RELIGIOUS STUDIES最新文献

英文中文

One goodness, many goodnesses, and the Divine Ideas Imitation Theory 一善、多善与神思模仿理论

IF 0.6 2区哲学 0 RELIGION

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Pub Date : 2024-09-10 DOI: 10.1017/s0034412524000301

Anne Jeffrey, Thomas M. Ward

Some theories of goodness are descriptively rich: they have much to say about what makes things good. Neo-Aristotelian accounts, for instance, detail the various features that make a human being, a dog, a bee good relative to facts about those forms of life. Famously, such theories of relative goodness tend to be comparatively poor: they have little or nothing to say about what makes one kind of being better than another kind. Other theories of goodness – those that take there to be absolute goodness – are comparatively rich: they offer grounds for judging some types of things better than others because they have more absolute goodness. Moorean accounts, for example, can tell us that humans and human experiences are superior to bees and blades of grass. But such theories tend to be descriptively poor: they struggle to tell us in virtue of what this is so. In this article we motivate and flesh out a view that splits the difference between accounts of goodness as relative and accounts of goodness as absolute. Such a view holds promise only if the mechanics of this kind of metaphysics of goodness can be worked out. Here we present a view on which the paradigm for absolute goodness is God and the paradigm for each kind of relative goodness is a divine idea.

有些善的理论具有丰富的描述性：它们对事物之所以为善有很多论述。例如，新亚里士多德的理论详细描述了人、狗、蜜蜂相对于这些生命形式的事实而言之所以为善的各种特征。著名的是，这种相对善的理论往往比较贫乏：它们几乎没有或根本没有论述是什么让一种生命比另一种生命更好。而其他善的理论--那些认为存在绝对善的理论--则相对丰富：它们为判断某些类型的事物比其他类型的事物更好提供了依据，因为它们具有更多的绝对善。例如，摩尔理论可以告诉我们，人类和人类的经验比蜜蜂和草叶更优越。但这类理论往往缺乏描述性：它们难以告诉我们这是由于什么原因。在本文中，我们提出并充实了一种观点，这种观点将善的相对性与善的绝对性区分开来。这种观点只有在这种善的形而上学的机制能够得到解决的情况下才有希望。在这里，我们提出了这样一种观点：绝对善的范式是上帝，而每一种相对善的范式都是一种神圣的观念。

{"title":"One goodness, many goodnesses, and the Divine Ideas Imitation Theory","authors":"Anne Jeffrey, Thomas M. Ward","doi":"10.1017/s0034412524000301","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034412524000301","url":null,"abstract":"Some theories of goodness are descriptively rich: they have much to say about what makes things good. Neo-Aristotelian accounts, for instance, detail the various features that make a human being, a dog, a bee good relative to facts about those forms of life. Famously, such theories of relative goodness tend to be comparatively poor: they have little or nothing to say about what makes one kind of being better than another kind. Other theories of goodness – those that take there to be absolute goodness – are comparatively rich: they offer grounds for judging some types of things better than others because they have more absolute goodness. Moorean accounts, for example, can tell us that humans and human experiences are superior to bees and blades of grass. But such theories tend to be descriptively poor: they struggle to tell us in virtue of what this is so. In this article we motivate and flesh out a view that splits the difference between accounts of goodness as relative and accounts of goodness as absolute. Such a view holds promise only if the mechanics of this kind of metaphysics of goodness can be worked out. Here we present a view on which the paradigm for absolute goodness is God and the paradigm for each kind of relative goodness is a divine idea.","PeriodicalId":45888,"journal":{"name":"RELIGIOUS STUDIES","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142193792","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Divine Contradiction: some snippets 神圣的矛盾：一些片段

IF 0.6 2区哲学 0 RELIGION

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Pub Date : 2024-09-02 DOI: 10.1017/s0034412524000295

Jc Beall

Two doctrines (or axioms) of christian theology sharply distinguish christian monotheism from its traditional monotheistic siblings (viz. jewish and islamic monotheism): the incarnation of God and the triunity of God. Both doctrines, as many have long observed, face a conspicuous so-called logical problem – namely, apparent contradiction. How should the strong appearance of such fundamental contradiction be explained? Beall's answer: the incarnation and trinity appear to be contradictory because God is a contradictory being – a being of whom some contradictions are true. The full truth of God is expressed only via contradiction, which is why the fundamental axioms of christian theology have long appeared to be contradictory. Divine Contradiction presents the target contradictory account of the trinity; its predecessor The Contradictory Christ presents the contradictory account of the incarnation.

基督教神学的两个教义（或公理）将基督教一神论与其传统的一神论兄弟姐妹（即犹太教和伊斯兰教的一神论）明显区分开来：上帝道成肉身和上帝三位一体。正如许多人早已注意到的那样，这两种教义都面临着一个明显的所谓逻辑问题--即明显的矛盾。如何解释这种根本矛盾的强烈表象呢？比厄尔的答案是：道成肉身和三位一体看起来是矛盾的，因为上帝是一个矛盾的存在--他的某些矛盾是真实的。只有通过矛盾才能表达上帝的全部真理，这就是为什么基督教神学的基本公理长期以来似乎都是矛盾的。神圣的矛盾》介绍了三位一体的目标矛盾论；其前身《矛盾的基督》介绍了道成肉身的矛盾论。

引用次数: 0

Divine Contradiction: replies to critics 神圣的矛盾：对批评家的答复

IF 0.6 2区哲学 0 RELIGION

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Pub Date : 2024-09-02 DOI: 10.1017/s0034412524000283

Jc Beall

This is a collection of replies to critics of Divine Contradiction, each critic a symposiast in the Religious Studies symposium on said book.

这是一本给《神圣的矛盾》评论家的回信集，每位评论家都是该书宗教研究研讨会的座谈会发言人。

引用次数: 0

Divine contradiction: fascinating but unpersuasive 神圣的矛盾：引人入胜却缺乏说服力

IF 0.6 2区哲学 0 RELIGION

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Pub Date : 2024-09-02 DOI: 10.1017/s0034412524000271

Karen Kilby

This article, offered from the point of view of a non-analytic, systematic theologian, admires the freshness, clarity, and simplicity of the proposal at the heart of Beall's Divine Contradiction, while raising three objections. The first is to the style in which the book is written: I suggest that it remains far too technical to reach large parts of its intended audience. The second is to the tendency to speak of God as ‘portion’ or ‘fragment’ of reality. The third, more substantive objection is to the proposal that the denial of the divinity of each of the Persons of the Trinity can be part of the Christian faith: I argue that Beall's position that only the failure to affirm a truth, and not its denial, counts as a real heresy, is under-argued and unpersuasive.

本文从一个非分析性、系统性神学家的角度出发，钦佩比厄尔《神圣的矛盾》一书核心提议的新颖、清晰和简洁，同时也提出了三点反对意见。首先是该书的写作风格：我认为，该书的技术性太强，无法触及大部分读者。第二是反对将上帝说成是现实的 "部分 "或 "片段 "的倾向。第三种更实质性的反对意见是，否认三位一体中每一位的神性可以成为基督教信仰的一部分：我认为，比厄尔认为只有不肯定真理而不是否认真理才是真正的异端，这一立场论证不足，缺乏说服力。

引用次数: 0

The evidential challenge for petitionary prayer 请愿式祷告的证据挑战

IF 0.6 2区哲学 0 RELIGION

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Pub Date : 2024-05-13 DOI: 10.1017/s0034412524000209

Noam Oren

In the past decade, philosophers have devoted a great deal of attention to the practice of petitionary prayer. Philosophical inquiries have posed a priori problems – issues that arise from an analytical investigation of the concept of God, the concept of petitionary prayer, and the relationship between the two. Taking a different direction, this article shifts the focus from possibility to actuality. Accordingly, this article does not deal with the question ‘Can God answer petitionary prayers?’ but rather with the question ‘Does God answer petitionary prayers?’ and, mainly, its implications. More accurately, I will present the tension between the religious belief that petitionary prayers can be effective and the fact that this does not seem to be so in reality, a claim that has been the conclusion of several empirical studies. Then I will present and examine several solutions to this tension. Although I will try to promote my preferred solution, my main aim is to clarify the problem and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the solutions offered to solve the problem under discussion.

在过去的十年中，哲学家们对请愿祷告的实践给予了极大的关注。哲学研究提出了先验问题--这些问题产生于对上帝的概念、请愿祷告的概念以及两者之间关系的分析研究。本文从另一个方向出发，将重点从可能性转向现实性。因此，本文不讨论 "上帝能否回答请愿性祷告？"这一问题，而是讨论 "上帝是否回答请愿性祷告？"这一问题及其主要影响。更准确地说，我将阐述 "请愿式祈祷会有效 "这一宗教信仰与 "请愿式祈祷在现实中似乎并不有效 "这一事实之间的矛盾。然后，我将提出并研究几种解决这一矛盾的方法。虽然我会努力推广我所倾向的解决方案，但我的主要目的是澄清问题，并讨论为解决所讨论的问题而提出的解决方案的优缺点。

引用次数: 0

Sceptical theism, divine commands, and love 怀疑论、神谕与爱

IF 0.6 2区哲学 0 RELIGION

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Pub Date : 2024-05-13 DOI: 10.1017/s0034412524000222

Ho-yeung Lee

Sceptical theists respond to the problem of evil by arguing that we should be sceptical of our abilities to understand God's plan and the justifying reasons for his actions. A major difficulty faced by sceptical theism is the problem of moral paralysis. Some sceptical theists have proposed a divine command response: theists can appeal to God's commands in acting, and this circumvents the need to exercise value judgement in moral deliberations. This article provides an objection to the divine command response by arguing that it renders love impossible and practically undermines the possibility of the theistic way of life. As a result, this article demonstrates a constraint on any potential solution to the problem of moral paralysis in sceptical theism: the access to values of loving relationship and human well-being, as well as their role to play in agents’ deliberative process, should be safeguarded.

怀疑神论者对邪恶问题的回应是，我们应该怀疑自己是否有能力理解上帝的计划及其行为的正当理由。怀疑神论面临的一个主要困难是道德麻痹问题。一些怀疑主义有神论者提出了神谕对策：有神论者在行动时可以诉诸上帝的命令，这就避免了在道德思考中进行价值判断的需要。本文反对神谕回应，认为它使爱成为不可能，实际上破坏了有神论生活方式的可能性。因此，本文展示了对怀疑有神论中道德瘫痪问题的任何潜在解决方案的限制：爱的关系和人类福祉的价值以及它们在行为者审议过程中的作用应得到保障。

引用次数: 0

Divine command theory and the (supposed) incoherence of self-commanding 神谕理论与自我命令的（假定）不一致性

IF 0.6 2区哲学 0 RELIGION

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Pub Date : 2024-05-13 DOI: 10.1017/s0034412524000210

Jashiel Resto Quiñones

Theological voluntarism is a family of metaethical views that share the claim that deontological statuses of actions are dependent on or identical with some divine feature. Adams's version of this theistic metaethical view is a divine command theory (DCT). According to Adams's DCT, the property being-morally-obligated is identical to the property being-commanded-by-God. Thus, a natural consequence of Adams's DCT is that an agent is morally obligated to do something just in case God commands that agent to do such a thing. From Adams's DCT, it follows that God is morally obligated to act just in case God commands himself to act. Quinn argued that commanding oneself is incoherent and, therefore, that God cannot be morally obligated to act. The claim that commanding oneself is incoherent has seldom been discussed in the divine command theory literature. This article is an attempt to change that. Here, I argue (contra Quinn) that that no constitutive rule (or condition of satisfaction) of self-commands is incoherent, from which it follows that self-commanding is not an incoherent speech act. I conclude that divine command theorists can, without the charge of incoherence, affirm that God can be morally obligated because God can command himself.

神学自愿论是元伦理学观点的一个家族，它们都主张行为的道义地位取决于或等同于某种神性特征。亚当斯的这种有神论元伦理学观点的版本是神圣命令理论（DCT）。根据亚当斯的 "神圣命令论"，被赋予道德义务的属性与被上帝命令的属性是相同的。因此，亚当斯的 DCT 的一个自然结果是，只要上帝命令一个人做某件事，这个人就有道德义务去做这件事。根据亚当斯的 DCT，只要上帝命令自己行事，上帝在道德上就有义务行事。奎因认为，命令自己是不连贯的，因此，上帝不可能在道德上有义务采取行动。在神圣命令理论的文献中，很少有人讨论命令自己是不连贯的这一说法。本文试图改变这种状况。在这里，我论证（与奎因相反），自我命令的构成规则（或满足条件）没有不连贯之处，由此推论，自我命令不是一种不连贯的言语行为。我的结论是，神圣命令论者可以在不被指控为不连贯的情况下，肯定上帝可以承担道德义务，因为上帝可以命令自己。

{"title":"Divine command theory and the (supposed) incoherence of self-commanding","authors":"Jashiel Resto Quiñones","doi":"10.1017/s0034412524000210","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034412524000210","url":null,"abstract":"Theological voluntarism is a family of metaethical views that share the claim that deontological statuses of actions are dependent on or identical with some divine feature. Adams's version of this theistic metaethical view is a divine command theory (DCT). According to Adams's DCT, the property being-morally-obligated is identical to the property being-commanded-by-God. Thus, a natural consequence of Adams's DCT is that an agent is morally obligated to do something just in case God commands that agent to do such a thing. From Adams's DCT, it follows that God is morally obligated to act just in case God commands himself to act. Quinn argued that commanding oneself is incoherent and, therefore, that God cannot be morally obligated to act. The claim that commanding oneself is incoherent has seldom been discussed in the divine command theory literature. This article is an attempt to change that. Here, I argue (contra Quinn) that that no constitutive rule (or condition of satisfaction) of self-commands is incoherent, from which it follows that self-commanding is not an incoherent speech act. I conclude that divine command theorists can, without the charge of incoherence, affirm that God can be morally obligated because God can command himself.","PeriodicalId":45888,"journal":{"name":"RELIGIOUS STUDIES","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140935802","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Afro-Brazilian religions and religious diversity: contributions to pluralism 非洲裔巴西人的宗教和宗教多样性：对多元化的贡献

IF 0.6 2区哲学 0 RELIGION

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Pub Date : 2024-04-29 DOI: 10.1017/s0034412524000192

Marciano Adilio Spica

My objective is to explore a possible contribution of Afro-Brazilian religions to a pluralist philosophy of religious diversity. I will especially explore the syncretic wisdom of these religious traditions, showing how it can help us better understand interreligious dynamics. To do this, I begin by exposing some challenges of pluralist theses, highlighting two problems: homogenization and isolationism. Following that, I briefly introduce some characteristics of Afro-Brazilian religiosity, emphasizing its syncretic aspects, and then argue in favour of syncretism as a kind of wisdom intrinsic to Afro-Brazilian religiosity. This wisdom encompasses both practical and conceptual aspects. I conclude by demonstrating how this Afro-Brazilian wisdom can contribute with philosophical studies on religious diversity.

我的目标是探讨非洲-巴西宗教对宗教多样性多元化哲学可能做出的贡献。我将特别探讨这些宗教传统的交融智慧，说明它如何帮助我们更好地理解宗教间的动态。为此，我首先揭示了多元论的一些挑战，强调了两个问题：同质化和孤立主义。随后，我简要介绍了非洲裔巴西人宗教信仰的一些特点，强调了其宗教信仰的融合性，然后主张融合性是非洲裔巴西人宗教信仰固有的一种智慧。这种智慧包括实践和概念两个方面。最后，我将说明这种非洲-巴西智慧如何有助于宗教多样性的哲学研究。

引用次数: 0

Falsity and untruth 虚假与不真实

IF 0.6 2区哲学 0 RELIGION

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Pub Date : 2024-04-29 DOI: 10.1017/s0034412524000064

Peter van Inwagen

Jc Beall's Divine Contradiction is a fascinating defence of the idea that contradictions are true of the tri-personal God. This project requires a logic that avoids the consequence that every proposition follows from a contradiction. Beall presents such a logic. This ‘gap/glut’ logic is the topic of this article. A gap/glut logic presupposes that falsity is not simply the absence of truth – for a proposition that is true may also be false. This article is essentially an examination of the idea that falsity is not simply untruth. The author rejects this position but does not claim to have an argument against it. In lieu of an argument, he presents three ‘considerations’. First, it is possible to give an intuitive semantics for the language of sentential logic that yields ‘classical’ sentential logic (including ‘p, ¬ p ⊢ q’) and which makes no mention of truth-values. Second, it is possible to imagine a race who manage their affairs very well without having the concept ‘falsity’. Third, it is possible to construct a semantics that yields a logic identical with the dialetheist logic and which makes no mention of truth-values – and which, far from being plausible, seems pointless.

Jc Beall 的《Divine Contradiction》是对 "三位一体的上帝是矛盾的 "这一观点的精彩辩护。这一计划需要一种逻辑，以避免每个命题都由矛盾产生的后果。比厄尔提出了这样一种逻辑。这种 "间隙/直觉 "逻辑就是本文的主题。间隙/直觉 "逻辑的前提是，假性并不只是没有真--因为一个真命题也可能是假的。本文实质上是对 "假 "不仅仅是 "不真 "这一观点的探讨。作者拒绝接受这一立场，但并未声称有反对这一立场的论据。为了代替论证，他提出了三个 "考虑"。首先，我们可以给出一种直观的语义，这种语义可以产生 "经典 "的句法逻辑（包括 "p, ¬ p ⊢ q"），而且不提真值。其次，我们可以想象一个种族在没有 "虚假 "概念的情况下也能很好地管理自己的事务。第三，我们可以构建一种语义学，这种语义学产生的逻辑与辩证逻辑完全相同，而且不提真值。

{"title":"Falsity and untruth","authors":"Peter van Inwagen","doi":"10.1017/s0034412524000064","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034412524000064","url":null,"abstract":"Jc Beall's Divine Contradiction is a fascinating defence of the idea that contradictions are true of the tri-personal God. This project requires a logic that avoids the consequence that every proposition follows from a contradiction. Beall presents such a logic. This ‘gap/glut’ logic is the topic of this article. A gap/glut logic presupposes that falsity is not simply the absence of truth – for a proposition that is true may also be false. This article is essentially an examination of the idea that falsity is not simply untruth. The author rejects this position but does not claim to have an argument against it. In lieu of an argument, he presents three ‘considerations’. First, it is possible to give an intuitive semantics for the language of sentential logic that yields ‘classical’ sentential logic (including ‘p, ¬ p ⊢ q’) and which makes no mention of truth-values. Second, it is possible to imagine a race who manage their affairs very well without having the concept ‘falsity’. Third, it is possible to construct a semantics that yields a logic identical with the dialetheist logic and which makes no mention of truth-values – and which, far from being plausible, seems pointless.","PeriodicalId":45888,"journal":{"name":"RELIGIOUS STUDIES","volume":"130 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140813086","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The unreality of traditional Islamic theism's views on belief, providence, and eschatology: a rejoinder to Tabur 传统伊斯兰神学关于信仰、天意和末世论的不现实观点：对塔布尔的反驳

IF 0.6 2区哲学 0 RELIGION

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Pub Date : 2024-04-22 DOI: 10.1017/s0034412524000180

Imran Aijaz

In a previous work, I argue that traditional Islamic theism's understanding of the world, when juxtaposed with key facts of our world's religious diversity, is implausible. On this understanding, roughly, the truth of tawḥīd (Islamic monotheism) is universally evident, as is belief in its truth. Faithful Muslims act appropriately on knowledge of tawḥīd and are rewarded with heaven, whereas non-Muslims culpably refuse to do so and are eternally punished in hell. Such a view of the world, I argue, is not borne out by empirical observation and philosophical reflection. In a recent article, Ayşenur Ünügür Tabur criticizes this argument, presenting a number of objections to it. In this rejoinder, I argue that her objections, which primarily consist of misstatements and irrelevancies, fail to refute my argument. Since traditional Islamic theism's understanding of the world includes the view that some people will be eternally punished in hell, Tabur augments her discussion of my argument by attempting to solve the Problem of Hell. In my rejoinder to Tabur, I further argue that her proffered solution to this problem is woefully inadequate.

在前一部作品中，我认为传统伊斯兰有神论对世界的理解与我们世界宗教多样性的关键事实相比较是不可信的。根据这种理解，伊斯兰教一神论（tawḥīd）的真理是放之四海而皆准的，对其真理的信仰也是如此。忠实的穆斯林根据对 tawḥīd 的了解采取适当的行动，会得到天堂的奖赏，而非穆斯林则会因拒绝这样做而受到惩罚，永远下地狱。我认为，这种世界观并不符合经验观察和哲学思考。Ayşenur Ünügür Tabur 在最近的一篇文章中批评了这一观点，并提出了一系列反对意见。在这篇反驳文章中，我认为她的反对意见主要包括错误陈述和无关紧要的内容，无法驳倒我的论点。由于传统伊斯兰有神论对世界的理解包括一些人将在地狱中受到永恒的惩罚，塔布尔试图通过解决地狱问题来加强对我的论点的讨论。在我对塔布尔的反驳中，我进一步指出，她所提出的解决这一问题的方法是远远不够的。

{"title":"The unreality of traditional Islamic theism's views on belief, providence, and eschatology: a rejoinder to Tabur","authors":"Imran Aijaz","doi":"10.1017/s0034412524000180","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034412524000180","url":null,"abstract":"In a previous work, I argue that traditional Islamic theism's understanding of the world, when juxtaposed with key facts of our world's religious diversity, is implausible. On this understanding, roughly, the truth of tawḥīd (Islamic monotheism) is universally evident, as is belief in its truth. Faithful Muslims act appropriately on knowledge of tawḥīd and are rewarded with heaven, whereas non-Muslims culpably refuse to do so and are eternally punished in hell. Such a view of the world, I argue, is not borne out by empirical observation and philosophical reflection. In a recent article, Ayşenur Ünügür Tabur criticizes this argument, presenting a number of objections to it. In this rejoinder, I argue that her objections, which primarily consist of misstatements and irrelevancies, fail to refute my argument. Since traditional Islamic theism's understanding of the world includes the view that some people will be eternally punished in hell, Tabur augments her discussion of my argument by attempting to solve the Problem of Hell. In my rejoinder to Tabur, I further argue that her proffered solution to this problem is woefully inadequate.","PeriodicalId":45888,"journal":{"name":"RELIGIOUS STUDIES","volume":"102 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140636751","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

下一页尾页

类型

全部化学•材料生命科学医学物理工程技术环境•农林材料科学地球科学法学管理学化学环境科学与生态学计算机科学教育学经济学农林科学人文科学生物学数学物理与天体物理心理学综合性期刊其他工业工程理学历史学农学文学信息工程

数据库

全部 ACS Publications Elsevier ieeexplore Springer The Royal Society of Chemistry Wiley

期刊

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.

﹀