Focusing on stakeholder inclusion, this article investigates the consequences of implementing the responsible research and innovation framework in a public funding regime. I use a Norwegian transdisciplinary project as a case study, demonstrating how the Research Council of Norway relies heavily on the assumption that stakeholders will pay for further development of the project as long as they are appropriately engaged. In analysing my case, I show how a real risk exists for a project that can potentially deliver value to society and address the grand challenges of our time ends up as waste. I refer to this as 4E Waste which I break into four types: Economic Waste – when money put into the initial project becomes “worthless” because the research is not followed up, Eidetic Waste – where knowledge is lost when the community of practice that is building the novel understanding dissipates, Ecological Waste – when polluting practices associated with current production methods prevail, and Ethical Waste – when the potential enterprise becomes a missed chance to do something good. Keywords: RRI; stakeholder inclusion; funding policy; Mode 2 research
{"title":"Stakeholder Inclusion as the Research Council of Norway’s Silver Bullet","authors":"Mattias Solli","doi":"10.5324/eip.v17i1.5043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v17i1.5043","url":null,"abstract":"Focusing on stakeholder inclusion, this article investigates the consequences of implementing the responsible research and innovation framework in a public funding regime. I use a Norwegian transdisciplinary project as a case study, demonstrating how the Research Council of Norway relies heavily on the assumption that stakeholders will pay for further development of the project as long as they are appropriately engaged. In analysing my case, I show how a real risk exists for a project that can potentially deliver value to society and address the grand challenges of our time ends up as waste. I refer to this as 4E Waste which I break into four types:\u0000\u0000Economic Waste – when money put into the initial project becomes “worthless” because the research is not followed up,\u0000Eidetic Waste – where knowledge is lost when the community of practice that is building the novel understanding dissipates, \u0000Ecological Waste – when polluting practices associated with current production methods prevail, and \u0000Ethical Waste – when the potential enterprise becomes a missed chance to do something good.\u0000\u0000Keywords: RRI; stakeholder inclusion; funding policy; Mode 2 research","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85178456","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}
For this open issue of the Etikk i Praksis: Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics, we put together a broad mix of different articles tackling current important issues in the field.
在这一期《北欧应用伦理学杂志》中，我们汇集了不同的文章，讨论了该领域当前的重要问题。
{"title":"Moral sensitivity, moral distress and moral functioning","authors":"A. Alvarez, M. Thorseth","doi":"10.5324/eip.v17i1.5109","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v17i1.5109","url":null,"abstract":"For this open issue of the Etikk i Praksis: Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics, we put together a broad mix of different articles tackling current important issues in the field.","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87438781","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}
María Jesús Úriz, Juan Jesús Viscarret, Alberto Ballestero
This article presents the main ethical challenges faced by social work professionals in Spain during the "first wave" of COVID-19 in 2020. The pandemic had a serious impact not only on the health sector, but also in the field of social work. During this time, social workers had to address serious ethical questions regarding issues such as confidentiality breaches, how to fairly distribute available resources, the lack of personal contact and emotional connection with the service users, the difficulties of working in isolation and online, doubts about the reliability of the information they were handling and the difficulty of making proper diagnoses. An international research group led by Dr. Sara Banks conducted a broader research project in collaboration with the International Federation of Social Workers, which collected information through an online questionnaire aimed at social workers from various countries. In this article we analyse the results related to the main ethical challenges faced by social workers in Spain. The research group identified two types of ethical challenges that they have separated into two sections: the first section is related to direct intervention with users, which includes topics such as the lack of emotional support, reliability, use of technology, the appropriate care, compliance with the highest professional standards, confidentiality, vulnerability, and the fair distribu-tion of resources. The other section is related to the ethical challenges around the daily work within social entities, which involved dealing with issues such as the e-social work and coordination difficulties, the management of pressure in social bodies and changes in the intervention methodology. Keywords: Social work ethics, pandemic, international research, COVID
本文介绍了西班牙社会工作专业人员在2020年COVID-19“第一波”期间面临的主要道德挑战。这一流行病不仅对卫生部门产生严重影响，而且对社会工作领域也产生严重影响。在此期间，社会工作者必须解决一些严重的道德问题，如违反保密规定、如何公平分配现有资源、与服务使用者缺乏个人接触和情感联系、孤立工作和在线工作的困难、对他们所处理信息的可靠性的怀疑以及难以作出正确诊断。萨拉·班克斯博士领导的一个国际研究小组与国际社会工作者联合会(international Federation of Social Workers)合作开展了一项更广泛的研究项目，通过针对各国社会工作者的在线问卷收集信息。在本文中，我们分析了与西班牙社会工作者面临的主要道德挑战相关的结果。研究小组确定了两种类型的道德挑战，他们将其分为两个部分:第一部分与用户的直接干预有关，其中包括诸如缺乏情感支持、可靠性、技术使用、适当护理、遵守最高专业标准、保密性、脆弱性和资源公平分配等主题。另一部分涉及社会实体日常工作中的伦理挑战，涉及处理诸如电子社会工作和协调困难，社会机构压力管理以及干预方法的变化等问题。关键词:社会工作伦理，流行病，国际研究，COVID
{"title":"Ethical challenges of social work in Spain during COVID-19","authors":"María Jesús Úriz, Juan Jesús Viscarret, Alberto Ballestero","doi":"10.5324/eip.v17i1.5038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v17i1.5038","url":null,"abstract":"This article presents the main ethical challenges faced by social work professionals in Spain during the \"first wave\" of COVID-19 in 2020. The pandemic had a serious impact not only on the health sector, but also in the field of social work. During this time, social workers had to address serious ethical questions regarding issues such as confidentiality breaches, how to fairly distribute available resources, the lack of personal contact and emotional connection with the service users, the difficulties of working in isolation and online, doubts about the reliability of the information they were handling and the difficulty of making proper diagnoses. An international research group led by Dr. Sara Banks conducted a broader research project in collaboration with the International Federation of Social Workers, which collected information through an online questionnaire aimed at social workers from various countries. In this article we analyse the results related to the main ethical challenges faced by social workers in Spain. The research group identified two types of ethical challenges that they have separated into two sections: the first section is related to direct intervention with users, which includes topics such as the lack of emotional support, reliability, use of technology, the appropriate care, compliance with the highest professional standards, confidentiality, vulnerability, and the fair distribu-tion of resources. The other section is related to the ethical challenges around the daily work within social entities, which involved dealing with issues such as the e-social work and coordination difficulties, the management of pressure in social bodies and changes in the intervention methodology.\u0000Keywords: Social work ethics, pandemic, international research, COVID","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76884521","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}
This article discusses some of the normative bases for the recent (2020) Norwegian policy prioritizing LGBTIQ+ refugees in refugee admissions. It argues that, when properly interpreted, this policy is compatible with the UNHCR vulnerability selection criteria but is not independently supported by it. Combined with some of the broader moral principles guiding refugee admissions – including both state-based and refugee-based reasons in refugee resettlement – the article provides qualified support for the Norwegian policy of LGBTIQ+ refugee prioritization. Drawing from some of the specifics of LGBTIQ+ refugee resettlement and integration, the article nevertheless points to certain limitations of such a policy in so far as refugees’ own agency is concerned. The article emphasizes the need to listen to refugees’ own voices in the selection and resettlement processes, including cases where the default position of LGBTIQ+ prioritization may be overridden by LGBTIQ+ persons’ own interests in being resettled elsewhere. Keywords: LGBTIQ+, Norwegian refugee policy, priority setting, refugee selection, LGBTIQ+ integration
{"title":"LGBTIQ+ prioritization in refugee admissions – The case of Norway","authors":"Annmari Vitikainen","doi":"10.5324/eip.v17i1.5014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v17i1.5014","url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses some of the normative bases for the recent (2020) Norwegian policy prioritizing LGBTIQ+ refugees in refugee admissions. It argues that, when properly interpreted, this policy is compatible with the UNHCR vulnerability selection criteria but is not independently supported by it. Combined with some of the broader moral principles guiding refugee admissions – including both state-based and refugee-based reasons in refugee resettlement – the article provides qualified support for the Norwegian policy of LGBTIQ+ refugee prioritization. Drawing from some of the specifics of LGBTIQ+ refugee resettlement and integration, the article nevertheless points to certain limitations of such a policy in so far as refugees’ own agency is concerned. The article emphasizes the need to listen to refugees’ own voices in the selection and resettlement processes, including cases where the default position of LGBTIQ+ prioritization may be overridden by LGBTIQ+ persons’ own interests in being resettled elsewhere.\u0000Keywords: LGBTIQ+, Norwegian refugee policy, priority setting, refugee selection, LGBTIQ+ integration","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82414034","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}
This article presents an experiment in using Socratic dialogue as a methodological approach to Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) in an interdisciplinary life sciences research project. The approach seeks to avoid imposing a set of predetermined substantive norms by engaging the researchers in knowledge-seeking group discussions. We adapted Svend Brinkmann’s method of epistemic interviewing, in order to facilitate reflection on normative issues concerning responsibility in research and innovation in two research group sessions. Two elements characterize this approach, relating it to empirical ethics methodologies: (1) the aim is not to map and analyse opinions, but to develop knowledge based on the dialogue; and (2) the facilitators of the discussion are also active participants in the dialogue rather than mere “spectators”. Through a description of the approach and discussion of some key challenges, we show the method’s potential as a supplement to the catalogue of RRI approaches and argue that it serves a dual purpose of contributing to knowledge production and reflexivity. Keywords: Epistemic interviewing, bioethics, responsibility, reflexivity
{"title":"Socratic dialogue on responsible innovation – a methodological experiment in empirical ethics","authors":"B. Myskja, Alexander Myklebust","doi":"10.5324/eip.v17i1.4950","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v17i1.4950","url":null,"abstract":"This article presents an experiment in using Socratic dialogue as a methodological approach to Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) in an interdisciplinary life sciences research project. The approach seeks to avoid imposing a set of predetermined substantive norms by engaging the researchers in knowledge-seeking group discussions. We adapted Svend Brinkmann’s method of epistemic interviewing, in order to facilitate reflection on normative issues concerning responsibility in research and innovation in two research group sessions. Two elements characterize this approach, relating it to empirical ethics methodologies: (1) the aim is not to map and analyse opinions, but to develop knowledge based on the dialogue; and (2) the facilitators of the discussion are also active participants in the dialogue rather than mere “spectators”. Through a description of the approach and discussion of some key challenges, we show the method’s potential as a supplement to the catalogue of RRI approaches and argue that it serves a dual purpose of contributing to knowledge production and reflexivity.\u0000Keywords: Epistemic interviewing, bioethics, responsibility, reflexivity","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81475437","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}
As the year 2022 ends, we continue to face challenging issues and uncertainties about what should be the right approach to various ethical problems society face. In approaching these problems we reflect on our existing guiding values but also discover new ones. We then try to figure out how our actions and decisions could align with our well-considered judgments until we achieve some degree of reflective equilibrium.
{"title":"Applying ethical reflection to ongoing challenges society face","authors":"A. Alvarez, M. Thorseth","doi":"10.5324/eip.v17i1.5033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v17i1.5033","url":null,"abstract":"As the year 2022 ends, we continue to face challenging issues and uncertainties about what should be the right approach to various ethical problems society face. In approaching these problems we reflect on our existing guiding values but also discover new ones. We then try to figure out how our actions and decisions could align with our well-considered judgments until we achieve some degree of reflective equilibrium.","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86010399","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}
A few public actions prepared the way for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the purpose of which was to define a special military operation as forced, necessary and inevitable. The use of armed force against Ukraine was discussed during those public events. The Russian authorities applied many arguments, and a great deal of attention was paid to the moral justification of war. In this article, I consistently analyze three problems: why did Russian officials use moral language to justify the war, what arguments did they use, and would these arguments retain their effect in the long term. I will examine several addresses made by the President of Russia and the Russian Federation Security Council meeting materials to address these questions. I conclude that Putin's lack of legitimacy forced him to justify the war in moral terms, and the peculiarities of Russian moral discourse allowed him to do that. However, even if this strategy was effective to a certain extent at the beginning of the war, it can hardly be stable and sustainable. Keywords: invasion of Ukraine, Russia, Ukraine, just war, morality
{"title":"Nazism, Genocide and the Threat of The Global West. Russian Moral Justification of War in Ukraine","authors":"A. Kumankov","doi":"10.5324/eip.v17i1.4997","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v17i1.4997","url":null,"abstract":"A few public actions prepared the way for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the purpose of which was to define a special military operation as forced, necessary and inevitable. The use of armed force against Ukraine was discussed during those public events. The Russian authorities applied many arguments, and a great deal of attention was paid to the moral justification of war. In this article, I consistently analyze three problems: why did Russian officials use moral language to justify the war, what arguments did they use, and would these arguments retain their effect in the long term. I will examine several addresses made by the President of Russia and the Russian Federation Security Council meeting materials to address these questions. I conclude that Putin's lack of legitimacy forced him to justify the war in moral terms, and the peculiarities of Russian moral discourse allowed him to do that. However, even if this strategy was effective to a certain extent at the beginning of the war, it can hardly be stable and sustainable.\u0000Keywords: invasion of Ukraine, Russia, Ukraine, just war, morality","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72751969","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}
The Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was met with condemnation from the European Union and the United States as an "unprovoked and unjustified military aggression" that undermines the liberal international order. However, some international relations scholars, such as John Mearsheimer, argue that Russia had genuine security concerns with regard to Ukraine and that the invasion was a response to the threat of NATO membership for Ukraine. Both liberal and realist perspectives on the invasion rely on the assumption of rational, cost-benefit calculations by actors, but cultural factors and irreconcilable non-material interests may also be at play in shaping the actions and motivations of states. Understanding the cultural and national identity factors at play in the invasion of Ukraine is complex and difficult, but they cannot be ignored in attempting to understand and address the conflict.
{"title":"Constructing a Crisis: Putin, the West and War in Ukraine","authors":"J. Bailey","doi":"10.5324/eip.v17i1.5032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v17i1.5032","url":null,"abstract":"The Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was met with condemnation from the European Union and the United States as an \"unprovoked and unjustified military aggression\" that undermines the liberal international order. However, some international relations scholars, such as John Mearsheimer, argue that Russia had genuine security concerns with regard to Ukraine and that the invasion was a response to the threat of NATO membership for Ukraine. Both liberal and realist perspectives on the invasion rely on the assumption of rational, cost-benefit calculations by actors, but cultural factors and irreconcilable non-material interests may also be at play in shaping the actions and motivations of states. Understanding the cultural and national identity factors at play in the invasion of Ukraine is complex and difficult, but they cannot be ignored in attempting to understand and address the conflict.","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82472426","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}
{"title":"Klar for en ny teori i bioetikk?","authors":"Kamilla Østerberg, Henrik Wathne","doi":"10.5324/eip.v16i1.4870","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v16i1.4870","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79959079","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}
One of the strongest arguments against hate speech legislation is the so-called Argument from Political Speech. This argument problematizes the restrictions that might be placed on political opinions or political critique when these opinions are expressed in a way which can be interpreted as ‘hateful’ towards minority groups. One of the strongest free speech scholars opposing hate speech legislation is Ronald Dworkin, who stresses that having restrictions on hate speech is, in fact, illegitimate in a liberal democracy. The right to express oneself freely concerning any political decision is, according to Dworkin, a core democratic principle; it is what self-governance – and hence liberal democracies – are built upon. Dworkin and many other free speech scholars based in the United States see hate speech legislation as a threat to expressing oneself freely and critically. I argue that Dworkin and other US-based free speech scholars tend to overlook actual hate speech legislation in countries where such laws have been implemented and have functioned for decades. Furthermore, I argue that the real threat against political speech lies not in hate speech legislation but rather outside of the law, namely, in private institutions such as universities and museums. Restrictions on political speech in various societal circumstances have been on the rise over the last decades – first and foremost in the US. I analyse why these restrictions on political speech are more widespread in the only Western country without laws against hate speech than they are in countries with implemented hate speech laws. Keywords: political speech, hate speech, hate speech legislation, private institu-tions, universities, USA
{"title":"Universities and other Institutions – not Hate Speech Laws – are a threat to Freedom of Political Speech","authors":"Sigri Gaïni","doi":"10.5324/eip.v16i1.4826","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v16i1.4826","url":null,"abstract":"One of the strongest arguments against hate speech legislation is the so-called Argument from Political Speech. This argument problematizes the restrictions that might be placed on political opinions or political critique when these opinions are expressed in a way which can be interpreted as ‘hateful’ towards minority groups. One of the strongest free speech scholars opposing hate speech legislation is Ronald Dworkin, who stresses that having restrictions on hate speech is, in fact, illegitimate in a liberal democracy. The right to express oneself freely concerning any political decision is, according to Dworkin, a core democratic principle; it is what self-governance – and hence liberal democracies – are built upon. Dworkin and many other free speech scholars based in the United States see hate speech legislation as a threat to expressing oneself freely and critically. I argue that Dworkin and other US-based free speech scholars tend to overlook actual hate speech legislation in countries where such laws have been implemented and have functioned for decades. Furthermore, I argue that the real threat against political speech lies not in hate speech legislation but rather outside of the law, namely, in private institutions such as universities and museums. Restrictions on political speech in various societal circumstances have been on the rise over the last decades – first and foremost in the US. I analyse why these restrictions on political speech are more widespread in the only Western country without laws against hate speech than they are in countries with implemented hate speech laws.\u0000Keywords: political speech, hate speech, hate speech legislation, private institu-tions, universities, USA","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81929700","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：