LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. Developments in research have made culturing human embryos beyond the 14-day limit seem technologically feasible. In the article “Emerging Human Embryo Research Technologies, the 14-day Rule, and the Special Status of the Embryo,” the authors examine a proposal for new human embryo and embryoid research guidelines by reviewing the history of the 14-day limit and emerging areas of research that are impacted by these guidelines. However, as noted by the authors, changes in science policy should not be developed solely by scientists. Instead, policy development should reflect the reality of science as a public endeavor. After 40 years of consensus, any attempts to revoke the 14-day limit on the in vitro culturing of human embryos should rely on public and stakeholder engagement.
{"title":"生物醫學技術發展應該改變14天法則限制嗎？","authors":"Hongqi Wang","doi":"10.24112/ijccpm.191949","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.191949","url":null,"abstract":"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. \u0000Developments in research have made culturing human embryos beyond the 14-day limit seem technologically feasible. In the article “Emerging Human Embryo Research Technologies, the 14-day Rule, and the Special Status of the Embryo,” the authors examine a proposal for new human embryo and embryoid research guidelines by reviewing the history of the 14-day limit and emerging areas of research that are impacted by these guidelines. However, as noted by the authors, changes in science policy should not be developed solely by scientists. Instead, policy development should reflect the reality of science as a public endeavor. After 40 years of consensus, any attempts to revoke the 14-day limit on the in vitro culturing of human embryos should rely on public and stakeholder engagement.","PeriodicalId":41284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43580886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. Human beings always try to transcend their limitations. Emerging technologies provide a set of powerful tools that promise to significantly improve human performance, stimulating the desire of some technical experts to transform the human body. Against this backdrop, superhumanism has come into being in today's society and is flourishing. Superhumanism has been criticized by some Chinese scholars on the basis of traditional Chinese thought. Their criticism of superhumanism is a difficult task that involves multi-level reflection on human nature, technology, and value. I argue that for the issue of superhumanism, theoretical innovation is more important than continuing to invoke traditional thought.
{"title":"人類自然的身體性狀是不應被技術改造的嗎？","authors":"Yuejun Liu","doi":"10.24112/ijccpm.191955","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.191955","url":null,"abstract":"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. \u0000Human beings always try to transcend their limitations. Emerging technologies provide a set of powerful tools that promise to significantly improve human performance, stimulating the desire of some technical experts to transform the human body. Against this backdrop, superhumanism has come into being in today's society and is flourishing. Superhumanism has been criticized by some Chinese scholars on the basis of traditional Chinese thought. Their criticism of superhumanism is a difficult task that involves multi-level reflection on human nature, technology, and value. I argue that for the issue of superhumanism, theoretical innovation is more important than continuing to invoke traditional thought.","PeriodicalId":41284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44730832","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. 隨著高科技操縱人類生命的潛力日益明顯，超人類主義運動也愈加受到學界重視，相關研究飛速增長，但尚缺乏一種基於儒家視角的系統研究。本文試圖表明儒家視角對反思超人類主義具有不可替代的重要性，不僅因為它可以幫助我們更清晰、更深刻地把握超人類主義的影響和風險，而且因為它可以在超人類主義的技術主義圖景之外，提供想像和監管我們後人類未來的另一種可能性。具體而言，本研究致力於在一種隱含比較視域下展開儒家的批判性視角，從儒家“天人合一”觀念出發，闡釋儒家為什麼不能接受超人類主義，並嘗試探索儒家反對超人類主義的倫理理由與西方生物保守主義的同異之處。由此，本文嘗試將不同文化來源的思想帶入對話中，既是通過它們分歧之處，更是要通過它們共同關懷的議題，來更好地思考，超人類主義計劃對人類社會、對人類未來意味著什麼，並回答“如何監管我們的後人類未來”這一至關重要的問題。 As the potential of high technology to manipulate human life becomes increasingly evident, the transhumanist movement is receiving greater scholarly attention, and the number of related research projects is growing exponentially. However, systematic research from a Confucian perspective is still lacking. This paper attempts to demonstrate the unique value of a Confucian perspective in reflecting on transhumanism. Confucian thought can not only help us grasp the implications and risks of transhumanism with clarity and depth but also offer alternative possibilities for imagining as well as regulating our posthuman future beyond the technocratic picture of transhumanism. Specifically, this paper develops a critical Confucian perspective in an implicitly comparative context to explain why Confucianism cannot accept transhumanism （due to the Confucian notion of “the unity of heaven and man”（天人合一）and to explore the similarities and differences between Confucian and bio-conservative perspectives on transhumanism. I thereby bring ideas from different cultural sources into dialogue to form a better understanding of what transhumanism means for human society and its future, and to answer the crucial question of how to regulate our posthuman future.
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. 随著高科技操纵人类生命的潜力日益明显，超人类主义运动也愈加受到学界重视，相关研究飞速增长，但尚缺乏一种基于儒家视角的系统研究。本文试图表明儒家视角对反思超人类主义具有不可替代的重要性，不仅因为它可以帮助我们更清晰、更深刻地把握超人类主义的影响和风险，而且因为它可以在超人类主义的技术主义图景之外，提供想像和监管我们后人类未来的另一种可能性。具体而言，本研究致力于在一种隐含比较视域下展开儒家的批判性视角，从儒家“天人合一”观念出发，阐释儒家为什么不能接受超人类主义，并尝试探索儒家反对超人类主义的伦理理由与西方生物保守主义的同异之处。由此，本文尝试将不同文化来源的思想带入对话中，既是通过它们分歧之处，更是要通过它们共同关怀的议题，来更好地思考，超人类主义计划对人类社会、对人类未来意味著什么，并回答“如何监管我们的后人类未来”这一至关重要的问题。 As the potential of high technology to manipulate human life becomes increasingly evident, the transhumanist movement is receiving greater scholarly attention, and the number of related research projects is growing exponentially. However, systematic research from a Confucian perspective is still lacking. This paper attempts to demonstrate the unique value of a Confucian perspective in reflecting on transhumanism. Confucian thought can not only help us grasp the implications and risks of transhumanism with clarity and depth but also offer alternative possibilities for imagining as well as regulating our posthuman future beyond the technocratic picture of transhumanism. Specifically, this paper develops a critical Confucian perspective in an implicitly comparative context to explain why Confucianism cannot accept transhumanism （due to the Confucian notion of “the unity of heaven and man”（天人合一）and to explore the similarities and differences between Confucian and bio-conservative perspectives on transhumanism. I thereby bring ideas from different cultural sources into dialogue to form a better understanding of what transhumanism means for human society and its future, and to answer the crucial question of how to regulate our posthuman future.
{"title":"儒家視角下的超人類主義反思——如何監管我們的後人類未來？","authors":"Jue Wang","doi":"10.24112/ijccpm.191951","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.191951","url":null,"abstract":"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. \u0000隨著高科技操縱人類生命的潛力日益明顯，超人類主義運動也愈加受到學界重視，相關研究飛速增長，但尚缺乏一種基於儒家視角的系統研究。本文試圖表明儒家視角對反思超人類主義具有不可替代的重要性，不僅因為它可以幫助我們更清晰、更深刻地把握超人類主義的影響和風險，而且因為它可以在超人類主義的技術主義圖景之外，提供想像和監管我們後人類未來的另一種可能性。具體而言，本研究致力於在一種隱含比較視域下展開儒家的批判性視角，從儒家“天人合一”觀念出發，闡釋儒家為什麼不能接受超人類主義，並嘗試探索儒家反對超人類主義的倫理理由與西方生物保守主義的同異之處。由此，本文嘗試將不同文化來源的思想帶入對話中，既是通過它們分歧之處，更是要通過它們共同關懷的議題，來更好地思考，超人類主義計劃對人類社會、對人類未來意味著什麼，並回答“如何監管我們的後人類未來”這一至關重要的問題。 \u0000As the potential of high technology to manipulate human life becomes increasingly evident, the transhumanist movement is receiving greater scholarly attention, and the number of related research projects is growing exponentially. However, systematic research from a Confucian perspective is still lacking. This paper attempts to demonstrate the unique value of a Confucian perspective in reflecting on transhumanism. Confucian thought can not only help us grasp the implications and risks of transhumanism with clarity and depth but also offer alternative possibilities for imagining as well as regulating our posthuman future beyond the technocratic picture of transhumanism. Specifically, this paper develops a critical Confucian perspective in an implicitly comparative context to explain why Confucianism cannot accept transhumanism （due to the Confucian notion of “the unity of heaven and man”（天人合一）and to explore the similarities and differences between Confucian and bio-conservative perspectives on transhumanism. I thereby bring ideas from different cultural sources into dialogue to form a better understanding of what transhumanism means for human society and its future, and to answer the crucial question of how to regulate our posthuman future.","PeriodicalId":41284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48937109","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. Superhumanism or posthumanism has become our reality. To deal with the resulting humanitarian dilemma, we can consult the abundant theoretical resources provided by Confucianism. Confucius's “The Gentleman is No Vessel”, Zengzi's important concept of filial piety, and Mencius' understanding of human nature contribute valuable theoretical perspectives for reflection on the real-world consequences of transhumanism.
{"title":"再議儒家對超人類主義的態度","authors":"Zhiwei Chen","doi":"10.24112/ijccpm.191953","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.191953","url":null,"abstract":"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. \u0000Superhumanism or posthumanism has become our reality. To deal with the resulting humanitarian dilemma, we can consult the abundant theoretical resources provided by Confucianism. Confucius's “The Gentleman is No Vessel”, Zengzi's important concept of filial piety, and Mencius' understanding of human nature contribute valuable theoretical perspectives for reflection on the real-world consequences of transhumanism.","PeriodicalId":41284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44160586","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. Transhumanism banishes the body from being, which leads to the separation of technology and virtue. In the Confucian view, the body is the symbiosis of technology and virtue, human relations and politics. We can use the notions of “benevolence” and Tao in Confucian ethics to criticize transhumanism. The fundamental problem involved in the debate between Confucianism and transhumanism concerns how human beings define themselves. Confucianists believe that human beings cannot and should not violate certain fundamental restrictions and principles presented by the universe. We should continue to think about what these fundamental restrictions and principles should be, and whether they are likely to be breached with technological progress.
{"title":"我們該如何存在？——關於超人類主義的若干批判","authors":"Tao Liu","doi":"10.24112/ijccpm.191954","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.191954","url":null,"abstract":"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. \u0000Transhumanism banishes the body from being, which leads to the separation of technology and virtue. In the Confucian view, the body is the symbiosis of technology and virtue, human relations and politics. We can use the notions of “benevolence” and Tao in Confucian ethics to criticize transhumanism. The fundamental problem involved in the debate between Confucianism and transhumanism concerns how human beings define themselves. Confucianists believe that human beings cannot and should not violate certain fundamental restrictions and principles presented by the universe. We should continue to think about what these fundamental restrictions and principles should be, and whether they are likely to be breached with technological progress.","PeriodicalId":41284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42408670","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. Transhumanism is a contemporary form of Western “subject metaphysics” that combines the dual elements of Cartesianism and Nietzsche's “metaphysics of will.” The essence of Eros is the human desire for totality, which is interlinked with the secret desire for today's “human enhancement” technology. The Confucian idea of “the unity of heaven and man”（天人合一）can solve many problems in the debate between biological conservatism and bioprogressivism. The ideological foundation of this idea in Laozi's and Zhuangzi's thought should be taken seriously. Recognition of human limitations is an important aspect of traditional Confucian—Taoist wisdom, but human enhancement technology is in essence a tool for “excessive reduction”.
{"title":"“超人類主義”是主體形而上學的新形式","authors":"X. Shi","doi":"10.24112/ijccpm.191957","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.191957","url":null,"abstract":"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. \u0000Transhumanism is a contemporary form of Western “subject metaphysics” that combines the dual elements of Cartesianism and Nietzsche's “metaphysics of will.” The essence of Eros is the human desire for totality, which is interlinked with the secret desire for today's “human enhancement” technology. The Confucian idea of “the unity of heaven and man”（天人合一）can solve many problems in the debate between biological conservatism and bioprogressivism. The ideological foundation of this idea in Laozi's and Zhuangzi's thought should be taken seriously. Recognition of human limitations is an important aspect of traditional Confucian—Taoist wisdom, but human enhancement technology is in essence a tool for “excessive reduction”.","PeriodicalId":41284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46709313","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract in English only.The COVID-19 pandemic requires people and political bodies to reflect on the abundant and complicated relationships between human beings, governments, and organizations. We hold that Prof. Sass emphasizes the urgency and necessity of the view that “life is interconnected.” With the continuous progress of globalization, mankind has become an interdependent community with a shared future. However, global cooperation and communication face numerous challenges due to the diversity of cultures, national conditions, and competing interests. The COVID-19 pandemic has driven individuals and political bodies to discuss effective measures and control the disaster together, which demands that a basic consensus be reached on how to manage the tension between individual freedom and interests and public health and well-being. Even more importantly, the pursuit of happiness is the common goal of mankind. Solidarity and mutual aid are required to create a stable, harmonious, healthy, and orderly community. Chinese traditional philosophy can contribute some wisdom and strategies to build similar but not identical bodies and societies. DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 8 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.
{"title":"新冠疫情背景下的人類命運共同體探析","authors":"Junxiang Liu, Qiang Yue, Xiaomu Ma","doi":"10.24112/ijccpm.181696","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.181696","url":null,"abstract":"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract in English only.The COVID-19 pandemic requires people and political bodies to reflect on the abundant and complicated relationships between human beings, governments, and organizations. We hold that Prof. Sass emphasizes the urgency and necessity of the view that “life is interconnected.” With the continuous progress of globalization, mankind has become an interdependent community with a shared future. However, global cooperation and communication face numerous challenges due to the diversity of cultures, national conditions, and competing interests. The COVID-19 pandemic has driven individuals and political bodies to discuss effective measures and control the disaster together, which demands that a basic consensus be reached on how to manage the tension between individual freedom and interests and public health and well-being. Even more importantly, the pursuit of happiness is the common goal of mankind. Solidarity and mutual aid are required to create a stable, harmonious, healthy, and orderly community. Chinese traditional philosophy can contribute some wisdom and strategies to build similar but not identical bodies and societies. DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 8 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.","PeriodicalId":41284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69045290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese我們正生活在一個全球性危機的時代。2020年突如其來的新冠病毒不僅造成了一場全球性公共衛生危機，而且也加劇了全球經濟、政治、社會方方面面的既有危機，以至於短短幾個月內病毒已經蔓延為一場關乎人類社會興衰的巨大危機，影響到世界上的每一個角落、每一個人。此時此刻，我們仍然深處危機之中，既無從確定危機會在什麼時候完結，以什麼方式結束，也無法預知危機將會把我們帶向何方。面對完全不確給定的未來，我們比以從任何時刻都更加需要思考、對話和相互聯結。本期組稿的初衷也正是試圖創造這樣一個對話空間，讓來自不同文化背景，不同學科領域的學者共同探討新冠疫情給人類社會帶來的變化、危險，和機會。DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 8 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese我们正生活在一个全球性危机的时代。2020年突如其来的新冠病毒不仅造成了一场全球性公共卫生危机，而且也加剧了全球经济、政治、社会方方面面的既有危机，以至于短短几个月内病毒已经蔓延为一场关乎人类社会兴衰的巨大危机，影响到世界上的每一个角落、每一个人。此时此刻，我们仍然深处危机之中，既无从确定危机会在什么时候完结，以什么方式结束，也无法预知危机将会把我们带向何方。面对完全不确给定的未来，我们比以从任何时刻都更加需要思考、对话和相互联结。本期组稿的初衷也正是试图创造这样一个对话空间，让来自不同文化背景，不同学科领域的学者共同探讨新冠疫情给人类社会带来的变化、危险，和机会。DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 8 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.
{"title":"前言: 新冠疫情的危機","authors":"Jue Wang","doi":"10.24112/ijccpm.181692","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.181692","url":null,"abstract":"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese我們正生活在一個全球性危機的時代。2020年突如其來的新冠病毒不僅造成了一場全球性公共衛生危機，而且也加劇了全球經濟、政治、社會方方面面的既有危機，以至於短短幾個月內病毒已經蔓延為一場關乎人類社會興衰的巨大危機，影響到世界上的每一個角落、每一個人。此時此刻，我們仍然深處危機之中，既無從確定危機會在什麼時候完結，以什麼方式結束，也無法預知危機將會把我們帶向何方。面對完全不確給定的未來，我們比以從任何時刻都更加需要思考、對話和相互聯結。本期組稿的初衷也正是試圖創造這樣一個對話空間，讓來自不同文化背景，不同學科領域的學者共同探討新冠疫情給人類社會帶來的變化、危險，和機會。DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 8 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.","PeriodicalId":41284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69044482","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract in English only.The COVID-19 pandemic has taken a heavy toll on human life thrown societies across the world into disarray. This article provides a brief reading of and commentary on the article “The coronavirus also attacks political and corporate bodies” by Prof. Hans-Martin Sass. Sass, with his deep concern about the future of human society, assumes a higher vantage point than particular sociopolitical issues to discuss the more fundamental question of interconnectedness in human societies. The pandemic is only one of many potential serious threats to social and political institutions. COVID-19 has hit the world at a time of fragmentation, localism, and disarray. Sass raises substantial questions about what the world in general, and China in particular, may need to consider to ensure the success of rebuilding. Paradoxically, some authors suggest that the pandemic may be an opportunity for sociopolitical reconciliation and sustainable human development in the post-pandemic era.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 9 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.
{"title":"閱讀Sass: 展望疫症後人類社會的再造","authors":"K. Au","doi":"10.24112/ijccpm.181694","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.181694","url":null,"abstract":"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract in English only.The COVID-19 pandemic has taken a heavy toll on human life thrown societies across the world into disarray. This article provides a brief reading of and commentary on the article “The coronavirus also attacks political and corporate bodies” by Prof. Hans-Martin Sass. Sass, with his deep concern about the future of human society, assumes a higher vantage point than particular sociopolitical issues to discuss the more fundamental question of interconnectedness in human societies. The pandemic is only one of many potential serious threats to social and political institutions. COVID-19 has hit the world at a time of fragmentation, localism, and disarray. Sass raises substantial questions about what the world in general, and China in particular, may need to consider to ensure the success of rebuilding. Paradoxically, some authors suggest that the pandemic may be an opportunity for sociopolitical reconciliation and sustainable human development in the post-pandemic era.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 9 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.","PeriodicalId":41284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69044525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.新冠病毒疫情催生了以中國的“健康碼”和新加坡的“TraceTogether”為代表的接觸者追蹤應用程式在全球的應用和擴散。如何利用人工智慧科技，在資料治理中平衡效率與隱私倫理的闢係，成為使用數位追蹤工具進行疫情治理的國家共同面對的難題。兩國法律都規定，在收集個人資訊前必須向個人資訊主體明確告知所收集的個人資訊類型、使用個人資訊的規則，並獲得個人資訊主體的授權同意。本文通過對“健康碼”和“TraceTogether”隱私政策的對比分析發現，在應用 上，中國健康碼的使用有效幫助防控疫情，但是收集的個人資訊範園廣、處理目的多、存儲時間不明確、隱私政策内容較含糊、知情同意流於形式。新加坡的“TraceTogether”則更好地遵守了資訊收集最少夠用、資訊處理目的限定、資訊存儲時間最小化、隱私政策公開透明、知情同意等原則。中國和新加坡兩種利用資料抗疫的糢式表明，風險社會裡的資料治理需要進一步調和公共利益與個人權利，平衡治理效率和資料倫理的邊界。The COVID-19 pandemic has spawned the spread of contact-tracing applications such as China's “Health Code” and Singapore’s “TraceTogether.” Balancing efficiency and privacy ethics in data governance has become a common problem faced by all countries using digital tracing tools to control the pandemic. The laws of both China and Singapore stipulate that prior to collecting personal information, organizations and institutions must clearly inform individuals about the types of personal information collected and the rules for the use of personal information, and must obtain authorized user consent. This article analyzes the privacy policies of Health Code in China and TraceTogether in Singapore and identifies five potential problems in Health Code’s privacy policies: the broad collection of personal information, multiple processing purposes, indeterminate storage time, ambiguous privacy policy content, and the ineffectiveness of informed consent, although Health Code has been deemed an efficient tool to fight against the pandemic. Singapore’s TraceTogether adheres to the principles of minimum information collection, limited information processing purposes, minimum duration of information storage, openness and transparency of privacy policies, and informed consent. These two models for using big data in the fight against the pandemic in China and Singapore suggest that data governance needs to reconcile public interests and individual rights, and should balance governance efficiency and data ethics.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 69 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.新冠病毒疫情催生了以中国的“健康码”和新加坡的“TraceTogether”为代表的接触者追踪应用程式在全球的应用和扩散。如何利用人工智慧科技，在资料治理中平衡效率与隐私伦理的辟系，成为使用数位追踪工具进行疫情治理的国家共同面对的难题。两国法律都规定，在收集个人资讯前必须向个人资讯主体明确告知所收集的个人资讯类型、使用个人资讯的规则，并获得个人资讯主体的授权同意。本文通过对“健康码”和“TraceTogether”隐私政策的对比分析发现，在应用 上，中国健康码的使用有效帮助防控疫情，但是收集的个人资讯范园广、处理目的多、存储时间不明确、隐私政策内容较含糊、知情同意流于形式。新加坡的“TraceTogether”则更好地遵守了资讯收集最少够用、资讯处理目的限定、资讯存储时间最小化、隐私政策公开透明、知情同意等原则。中国和新加坡两种利用资料抗疫的糢式表明，风险社会里的资料治理需要进一步调和公共利益与个人权利，平衡治理效率和资料伦理的边界。The COVID-19 pandemic has spawned the spread of contact-tracing applications such as China's “Health Code” and Singapore’s “TraceTogether.” Balancing efficiency and privacy ethics in data governance has become a common problem faced by all countries using digital tracing tools to control the pandemic. The laws of both China and Singapore stipulate that prior to collecting personal information, organizations and institutions must clearly inform individuals about the types of personal information collected and the rules for the use of personal information, and must obtain authorized user consent. This article analyzes the privacy policies of Health Code in China and TraceTogether in Singapore and identifies five potential problems in Health Code’s privacy policies: the broad collection of personal information, multiple processing purposes, indeterminate storage time, ambiguous privacy policy content, and the ineffectiveness of informed consent, although Health Code has been deemed an efficient tool to fight against the pandemic. Singapore’s TraceTogether adheres to the principles of minimum information collection, limited information processing purposes, minimum duration of information storage, openness and transparency of privacy policies, and informed consent. These two models for using big data in the fight against the pandemic in China and Singapore suggest that data governance needs to reconcile public interests and individual rights, and should balance governance efficiency and data ethics.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 69 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.
{"title":"如何平衡治理效率與隱私保護？中國和新加坡新冠病毒接觸者追蹤應用程式隱私政策的文本分析","authors":"Bian Xiong, Fen Lin","doi":"10.24112/ijccpm.181691","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.181691","url":null,"abstract":"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.新冠病毒疫情催生了以中國的“健康碼”和新加坡的“TraceTogether”為代表的接觸者追蹤應用程式在全球的應用和擴散。如何利用人工智慧科技，在資料治理中平衡效率與隱私倫理的闢係，成為使用數位追蹤工具進行疫情治理的國家共同面對的難題。兩國法律都規定，在收集個人資訊前必須向個人資訊主體明確告知所收集的個人資訊類型、使用個人資訊的規則，並獲得個人資訊主體的授權同意。本文通過對“健康碼”和“TraceTogether”隱私政策的對比分析發現，在應用 上，中國健康碼的使用有效幫助防控疫情，但是收集的個人資訊範園廣、處理目的多、存儲時間不明確、隱私政策内容較含糊、知情同意流於形式。新加坡的“TraceTogether”則更好地遵守了資訊收集最少夠用、資訊處理目的限定、資訊存儲時間最小化、隱私政策公開透明、知情同意等原則。中國和新加坡兩種利用資料抗疫的糢式表明，風險社會裡的資料治理需要進一步調和公共利益與個人權利，平衡治理效率和資料倫理的邊界。The COVID-19 pandemic has spawned the spread of contact-tracing applications such as China's “Health Code” and Singapore’s “TraceTogether.” Balancing efficiency and privacy ethics in data governance has become a common problem faced by all countries using digital tracing tools to control the pandemic. The laws of both China and Singapore stipulate that prior to collecting personal information, organizations and institutions must clearly inform individuals about the types of personal information collected and the rules for the use of personal information, and must obtain authorized user consent. This article analyzes the privacy policies of Health Code in China and TraceTogether in Singapore and identifies five potential problems in Health Code’s privacy policies: the broad collection of personal information, multiple processing purposes, indeterminate storage time, ambiguous privacy policy content, and the ineffectiveness of informed consent, although Health Code has been deemed an efficient tool to fight against the pandemic. Singapore’s TraceTogether adheres to the principles of minimum information collection, limited information processing purposes, minimum duration of information storage, openness and transparency of privacy policies, and informed consent. These two models for using big data in the fight against the pandemic in China and Singapore suggest that data governance needs to reconcile public interests and individual rights, and should balance governance efficiency and data ethics.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 69 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.","PeriodicalId":41284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69044452","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：