryPolygynyPost-fordismPredictabilityPrejudicePrestigeProfaneProletariatPatriarchal familyPatrilineal descentPatrilocal residencePattern maintenancePeer groupPersonality systemPlanned economyPlay stagePolitical partyPopulation projectionsPoverty levelPostindustrial sociologyPostindustrial societyPrimary groupPrimary socializationPublic opinionPopulation forecastRumorRandom samplingRational-legalReference groupResource mobilizationRevolutionary movementRove conflictRole setRole performanceRole taking参与观察政治区化父权体系人格政体一夫一妻制一夫多妻制后福特主义可预测性偏见声望世俗无产阶级父权家庭父系祭祀从夫居模式维持/维护同辈群体人格体系计划经济扮演期政党人口投影法贫困线后现代社会学后工业社会初级群体初级社会化公众舆论人口预测谣言随机抽样法理性权威参照群体资源动员革命运动角色冲突角色集角色扮演角色置换R itualSSuccessionSelf-segregation StereotypeStandpoint Secularization Superstructure SegregationSelfSparatismSexismStigmaSectSubcultureSactionSelf-control theory Sex ratioSocial devianceSocial disorganization Social interactionSocial control theory Social mobilitySocial movementSocial networkSocial stratification Social structure Sociocultural evolution Socioeconomic status Sociological imagination Structural mobility Symbolic interactionism仪式演替自我隔离刻板印象立场世俗化制约上层建筑自我分离主义性别主义/歧视污名教派亚文化自我控制性别比社会越轨社会解组社会互动社会控制理论社会流动社会运动社会网络社会分层社会结构社会文化进化论社会经济地位社会学想象力结构性流动符号互动论TTheismTotalitarianismTotemTotemismTriadTechnocratic thinkingTheories of everyday lifeTraditional actionT raditional authorityUUrbanismUrbanizationUtilitiesUtopianismUrban ecologistVValidityValue-rational actionVariablesVerstehenVertical mobilityVertical stratificationVital statisticsVictimless crimeVoluntary associationWWorld associationWorking class有神话集权主义图腾图腾崇拜三人群体技术专家思维日常生活理论传统型行为传统型权威城市生活方式城市化效益乌托邦思想城市生态学家效度价值理性行动变量理解垂直流动垂直分层动态流计无受害人犯罪志愿者协会世界体系工人阶级。

T tries to elicit correct pronunciation and the corrects
S: alib[ai]
S fails again
T: okay, listen, listen, alb[ay] T models correct pronunciation
SS: alib(ay)
Theoretical perspectives
1. The Interaction Hypothesis (Long 1996) 2. The Output Hypothesis (Swain 1985;
1995) 3. The Noticing Hypothesis (Schmidt
1994; 2001) 4. Focus on form (Long 1991)
2. In the course of this, they produce errors. 3. They receive feedback that they recognize as
corrective. 4. The feedback causes them to notice the errors they
first row. (uptake)
The complexity of corrective feedback
Corrective feedback (CF) occurs frequently in instructional settings (but much less frequently in naturalistic settings)
Commentary
Initial focus on meaning Student perceives the feedback as corrective

The Ethics of Deception: Why AI must study selfish behaviourMark LeeSchool of Computer Science,University of BirminghamBirmingham, B15 2TTUnited Kingdommgl@AbstractThe study of ethics is concerned with defining the rules governing social interaction.However,the first models of social interaction developed within Artificial Intelligence(AI)research were based on earlier theories concerning the structure and dynamics of conversation.This is not a unusual;conversation has long been held to be a paradigm case of social interaction and AI borrowed theo-ries from both the philosophy of language and socio-linguistics which merged social and linguistic behaviour.Central to such theories is a concept of cooperation.This paper will argue that such a cooperativistic view cannot account,specifically,for certain aspects of conversation and,more gen-erally,essential features of agent hood such as autonomy,conflict and choice.Instead,an account of social interaction based on rational self-interest is described which has been implemented in a AI program to reason about natural language.Such an account is argued to be a more promising foun-dation for an ethics of intelligent agents.IntroductionEthics,n.The doctrines of morality or social man-ners;the science of moral philosophy,which teaches men their duty and the reasons of it.1.A system of moral principles;a system of rulesfor regulating the actions and manners of menin society.(Webster’s)The study of ethics is concerned with how agents interact with each other in society.Clearly,if we are to take the concept of autonomous agents in AI seri-ously,then such ethical considerations must also be applied to such agents and how they interact:either with other artificial agents or human beings.Previ-ous work on the social interaction of artificial agents has been dominated by a cooperativistic par-adigm where altruistic agents passively adopt one another’s tasks as goals.Central to this account are concepts such as mutual belief and shared goals between agents.This paper will argue that the cooperative para-digm misses important aspects of agent hood in terms of architecture,social interaction and auton-omy.Essentially there is a contradiction between the concept of an autonomous agent and the naive view of cooperation as the default acceptance of other agent’s goals provided they do not contradict the satisfaction of one’s own goals.Instead,agents must be sensitive to the costs and benefits of help-ing others and,for true autonomy,intelligent agents must be capable of acting purely in their own interests, even if this requires conflicting with other agents.The cooperative paradigm has also been dominant in the pragmatics of dialogue:both in philosophical treat-ments and artificial intelligence.This has been due largely to the work of Grice and the Principle of Cooper-ation.Despite this influence,however,it has proven dif-ficult to actually computationally specify the principle in anything but the most trivial of terms.Instead,coop-eration has been adopted as a background assumption limiting the types of dialogue to be studied and the range of phenomena explained.However,recent work in dialogue understanding has stressed aspects of language use which cannot be accommodated within a cooperative framework.For example,irony,deception and topic avoidance are all aspects which require the speaker to be viewed as a rational self-motivated agent.This paper will argue that a similar view of social interaction is required.Rather than designing agents which are cooperative and pas-sively benevolent,it is essential to consider selfish,self motivated forms of behaviourfirst and then treat altru-ism as a special case.Language and agent hoodThefirst theories of social interaction in artificial intelli-gence took conversation as a starting point and task(for example[Cohen&Perrault,1979]).This should not be surprising since conversation requires interaction between agents:whether they are human or not.How-ever,conversation has been the paradigm case of socialinteraction due to a two way interaction between philosophy and sociology.For example,the work of Grice[1975]in philosophy attempted to explain how utterances could mean more than what they lit-erally said by a general principle governing behav-iour.Conversely,in sociology,conversational analysts such as Sacks and Schegloff[Sacks,et al., 1974]attempted to illustrate theories of social inter-action using aspects of conversational structure such as turn-taking and taking and maintaining the floor.As we shall see,the dominant paradigm within pragmatics has been the cooperative paradigm:lan-guage is essentially a cooperative process where understanding involves language users adopting and attempting to satisfy each other’s communica-tive goals.Such a view of understanding is compat-ible with current work in plan recognition (described in the next section)and has therefore been widely accepted by the AI community.How-ever,recent research in Artificial Intelligence has generalised linguistic cooperation to behavioural cooperation resulting in theories of agent interac-tion based purely on a naive view of cooperative behaviour as the default adoption of any other agent’s goals.The Cooperative Conception of Language in Philosophy Conversational implicatures are the extra linguistic aspects of meaning which are conveyed by an utter-ance due to the context in which the utterance is made.According to Grice,conversational implica-tures arise due to the set of assumptions that exist in language use.More specifically,Grice identifies a Principle of Cooperation which instructs language users to:“make [their] conversational contribution suchas is required,at the stage at which it occurs,by the accepted purpose or direction of the talkexchange in which you are engaged.”[Grice,1975]:45In order toflesh out this principle,Grice suggests four general maxims which if observed will fulfil the cooperative principle:the maxims of Quality (truthfulness),Quantity(no more and no less than required),Relation(relevance)and Manner(pres-entation).Grice’s position is that after the hearer has recognised the apparentflouting of a maxim,he or she draws an inference that the speaker is com-municating an additional implicature which explains why the maxim was disobeyed.Hence there must be a assumption among language users that each is being linguistically cooperative.It is important to note that Grice,however,distinguishes linguistic cooperation from behavioural cooperation. Linguistic cooperation is concerned solely with the achievement of mutual understanding among language users.Therefore,it is possible to be linguistically coop-erative yet refuse to help or even hinder another agent. As we shall see,research in AI,has adopted Grice’s the-ory but failed to distinguish these two types of coopera-tion.Grice’s account,however,has a more serious prob-lem in that it fails to fully explain how implicatures are recognised or how the particular inferences are drawn from the context after aflouting of one of the maxims has occurred.Given an utterance which breaks a maxim and is recognised by the hearer as such,it is unclear how a particular inference is arrived at.For example,con-sider an utterance which conveys something the hearer believes to be false.According to Grice,the hearer will be able to recognise that the speaker is still being coop-erative but has chosen to break the maxim of quality to convey some extra information.However,this does not account for the possibility that the speaker is simply mistaken or being deceptive.Moreover,it is often unclear which maxim is beingflouted.For example, consider Levinson’s [1983] example:A:What if the USSR blockades the Gulf and all the oil?B: Oh come now, Britain rules the waves!A Gricean account would explain the exchange as fol-lows:the reply is clearly false and given the assumption that the speaker is being cooperative,means that the maxim of Quality has beenflouted and the utterance must therefore be ironic.However,it is not clear that the maxim of Quality is the only maxim at work:since the reply inB does not provide enough information to directly answer the question,it could be argued that the reply also breaks the maxim of Quantity.A similar case can be made for the maxim of Relation since it is unclear how a obviously false statement could be rele-vant and also for the maxim of Manner since clearly the reply is not the most clear or direct response.What is missing from the above is an account of the motivations of the speaker,i.e.why the speaker choose to use a conversational implicature rather than a literal utterance.This gap is due to the assumption of coopera-tion:there is no motivation why a speaker should be cooperative other than because this is the nature of a conversation nor can there be since the Principle of Cooperation is assumed to hold in any normal discourse. The remainder of this paper will argue that part of understanding requires an understanding of why a speaker chooses to be cooperative.The Cooperativistic Paradigm in Natural Language ProcessingThe Cooperativistic paradigm has been just as influ-ential within AI approaches to dialogue understand-ing.Despite this,the Principle of Cooperation itself has not proven to be useful in building such sys-tems.The most apparent problem is that the max-ims are not specified sufficiently for use by computers.However,there are reasons to believe the explicit representation of the principle of coop-eration is not required.For example,Dale and Reiter[Dale and Reiter,1995]argue that any rea-sonable natural language generation(NLG)system will obey the maxims anyway without an explicit representation of the maxims simply because any well designed NLG system will only produce truth-ful contributions satisfying all and only the set of communicative goals available which are relevant to the system in as clear a manner as possible.All of this is achieved without any explicit rule of coop-eration.Instead,rather than attempt to directly capture Grice’s theory as a set of explicit maxims,natural language processing has emphasised the coopera-tive nature of dialogue.There is a very good reason for this.Carberry[Carberry,1990]distinguishes between keyhole recognition where the observed agent does not intend the plan to be recognised and intended plan recognition where the plan is intended by the planner to be recognised by the observer.Intended plan recognition allows the observer to make certain assumptions about the plan,such as that the plan relies on beliefs which are evident to both the planner and the observer and that the planner is not trying to mislead the observer.The majority of work in plan recognition has dealt solely with intended plan recognition and in general,keyhole plan recognition is regarded as too difficult a task.Given that plan-recognition has been the most common method of dialogue processing,emphasis on intended plan recognition has resulted in AI research looking at task orien-tated dialogues only.In such dialogues both dia-logue participants are assumed to be achieving a mutual goal.In the sub-sections that follow,we will briefly review two different systems.The TRAINS ProjectThe TRAINS project[Allen et al.,1994]is a large scale project for developing natural language interface technology which allows complex plan-ning to be performed in a simplified industrial domain where trains transport materials between factories and warehouses.The project considers user and the system to be peer agents who plan together.An important consideration is the planning requirements of the domain:the domain involves simul-taneous,variable duration and situation specific actions. Such features require complex and intensive planing even before dialogue processing is considered.There-fore,in order to maintain tractability,the system employs a highly restricted belief model.All facts about the domain are considered directly accessible by the user and system and therefore are con-sidered identical to mutual knowledge.However,plans under consideration have different attitudes associated with them which depend on their acceptance by both User and System:the System’s proposed plans arefirst considered private and then when mentioned become part of the proposed plan and if accepted by the User become part of the shared plan.It is therefore possible to construct a transition network offive distinct possible states and to define a set of conversational moves which allow interlocutors to change beliefs in a predictable way.TRAINS main success is that if provides a working platform for understanding spoken dialogue in real time. However,the nature of the TRAINS domain ensures that the conversation is always:first,cooperative;secondly, abstract from a large amount of real world knowledge. For example,the majority of referring expressions relate to the map displayed to the user.Because of this,both participants are cooperative but more importantly,have very similar belief sets and agendas concerning the domain.Therefore,there is no reason for the kinds of dialogue control found in everyday language or the sen-sitivity required to distinguish belief nestings.The Jam systemCarletta,Taylor and Mellish[Carletta et al.,1996]make stronger theoretical claims with respect to belief model-ling requirements.Where Allen et e a restricted belief model due to purely practical computational issues of complexity and achieving an adequate response time,Carletta el al.claim that distinguishing between deep nested beliefs is not required in coopera-tive dialogue anyway.Specifically they make the follow-ing claims:1.Task oriented domains give rise to cooperative dia-logues.2.Models of cooperative dialogue need only distin-guish between three levels of belief:i. Object level beliefs about the domain,ii. Agent’s beliefs about other agent’s object levelbeliefs (first level nested beliefs),iii. Agent’s beliefs about other agent’s first levelbeliefs (second level nested beliefs),3.In any cooperative dialogue where private deepnested beliefs are not explicitly reported, they willnot be required for understanding any utter-ance.4.Models which do not represent deeply nestedbeliefs prevent the generation of unnatural,uncooperative dialogue by simulating humanperformance more closely than more expres-sive models.Carletta et al.claim that nested beliefs beyond the third level are not necessary in cooperative dia-logue.They describe cooperative dialogues as a natural class of dialogues where there is no commit-ment on the part of either participant to deception, malicious or otherwise,and where the participants share goals.Carletta et al’s account is based around the JAM project which was originally developed as part of Carletta’s thesis[Carletta,1992].JAM simulates dialogue of the type found in the Maptask corpus [Anderson et al.,1991].The Maptask involves pairs of speakers navigating a route on two separate and slightly different maps.Typically one speaker leads the other by referring to locations which may or may not be present on the other’s map.Carletta claims that JAM is capable of capturing the essence of many of the dialogues in the Maptask.Nesting is strictly limited:beliefs are limited to three levels of nesting.Each agent in the dialogue represents the state of each concept discussed as being one of eighteen possible states corresponding to a combination of object level,singly and doubly nested belief.These states are represented as a tran-sition network where any utterance moves from one state on the network to another.Carletta evaluates the JAM system by generating mock dialogues which they argue resemble the features found in the Maptask corpus.Carletta et al.enhance the JAM system with a variable limit to the number of belief nestings rep-resentable.They do however,retain the ability to represent deeply nested beliefs but not to differenti-ate them beyond the third level of nesting.Deeper levels of nested belief are termed residual mutual beliefs.They report that restricting JAM to onlyfirst level nested beliefs results in longer and simpler dialogues being produced but that increasing the number of nestings allowed resulted in no change in the dialogues produced.This is despite the fact that JAM’s planner contains plan action operators with doubly nested beliefs as effects and since plan rec-ognition involves reversing planning at an addi-tional level of nesting and thus should make use of third level nested beliefs.To explain this,Carletta et al.adopt essentially Searle’s[Searle,1969]position with regard to understanding.If two agents are involved in a dia-logue with shared objectives then they are not merely attempting to pass information back and forth.Rather they are trying to reach some state of mutual knowledge. Searle claims that this is achieved when an addressee understands the meaning of an utterance by recognising the speaker’s intention to produce that understanding.Carletta et al.interpret this as follows:the speaker makes a plan involving actions to be performed by the addressee,and then executes it not in the hope that it will succeed as conceived but rather as the best way of getting it recognised given assumptions of honesty and helpfulness.So far,this line of reasoning is fairly stand-ard.However,Carletta et argue that given that two agents are cooperating with each other then they do not need to generate third level nested beliefs since they will both be content for their plans to be recognised as they actually are.Plan recognition is useful in such situations to allow the addressee to take initiative in achieving the planner’s goals and also in detecting incorrect plans but in both cases,only third level nested beliefs are required and any goal is assumed to be adopted by each agent involved in the Maptask.Therefore,agents are forced to be cooperative in virtue of the nature of the domain. Problems with Cooperative dialogues As,Galliers[Galliers,1988]argued,previous approaches have assumed that cooperative dialogues require:• A common goal between the agents.•That possessing the goal consists of being aware that the other agent shares the goal.•Recognition of another’s goal is sufficient justifica-tion to adopt the goal as one’s own.•If attainment of the common goal involves sub goals then these are shared on the same basis asabove.Both the TRAINS and Maptask domains provide stron-ger conditions on cooperation.In particular,in both cases,not only is there a shared goal but this goal is pri-mary to all other goals.In addition,both accounts insist that all goals are shared by the participants.Clearly,this is not true in general dialogue or even in most task related domains.For example,in a medical counselling domain,the medical expert has goals of diagnosis and treatment which are quite different from the patient’s treatments of seeking help.Though all the goals may be believed by each party, they are clearly not all shared.Moreover,even in the case of such shared goals,a rational agent will attempt to achieve as many goals as possible with any action.Therefore,the utterance or speech act chosen by the agent will be shaped by their private goals.Understanding an utterance involves understanding the intention behind the utterance and, therefore,the set of goals the participant is trying to achieve.Systems such as JAM are able to avoid suchcomplexities because they assume a domain which is both abstract and restricted to a single primary goal (or task).However,such situations are rare.Instead,dialogue systems must be capable of han-dling situations where the conversation is structured according to a combination of mutual,shared goals and mixed initiative.Recent work in A.I.has begun to treat the concept of mixed initiative,mixed coop-eration dialogues seriously.Despite this,the majority of implemented dia-logue systems have dealt with only shared task ori-ented dialogue.Previously,we have argued that such dialogues are the exception rather than the rule [Lee,1997].Three types of dialogue are assumed:cooperative,conflictive and collaborative.These types are shown in Figure 1.Each dialogue type can be distinguished by the different attitudes typical to its participants:Cooperative DialoguesThe defining characteristic of cooperative dia-logues is that participants share both beliefs about the topic of conversation and the goals to be achieved.This kind of dialogue has been extensively modelled in previous work in AI.Collaborative DialoguesThe defining characteristic of collaborative dia-logues is that participants hold contradictory beliefs but share the same goals.A proto-typi-cal collaborative dialogue is an argument,in terms of agreed goals,to convince the other participant of the “correct” belief.Conflictive DialoguesThe defining characteristics of conflictive dia-logues are that the participants hold conflicting beliefs and goals.Conflictive dialogues intro-duce the possibility of non-cooperative behav-ior such as deception and topic avoidance.The majority of previous work has assumed that any dialogue modelled is cooperative,or at best,collaborative.There are several reasons for this.First,conflictive dialogues are often difficult to understand,regardless of whether the hearer is a computer or human,since a speaker in such a dia-logue cannot be assumed to intend his or her inten-Cooperative Dialogues Shared beliefs,Shared goalsCollaborative Dialogues Contrary beliefs Shared goals Conflictive Dialogues Contrary beliefs Contrary goalsFigure 1. Types of dialogue and their resident attitudes tions to be recognised,and may in fact be trying to conceal his intentions,as the range of possible interpre-tations for the speaker’s motivation is so large.However,previous approaches have relied on the concepts of mutual beliefs and shared goals.I have argued previously that mutual belief is psychologically implausible [Lee &Wilks,1996].In addition,the requirement of shared goals confuses behavioural with (Gricean) linguistic cooperation.Furthermore,full understanding of phenomena such as indirection requires that the understander is sensitive to what constitutes linguistic non-cooperation.For example,in previous papers,we have argued that a cer-tain class of conversational implicature,can be recog-nised and understood by the elimination in the mind of the hearer of the possibility of either collaborative or conflictive contributions cooperative dialogues [Lee and WIlks,1997].Elimination involves the attribution (or ascription)of additional beliefs and goals to the speaker which carry the content of a conversational implicature.An account along these lines is sketched in the next sec-tion.A rational view of language under-standingRational agents ideally achieve their goals by the use of optimal plans.Research in plan generation has specified a number of heuristics for producing such plans.Specif-ically, good plans have the following criteria:Correctness:All actions in the plan should rely on correct propo-sitions at the time of their execution. In terms of agent modelling,the criterion of correctness requires that agents prefer plans which are grounded on prop-ositions which are believed by the agent to be true.RelevanceThe plan has a whole achieves the complete set of goals required by the planning agent. The criterion of relevance dictates that agents plan to achieve the maximum set of goals they can with the plan.EfficiencyThe plan achieves the stated goals incurring the min-imum cost in terms of either time or effort orresources used. The criterion of efficiency dictates that agents prefer the cheapest plan available. Cost can refer to time, effort or resources. For the pur-poses of this paper,a simple measure of effort based on the number of planning steps is sufficient.Clearly there is a tension between the three criteria.Typically,correct plans require more specification than abstract plans.This additional specification increases the planning cost expressed in both time and effort and therefore conflicts with the efficiency criterion.How-ever,in this paper,we will concentrate on the ten-sion between the criteria of relevance and efficiency.The inference of implicatures based on the correctness criterion is discussed further in[Lee and Wilks,1997].The criterion of relevance suggests that a good plan should achieve as large a number of goals for the planner as possible.Stated simply,the more goals that are achieved,the more“relevant”the plan,and therefore,the more relevant the action performed to the agent.However,the criterion of efficiency suggests that a good plan should be inex-pensive and,therefore,for a given set of goals,the shorter plan should be preferred over the longer plan with all other things being equal.In plan generation,given afixed set of goals,a simple heuristic is to generate the shortest plan for the full set of goals to ensure that both criteria are satisfied.However,during plan recognition,this is more difficult since plan recognition involves infer-ring the actual set of goals the speaker is trying to achieve.The size of this set is usually unknown and therefore,it is not clear when either of the above criteria is satisfied by the recognised plan.In the following two sections,we will outline how this rational view of agent hood can handle some prag-matic phenomena.Deception, Mistaken Belief and Irony There has been a large body of work within dia-logue processing dealing with mistaken beliefs on the part of the human interlocutor(e.g.[Pollack, 1992;Zuckerman,1992]),however,there has been very little research on speaker deception.This is due to the cooperative assumption:previous accounts of dialogue understanding have assumed that dialogues are cooperative in a Gricean sense so that the participants are truthful ignore the possibil-ity of conflicting beliefs and goals on the part of the participants and therefore,have an insensitivity to deception and mistaken beliefActs of deception and cases of mistaken belief have distinct belief conditions.In using plan recog-nition to understand the meaning of a speaker’s utterance,it is essential tofirst ascribe the correct set of beliefs to the speaker.The understanding of utterances based on either deception or mistaken beliefs is a form of keyhole recognition which is difficult in practice.However,both sets of belief conditions can be used in the recognition and understanding of conversational implicatures such as ironic statements.If the speaker is attempting to implicate some additional meaning then he or she must assume that the hearer will recognise their attempt as such.This is only possible if the speaker is sure that the hearer can eliminate the possibility of deception or mistaken belief on the part of the speaker.The process of elimi-nating such cases as possible interpretations forces the hearer to make additional belief ascriptions which the speaker can rely on to communicate conversational implicatures.Indirection and topic avoidanceIndirection is a common phenomenon in natural lan-guage dialogue.For example,in question-answering,an indirect response might be preferred to a direct answer. This can be due to two possibilities:either the agent does not wish to provide a sufficient answer(topic avoidance)or the agent wishes to answer the question and provide additional information to justify the answer or achieve additional communicative goals which may or may not be known to the hearer.Neither case is han-dled sufficiently by a purely cooperative view of interac-tion since the former constitutes non-cooperative behaviour while the later allows agents to have a private agenda of goals and intentions which may or may not be mutually known.However,a purely rational view of language use can accommodate both cases.Rational agents prefer optimal plans to non-optimal plans.How good a plan is can be measured as a balance of the efficiency of the plan ver-sus its relevance.Clearly there is a tension between the two criteria.The criterion of relevance suggests that a good plan should achieve the maximum set of goals pos-sible.Stated simply,the more goals that are achieved, the more“relevant”the plan,and therefore,the more relevant the action performed by the agent.However,the criterion of efficiency suggests that a good plan should be as cheap as possible and,therefore,a shorter plan should be preferred over a longer plan,all things being equal.In plan generation,given afixed set of goals,a sim-ple heuristic to satisfy both criteria is to generate the shortest plan for the full set of goals.However,during plan recognition,this cannot be done since plan recogni-tion involves inferring the actual set of goals the speaker is trying to achieve.The size of this set is usually unknown and therefore,it is not clear when either of the above criteria is satisfied by a recognised plan.Instead, given a speech act and therefore,a recognised discourse plan,the dialogue system must infer if the speech act is the most efficient method of achieving the assumed goal.It can do this by re-planning from the context the utterance was made in.If a more efficient plan exists then the speaker must be attempting some additional goal(and therefore maximising the relevance of the plan)which must be inferred:either a conjunctive goal in addition to the assumed goal or an avoidance goal to avoid some topic.。

关于面孔知觉的英文文献Face Perception: A Cognitive and Computational Perspective.Introduction.Face perception is a fundamental aspect of human cognition, enabling us to recognize and interact with others, navigate social environments, and express emotions. It is a complex process that involves multiple cognitive and computational mechanisms, including visual processing, attention, memory, and decision-making.Visual Processing.The visual system plays a crucial role in face perception. When we encounter a face, the eyes first scan the central features, such as the eyes, nose, and mouth. This information is then rapidly processed by the visual cortex, which extracts key features and attributes, such asfacial shape, size, and texture.Attention.Attention is essential for focusing on specific aspects of a face, such as the eyes or mouth, which conveyimportant social and emotional information. Attention canbe influenced by a range of factors, including task demands, social cues, and personal preferences.Memory.Memory plays a vital role in face recognition. We store representations of familiar faces in our memory, which allows us to recognize them even after long periods of time. These representations include both structural information about facial features and associated semantic information, such as names and relationships.Decision-Making.Face perception ultimately involves making decisionsabout identity, emotion, and social intentions. These decisions are based on the integration of visual, attentional, and memory processes. For example, when we see a friend's face, we may recognize them based on their unique facial features and associate them with a name and personality.Computational Models.Computational models have been developed to simulate the processes involved in face perception. These models aim to explain how different cognitive and computational mechanisms interact to produce accurate and meaningful representations of faces. Some of the most widely used models include:Face Recognition Networks: These models use machine learning algorithms to learn the features that distinguish different faces. They can be trained on large datasets of images and achieve impressive performance on face recognition tasks.Geometric Face Models: These models represent faces as 3D objects, allowing for the extraction of detailed structural information. They can be used for facial animation, facial reconstruction, and other applications.Statistical Face Models: These models capture the statistical regularities of faces, such as the typical shape and distribution of facial features. They can be used to generate realistic face images and for facial recognition tasks.Applications.Face perception has numerous applications in various fields, including:Security and Surveillance: Face recognition systems can be used for access control, surveillance, and criminal identification.Medical Diagnosis: Facial features can provide clues about certain medical conditions, such as genetic disordersand neurological damage.Human-Computer Interaction: Face-tracking technology allows computers to interact with users in a more natural and intuitive way.Social Psychology: Face perception plays a critical role in social interactions, such as forming impressions, understanding emotions, and establishing relationships.Conclusion.Face perception is a complex and multifaceted cognitive process that involves visual processing, attention, memory, and decision-making. Computational models have provided valuable insights into the mechanisms underlying face perception, leading to numerous applications in various fields. As research continues, our understanding of this fundamental aspect of human cognition will continue to deepen.。

The importance of socio-intercultural competency With the gradual development of the economic globalization’s trend, exchanges between countries become more and more closer, and the shock or conflicts among countries is inevitable. It is very significant to master the intercultural communication competence so that we can exchange and cooperate people from different regions much better. The reasons responsible for it can be listed as follows. First, it can help us develop common sense and eliminate cultural centralism. For instance, both westerners and easterners like sports, so there is the Olympic games in the world every four years. Second, it is also vital to help us develop two-way communication, which means we can exchange our ideas, It is obvious that the environment in the world is worse than the past. Therefore, the united nations sets the world Environment organization to deal with the issues of environment. Every countries can take participate in it, and come up with their own ideas to do some donations. Third, the last but not least, it can do a great favor to make us know ourselves better. As a proverb goes , speech is a mirror of the soul; as a man speaks ,so is he. Only do we understand ourselves clearly, we can understand others fromthe bottom of our hearts.To speak frankly, socio-intercultural competency is playing a more and more important role in today’s world stage. It can help us develop common sense and eliminate cultural centralism. Besides, it can help us develop two-way communication. What’s more, it help us understand ourselves better. Therefore, hoping us all can pay attention to developing socio-intercultural competency.。

Erikson's Theory of Psychosocial Development What is Psychosocial Development?Erik Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development is one of the best-known theories of personality in psychology. Much like Sigmund Freud, Erikson believed that personality develops in a series of stages. Unlike Freud’s theory of psychosexual stages, Erikson’s theory describes the impact of social experience across the whole lifespan.One of the main elements of Erikson’s psychosocial stage theory is the development of ego identity.1 Ego identity is the conscious sense of self that we develop through social interaction. According to Erikson, our ego identity is constantly changing due to new experience and information we acquire in our daily interactions with others. In addition to ego identity, Erikson also believed that a sense of competence also motivates behaviors and actions. Each stage in Erikson’s theory is concerned with becoming competent in an area of life. If the stage is handled well, the person will feel a sense of mastery, which he sometimes referred to as ego strength or ego quality.2 If the stage is managed poorly, the person will emerge with a sense of inadequacy.In each stage, Erikson believed people experience a conflict that serves as a turning point in development. In Erikson’s view, these conflicts are centered on either developing a psychological quality or failing to develop that quality. During these times, the potential for personal growth is high, but so is the potential for failure. Psychosocial Stage 1 - Trust vs. Mistrust∙The first stage of Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development occurs between birth and one year of age and is the most fundamental stage in life.2∙Because an infant is utterly dependent, the development of trust is based on the dependability and quality of the child’s caregivers.∙If a child successfully develops trust, he or she will feel safe and secure in the world. Caregivers who are inconsistent, emotionally unavailable, or rejecting contribute to feelings of mistrust in the children they care for. Failure to develop trust will result in fear and a belief that the world is inconsistent and unpredictable.Psychosocial Stage 2 - Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt∙The second stage of Erikson's theory of psychosocial development takes place during early childhood and is focused on children developing a greater sense of personal control.2∙Like Freud, Erikson believed that toilet training was a vital part of this process. However, Erikson's reasoning was quite different then that of Freud's. Erikson believe that learning to control one’s body functions leads to a feeling of control and a sense of independence.∙Other important events include gaining more control over food choices, toy preferences, and clothing selection.∙Children who successfully complete this stage feel secure and confident, while those who do not are left with a sense of inadequacy and self-doubt.Psychosocial Stage 3 - Initiative vs. Guilt∙During the preschool years, children begin to assert their power and control over the world through directing play and other social interaction.∙Children who are successful at this stage feel capable and able to lead others. Those who fail to acquire these skills are left with a sense of guilt, self-doubt and lack of initiative.3Psychosocial Stage 4 - Industry vs. Inferiority∙This stage covers the early school years from approximately age 5 to 11.∙Through social interactions, children begin to develop a sense of pride in their accomplishments and abilities.∙Children who are encouraged and commended by parents and teachers develop a feeling of competence and belief in their skills. Those who receive little or no encouragement from parents, teachers, or peers will doubt their ability to be successful.Psychosocial Stage 5 - Identity vs. Confusion∙During adolescence, children are exploring their independence and developing a sense of self.∙Those who receive proper encouragement and reinforcement through personal exploration will emerge from this stage with a strong sense of self and a feeling of independence and control. Those who remain unsure of their beliefs and desires will insecure and confused about themselves and the future.Psychosocial Stage 6 - Intimacy vs. Isolation∙This stage covers the period of early adulthood when people are exploring personal relationships.∙Erikson believed it was vital that people develop close, committed relationships with other people. Those who are successful at this step will develop relationships that are committed and secure.∙Remember that each step builds on skills learned in previous steps. Erikson believed that a strong sense of personal identity was important to developing intimate relationships. Studies have demonstrated that those with a poor sense of self tend to have less committed relationships and are more likely to suffer emotional isolation, loneliness, and depression.Psychosocial Stage 7 - Generativity vs. Stagnation∙During adulthood, we continue to build our lives, focusing on our career and family.∙Those who are successful during this phase will feel that they are contributing to the world by being active in their home and community. Those who fail to attain this skill will feel unproductive and uninvolved in theworld.Psychosocial Stage 8 - Integrity vs. Despair∙This phase occurs during old age and is focused on reflecting back on life.∙Those who are unsuccessful during this phase will feel that their life has been wasted and will experience many regrets. The individual will be left with feelings of bitterness and despair.∙Those who feel proud of their accomplishments will feel a sense of integrity. Successfully completing this phase means looking back with few regrets and a general feeling of satisfaction. These individuals will attain wisdom, even when confronting deathErikson's Stages of Psychosocial Development Summary ChartBelow is given annual work summary, do not need friends can download after editor deleted Welcome to visit againXXXX annual work summaryDear every leader, colleagues:Look back end of XXXX, XXXX years of work, have the joy of success in your work, have a collaboration with colleagues, working hard, also have disappointed when encountered difficulties and setbacks. Imperceptible in tense and orderly to be over a year, a year, under the loving care and guidance of the leadership of the company, under the support and help of colleagues, through their own efforts, various aspects have made certain progress, better to complete the job. For better work, sum up experience and lessons, will now work a brief summary.To continuously strengthen learning, improve their comprehensive quality. With good comprehensive quality is the precondition of completes the labor of duty and conditions. A year always put learning in the important position, trying to improve their comprehensive quality. Continuous learning professional skills, learn from surrounding colleagues with rich work experience, equip themselves with knowledge, the expanded aspect of knowledge, efforts to improve their comprehensive quality.The second Do best, strictly perform their responsibilities. Set up the company, to maximize the customer to the satisfaction of the company's products, do a good job in technical services and product promotion to the company. And collected on the properties of the products of the company, in order to make improvement in time, make the products better meet the using demand of the scene.Three to learn to be good at communication, coordinating assistance. On‐site technical service personnel should not only have strong professional technology, should also have good communication ability, a lot of a product due to improper operation to appear problem, but often not customers reflect the quality of no, so this time we need to find out the crux, and customer communication, standardized operation, to avoid customer's mistrust of the products and even the damage of the company's image. Some experiences in the past work, mentality is very important in the work, work to have passion, keep the smile of sunshine, can close the distance between people, easy to communicate with the customer. Do better in the daily work to communicate with customers and achieve customer satisfaction, excellent technical service every time, on behalf of the customer on our products much a understanding and trust.Fourth, we need to continue to learn professional knowledge, do practical grasp skilled operation. Over the past year, through continuous learning and fumble, studied the gas generation, collection and methods, gradually familiar with and master the company introduced the working principle, operation method of gas machine. With the help of the department leaders and colleagues, familiar with and master the launch of the division principle, debugging method of the control system, and to wuhan Chen Guchong garbage power plant of gas machine control system transformation, learn to debug, accumulated some experience. All in all, over the past year, did some work, have also made some achievements, but the results can only represent the past, there are some problems to work, can't meet the higher requirements. In the future work, I must develop the oneself advantage, lack of correct, foster strengths and circumvent weaknesses, for greater achievements. Looking forward to XXXX years of work, I'll be more efforts, constant progress in their jobs, make greater achievements. Every year I have progress, the growth of believe will get greater returns, I will my biggest contribution to the development of the company, believe in yourself do better next year!I wish you all work study progress in the year to come.。

第一届认知神经动力学国际会议(ICCN2007)简介王如彬;陆启韶【期刊名称】《力学进展》【年(卷),期】2008(38)1【摘要】第一届认知神经动力学国际会议（The First International Conferenceon Cognitive Neurodynamics）。

2007年11月17-21日在上海华东理工大学隆重举行．这次大会是由华东理工大学、上海市生物物理学会以及由我国学者担任主编的国际学报《认知神经动力学》（Cognitive Neurodynamics，德国Springer出版社出版）联合主办．包括中国在内的来自世界上30多个国家和地区的约250位代表参加了这次国际会议，其中国外与会代表约占2／3左右，特别是，来自美国，英国，德国，法国，澳大利亚，加拿大，荷兰，瑞典，意大利，瑞士，日本以及韩国等发达国家的与会代表占一半以上，其余包括中国在内的近20个国家的与会代表占45％左右．这显示了发达国家在认知神经科学，神经动力学及它们的交叉研究领域内的重视程度以及强大的科研实力．【总页数】2页(P130-131)【作者】王如彬;陆启韶【作者单位】华东理工大学信息学院脑信息处理与认知神经动力学研究所,上海,200237;北京航空航天大学理学院,北京,100083【正文语种】中文【中图分类】TN911.73【相关文献】1.2009认知神经动力学国际会议 [J], 李光;王酉2.第二届认知神经动力学国际会议简介 [J], 王如彬;顾凡及;陆启韶3.第一届认知神经动力学国际会议(ICCN2007)简介 [J], 王如彬;陆启韶4.第一届认知神经动力学国际会议在上海胜利举行 [J], 王如彬;顾凡及5.探索语言与人类认知的奥秘——第七届全国认知科学会议暨第一届中国与世界认知科学国际会议纪要 [J], 夏炎;薛小迪因版权原因，仅展示原文概要，查看原文内容请购买。

!"#$%&%'(社会科学版)2021年第1期Journal of Chongqing University of Science and Technology(Social Sciences Edition)No.12021关于集成脑理论与意识的思考—对唐孝威集成脑观的哲学反思黄家裕(浙江师范大学马克思主义学院，浙江金华321000)摘要：人的意识是如何产生的？一些学者提出“集成脑”的观点。

唐孝威院士则把集成的思想和当今的神经科学有机结合起来，提出大脑的4个功能系统理论，该理论解释了意识产生的机制及情绪和认知活动的关系，从认知视角来看，其对人工智能具有重要的意义。

从意识的突现问题、还原问题及结构功能问题等哲学视角反思了唐孝威院士的集成脑观。

关键词：意识；涉身认知；大脑；认知结构；集成脑观中图分类号：B022文献标识码：A文章编号：1673-1999(2021)01-0008-04当今人工智能、认知科学，是学者的知识提出了关智认知的思想、理论。

，学者学者关于人工智能、认知科学、脑科学等方面的理论，产生了不少学术成果&,有许多论文和著作仅仅是机械地吸收了欧美的思想和理论，并没有多少创新。

当，也应该承认，确有学者，脑科学研究前沿的成果之后，对脑科学思想和理论了&合唐孝威院士的研成，思考集成脑的功能结构和认知结构，对中国学者关于大脑和意识的科学思想及理论哲学反思，从还原视对唐孝威院士理学关神经科学的关思想和理论之后提出的集成脑思想及理论作进一步反思，分析该理论的贡献和局限性，以及应用因果关系分析该理论所面临的难题&一、集成视角下“涉脑”的认知结构集成(integration"是指电子领域中把不同的电子器件集合在一起，把软件、通讯技术和硬件结合为一个单元而解决处理关问题&集成系统的不同构成部分原本是一个个相对独立的系统，但通过集成，集成系统作为整体能够把不同部有机合起来，由此形成集成系统的整体具有各个部所不具有的性质，集成系统能够发挥整体性的功能，具有整体优的&从广义来看，系统集成不仅包括硬件设备的集成、软件系统的集成，还包括社会领域中的组织机构的集成、社人员的集成和管理法的集成。

二 、数据资料及研究方法
(一) 数据资料 本文采用数据是中国社会科学院社会学研究所“当代中国社会结
构变迁研究”课题组于 2001 年 11 - 12 月在全国 12 个省及直辖市 (北
77
社会学研究
2005. 2
京 、上海 、浙江 、江苏 、山东 、黑龙江 、河北 、河南 、江西 、四川 、贵州 、内蒙) 73 个区县收集的问卷调查数据 。调查采用多阶段复合抽样方法 ,调查 对象为 16 - 70 岁人口 ,获取的有效样本为 6193 个 。经加权处理后 ,此 调查数据的样本分布在基本的人口信息和主要的个人社会经济背景信 息方面与第五次全国人口普查数据的分布极为接近 ,这表明此数据有 很好的代表性 。① 在此次调查样本中 ,有 5. 4 %是在校学生 。由于在校 生还未完成学业步入社会 ,无法对他们进行职业 、收入水平等相关因素 的归类 ,从而也不能进行社会声望地位的测量 。因此 ,本文进行社会声 望测量的数据排除了在校生样本 ,实际测量样本数量为 5860 个 。本文 中的所有数据分析都采用了加权数据 。
(二) 职业声望测量 西方社会学家发展出许多职业声望测量技术 ,而国内研究者大多
采用较为简化的测量方法 ,如 :列出几十类职业 ,让被调查者评价 ,并赋 予分值 ,计算出各个职业的平均得分 (许欣欣 ,2000 ;蒋来文等 ,1991 ;蔡 禾 、赵钊卿 ,1995 ; 叶南客 ,1997 ; 李强 、宋时歌 ,1998 ,等) 。这种测量方 法有一个局限 ,即测量的职业种类不能太多 ,如果列出过多职业 ,将使 被调查者进行职业评价时感到困难或厌烦 ,降低调查资料的效度 。但 是 ,如果列出的职业种类太少 ,又达不到研究职业声望的目的 。为了解 决这一问题 ,本研究采用了林南和叶晓兰 (Lin & Ye ,1997) 设计的分组 职业声望测量方法 。本研究共选择了 81 种职业进行声望测量 。这 81 个职业随机分为 8 组 ,每组共 11 个职业 ,其中一个职业 ———小学教师 ———在每一组中都出现 ,另外 10 个职业每组不同 。所有的被调查者也 被分为 8 组 ,每组被调查者只需评价一组职业 (即 11 个职业) ,把 11 个 职业进行高低等级排列 ,排在最高的职业赋值 1 ,排在最低的职业赋值 11 。为了把 8 组职业评价整合在一起进行比较 ,把每一组都出现的职 业 ———小学教师 ———作为参照职业 ,对各个职业的得分进行标准化转 换 ,转换后的得分再重新赋值 ,使各职业得分在 0 - 100 分之间 。最终 取得的职业声望得分经过了两次标准化转换 。第一次标准化转换是为 了把每个组中的 11 个职业的得分排列整合起来 ,转换成为 81 个职业 统一的得分排列 。标准化转换的公式是 :

认知体验哲学视角下的英语五大基本构式1. 引言1.1 介绍认知体验哲学视角下的英语五大基本构式In the field of cognitive experiential philosophy, the study of English language structures has been a subject of great interest. The five basic constructions in English language have been analyzed and examined through the lens of cognitive experience philosophy, providing new insights into the way language is processed and understood by the human mind.2. 正文2.1 认知体验哲学的概念Cognitive experiential philosophy is a branch of philosophy that focuses on the nature of human cognition and experience. It seeks to understand how individuals perceive, process, and make sense of the world around them. In the context of English language, cognitive experiential philosophy plays a crucial role in shaping the five basic sentence structures that define the language.2.2 英语五大基本构式的原理The principles underlying the five basic syntactic structuresin English are fundamental to understanding how language functions and how meaning is conveyed. These principles guide the formation of sentences and help determine the relationships between words within a sentence.2.3 构式一：简单句简单句是构成英语基本句型的一种最简单的句子结构，它通常由一个主语和一个谓语组成。

《微观经济学》课程教学大纲一、课程基本信息课程代码：16143103课程名称：西方经济学（微观部分）英文名称：Microeconomics课程类型：学科基础课学时：48学时学分：3学分适应对象：全院经济管理类各本科专业考核方式：考试先修课程：高等数学二、课程简介中文简介：（附内容结构图）微观经济学研究单个经济单位的活动规律。

具体地说，微观经济学研究单个消费者、单个生产者、单个市场的的经济行为，其对单个经济单位的考察，是在三个逐步深入的层次上进行：第一层次考察单个消费者、单个生产者的均衡；第二层次考察单个的市场均衡；第三层次考察所有单个市场均衡价格的决定。

正因为其分析涉及的变量都是经济个量，它才被称为微观经济学。

价格分析是微观经济学分析的核心，微观经济学也被称为价格理论。

本书关于价格理论的讲述是按以下层次展开：开篇简介西方经济学；第二章介绍价格的确定是由于供需两种因素均衡的结果，当然，作为必备知识，本章也介绍了供给、需求函数及相关曲线、供求的各种弹性；第三章介绍了决定商品价格的需求因素，需求曲线之所以向右下方倾斜，是由于效用最大化原则的要求；为说明供给曲线，第四章、第五章介绍了生产函数和成本函数，得到了一定产量时厂商成本最小化的条件和长短期成本曲线。

通过第六章的学习，可以得到完全竞争的市场条件下，厂商的商品供给曲线即是其边际成本线（高于平均可变成本最低点以上部分）。

第七章介绍了三种不完全竞争市场条件下都不存在规律的供给曲线。

至此，商品的供求及价格决定的内容已完整。

第八章、第九章介绍了要素的供求，从而确定了要素均衡时的价格。

第十章将单个市场均衡推广到多个市场，并讨论了生产和交换的最优条件；第十一章则从价格失灵的角度讨论其失灵原因及相应的对策。

英文简介：The conomics behaviors of single unit are studies in the subject of Microeconomics.In details,a cosumer、a poductor or a market is studied.Three contends are included in the book.The first one describes the conomics equilibrium behaviors of single cosumer andsingle cosumer;the second part explains how some market turning equilibrium;the equilibrium price and quantity of all markets was discussed in the third one.Because single unit is discussed,the subject was called as Microeconomics.The price analyses is the core of Microeconomics.What is Economics is introduced in the first chaptes;how the price deing decided is explained in the second chapter;demanding is described in the third;how to get supply curve is the main contend from the fourthchapter to the seventh one.The discussion about the factors demand and supply was introduced.The contend of the tenth chapter is market equilibrium and the production optimization and exchange optimization;Externalities、public goods、asymmetric information and Microeconomics policy are discussed in the eleventh.微观经济学内容结构图第一章：引论第四章：生产论第三章：效用论第二章：需求曲线和供给曲线概述以及有关的基本概念第十章：一般均衡论和福利经济学第九章：生产要素价格决定的供给方面第五章：成本论第六章：完全竞争市场第七章：不完全竞争市场第八章：生产要素价格决定的需求方面第十一章：市场失灵和微观经济政策在本课程体系中的功能章次及内容简介“西方经济学”范畴价格的形成机制——供求均衡的结果商品需求曲线的形成：消费者效用最大化的结果完全竞争时商品供给曲线的形成：生产者利润最大化的结果生产函数成本函数利润最大化条件不完全竞争条件下无有规律的商品供给曲线商品价格的形成：供求均衡生产要素的需求因素：边际要素收益=边际要素成本生产要素的供给因素：要素自用效用=要素供给效用所有市场的均衡价要素价格的形成：供求均衡价格失灵，不能起资源调配作用，采用相关经济政策生产和交换的最优条件实证经济学规范经济学三、课程性质与教学目的课程性质：作为西方经济学的组成部分,微观经济学是对西方发达资本主义国家二百多年市场经济发展中的单个经济单位活动规律的一般抽象和概括。

与演绎和归纳不同的是，因果过程追踪方法以溯因推论（ abductive reasoning） 为 逻辑路径，研究者从其他案例环境中借鉴观测结果、研究结论及已有文献，同时深入 考察具体事件（ Schwartz-Shea and Yanow，2012） ，研究过程经过循环往复“多次迭代” （ in a feedback loop） ，在经验观察和抽象理论之间灵活移动，开展更具扩展性的事件 追踪（ Schwartz-Shea and Yanow，2012； Beach and Pedersen，2019） 。这个方法在对特 定案例进行观察分析时，一般不对事实进行过度筛选，而注重将案例事实与特定时 间和空间情境进行联系，从而在研究设计中纳入多个因果解释的可能性，通过梳理 结构性变量之间的相互作用以及多变量时序变化引起的非线性效应，从而在同一解 释框架内解释复杂的政策现象（ Kay and Baker，2015） 。该方法更为关注因果过程展 开的社会情境、因果机制的时空范围条件及其基础理论，其目标是通过对单个或少 数案例的深度质性分析来观察因果过程，理清不同结构性因素对结果产生影响的过 程，揭示政 策 现 象 和 政 策 结 果 之 间 的 因 果 机 制 （ Mahoney，2004； Gerring，2007； Falleti and Lynch，2009； Goertz and Mahoney，2012； Trampusch and Palier，2016） 。
与量化研究相 比，质 性 研 究 显 然 更 擅 长 于 发 掘 和 描 述 政 策 变 化 过 程 的 因 果 机 制①（ 朱天飚，2017） 。“一个完整的解释，必须规定一种机制来描述一个变量影响另 一个变量的过程，换句话说，X 是如何产生 Y 的”（ Kiser and Hechter，1991） 。质性方 法论体系利用个案分析方法研究社会现实案例，是国内外公共管理以及公共政策研 究的重要载体（ Sigelman and Gadbois，1983； 马骏，2012） 。个案分析方法通过对公共 政策过程的全景式描述，多角度地把握研究对象的特征，可以探索揭示公共政策实 施过 程 的 因 果 机 制，但 其 方 法 论 瓶 颈 在 于 从 个 别 到 一 般 的 因 果 推 论 解 释 力 弱 （ Eisenhardt，1989； Yin，1994； Goodin，2009） 。为提高因果推论能力，公共政策的质 性研究方法论 体 系 需 要 进 一 步 突 破。近 年 来 兴 起 的 因 果 过 程 追 踪 方 法 （ Causal Process Tracing） 具有识别并纠正虚假因果关联以及遗漏变量偏误等内生性问题的方 法论优势（ Falleti，2016； 张长东，2018） ，成为公共政策学者可以使用的重要方法论 工具。

课程体系设计
第一讲 全景下的绩效与薪酬解析 第二讲 绩效理论与绩效管理 第三讲 绩效管理技术 第四讲 绩效管理案例分析 第五讲 薪酬激励机制 第六讲 薪酬设计 第七讲 薪酬管理控制 第八讲 薪酬案例分析 课程论文
课程形式及要求
内容讲解、案例分析、主题研究 理论 前沿 操作 两个案例分析作业＋课程论文 阅读、思考、交流、融合 课程目标：2W1H
员工生产率与素质
经营人才
价值链的人才运营观点
使命追求
经营战略
文化与价值观
企业对员工的要求
个人需求与自我实现
价值评价与价值分配 （考核与薪酬）
人力资源开发与管理体系
人力资源 管理技术
人力资源 管理制度
人力资源 管理机制
人力资源 管理流程
创造要素的价值定位 ＊谁创造了企业的价值， 价值创造理念的整合 ＊知识创新者和企业家 是企业价值创造的主导 要素 ＊依据战略要求对价值 贡献排序
Engaged Performance
Paynet External Competitiveness
Executive / Masterful Coaching MMPI
BEI
会不会？
愿不愿意？
容不容许？
员工思维模式
员工能力
员工治理方式
组织能力
组织能力
组织的核心能力(基于智力)的四个来源. *流程(processes) *知识(knowledge) *技术(technology) *内外关系(relationships)
关键绩效指标法
资质模型法
管理结构的重要性
高价值
低价值
企业人力资源的分层分类
惟一性
核心人才
通用人才

No clear-cut distinction can be drawn between professionals andamateurs in science: exceptions can be found to any rule. Neverthelss, the word“amateur” does carry a connotation that the person concerned is not fully integratedinto the scientific community and, in particular, may not fully share itsvalues. The growth of specialization in the nineteenth century, with itsconsequent requirement of a longer, more complex training, implied greaterproblems for amateur participation in science. The trend was naturally mostobvious in those areas of science based especially on a mathematical orlaboratory training, and can be illustrated in terms of the development ofgeology in the United Kingdom。

A comparison of British geological publications over the lastcentury and a half reveals not simply an increasing emphasis on the primacy ofresearch, but also a changing definition of what constitutes an acceptableresearch paper. Thus, in the nineteenth century, local geological studiesrepresented worthwhile research in their own right; but, in the twentiethcentury, local studies have increasingly become acceptable to professionalsonly if they incorporate, and reflect on, the wider geological picture.Amateurs, on the other hand, have continued to pursue local studies in the oldway. The overall result has been to make entrance to professional geologicaljournals harder for amateurs, a result that has been reinforced by thewidespread introduction of refereeing, first by national journals in thenineteenth century and then by several local geological journals in thetwentieth century. As a logical consequence of this development, separatejournals have now appeared aimed mainly towards either professional or amateurreadership. A rather similar process of differentiation has led to professionalgeologists coming together nationally within one or two specific societies,where the amateurs have tended either to remain in local societies or to cometogether nationally in a different way。

皮亚杰认知发展英文English:Jean Piaget was a Swiss psychologist known for his work in child development and cognitive theory. He proposed a stage theory of cognitive development, which outlines the four stages of development that children go through as they mature. According to Piaget, these stages include the sensorimotor stage, the preoperational stage, the concrete operational stage, and the formal operational stage. Piaget believed that children actively construct their understanding of the world through their experiences and interactions with the environment. He also emphasized the importance of schemas, which are mental frameworks that help individuals organize and interpret information. Piaget's work has had a significant impact on the field of developmental psychology and continues to influence our understanding of how children learn and grow.中文翻译:让·皮亚杰是一位瑞士心理学家，以其在儿童发展和认知理论方面的工作而闻名。