| ²é¿´: 583 | »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»¶
281Çóµ÷¼Á£¨0805£©
ÒѾÓÐ8È˻ظ´
»·¾³ÁìÓòÈ«¹úÖØµãʵÑéÊÒÕÐÊÕ²©Ê¿1-2Ãû
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
²ÄÁÏר˶306Ó¢Ò»Êý¶þ
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
301Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
Ò»Ö¾Ô¸Ìì½ò´óѧ»¯Ñ§¹¤ÒÕרҵ£¨081702£©315·ÖÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
302Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
26²©Ê¿ÉêÇë
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
268Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
311Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
±»ÎÒÑÔÖУºÐÂÄ£°å²»Ç¿µ÷¸ñʽÁË£¬¼Ùר¼Ò¿ªÊ¼¹Ü¸ñʽÁË
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´

°¢·É1990¹Ô¹Ô
ÈÙÓþ°æÖ÷ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
-

ר¼Ò¾Ñé: +131 - ·ÒëEPI: 9
- Ó¦Öú: 61 (³õÖÐÉú)
- ¹ó±ö: 1.922
- ½ð±Ò: 18814
- 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¥