| ²é¿´: 587 | »Ø¸´: 1 | ||||
| ±¾Ìû²úÉú 1 ¸ö ·ÒëEPI £¬µã»÷ÕâÀï½øÐв鿴 | ||||
ѾѾС×Óгæ (ÕýʽдÊÖ)
|
[ÇóÖú]
¼± Âé·³¸÷λ´óÉñ°ïæ·ÒëÏÂ
|
|||
| ¡°¹Û²ìÉøÍ¸ÀíÂÛ¡±ÈÏΪ²»´æÔÚÖÐÐԹ۲죬Èκι۲춼¸ºÔØ×ÅÀíÂÛ£¬Î§ÈÆÕâÒ»ÀíÂÛÒý·¢µÄÕùÂÛ£¬Ö±½Ó¹ØÏµµ½¿ÆÑ§ÀíÂ۵Ŀ͹ÛÐÔÒÔ¼°¿ÆÑ§Ñо¿µÄÒâÒå¡£±¾ÎÄ´ÓÈÏÖªÑо¿µÄ½Ç¶È¼°±çÖ¤µÄÕÜѧ˼Ïë³ö·¢À´ÌÖÂÛÕâÒ»ÃüÌ⣬¾¡Á¿±ÜÃâÔì³ÉÐζøÉÏѧµÄÕùÂÛ£¬»Ø¹éµ½ÀíÐÔµÄÈÏʶ¹ý³Ì¡£ |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
»·¾³×¨Ë¶µ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ23È˻ظ´
301Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ15È˻ظ´
304Çóµ÷¼Á£¨085602£¬¹ýËļ¶£¬Ò»Ö¾Ô¸985£©
ÒѾÓÐ17È˻ظ´
302·ÖÇóµ÷¼Á Ò»Ö¾Ô¸°²»Õ´óѧ085601
ÒѾÓÐ12È˻ظ´
288»·¾³×¨Ë¶,Çóµ÷²ÄÁÏ·½Ïò
ÒѾÓÐ23È˻ظ´
22408 µ÷¼Á²ÄÁÏ
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
285Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ12È˻ظ´
Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
085600²ÄÁÏÓ뻯¹¤301·ÖÇóµ÷¼ÁԺУ
ÒѾÓÐ19È˻ظ´

°¢·É1990¹Ô¹Ô
ÈÙÓþ°æÖ÷ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
-

ר¼Ò¾Ñé: +131 - ·ÒëEPI: 9
- Ó¦Öú: 61 (³õÖÐÉú)
- ¹ó±ö: 1.922
- ½ð±Ò: 18810
- É¢½ð: 7082
- ºì»¨: 190
- ɳ·¢: 2
- Ìû×Ó: 4177
- ÔÚÏß: 2761.7Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 2099580
- ×¢²á: 2012-11-01
- רҵ: ÉúÎﻯѧ
- ¹ÜϽ: ÍâÓïѧϰ
¡¾´ð°¸¡¿Ó¦Öú»ØÌû
¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï
ѾѾС×Ó: ½ð±Ò+5, ·ÒëEPI+1 2013-07-02 08:18:44
ѾѾС×Ó: ½ð±Ò+5, ·ÒëEPI+1 2013-07-02 08:18:44
|
The theory of permeated observation believes that there is no existence of neutral observation, any observation is loaded with theory and the controversy initiated by it can be related to the objectivity of scientific theory and the meaning of scientific research directly. This article discusses the proposition from the perspective of cognitive research and dialectic philosophy, trying to return to the process of rational cognition instead of causing metaphysical disputations. Çó±Ò±Ò£¬ |

2Â¥2013-06-03 21:23:46














»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥