Martin Buber saw The Question to the Single One (his small theological–political tractate) as an addition that completed his dialogical work I and Thou by broadening dialogical thought to the theological–political–social level. This article presents new findings regarding the tractate’s composition. Furthermore, it delves into the concealed depth of meaning behind Buber’s argument with Søren Kierkegaard which is revealed from within the historical context of Nazi Germany. Indeed, the work is a brave and daring call to the German Christian as a single one standing before God, rousing him to behave in the intersubjective realm according to his obligation to social–political responsibility in response to God’s command. The ethical meaning deviates here from the historical: it constitutes a timeless call for action and responsible theo-political behavior on the social–political plane, which is relevant to our time; an ethical relationship with every other person, and deciding in favor of truth, even at the cost of opposing one’s own collective.
{"title":"Martin Buber’s Small Theological–Political Tractate The Question to the Single One as a Call for Intersubjective Action","authors":"Yael Cherniak","doi":"10.1093/mj/kjae020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mj/kjae020","url":null,"abstract":"Martin Buber saw The Question to the Single One (his small theological–political tractate) as an addition that completed his dialogical work I and Thou by broadening dialogical thought to the theological–political–social level. This article presents new findings regarding the tractate’s composition. Furthermore, it delves into the concealed depth of meaning behind Buber’s argument with Søren Kierkegaard which is revealed from within the historical context of Nazi Germany. Indeed, the work is a brave and daring call to the German Christian as a single one standing before God, rousing him to behave in the intersubjective realm according to his obligation to social–political responsibility in response to God’s command. The ethical meaning deviates here from the historical: it constitutes a timeless call for action and responsible theo-political behavior on the social–political plane, which is relevant to our time; an ethical relationship with every other person, and deciding in favor of truth, even at the cost of opposing one’s own collective.","PeriodicalId":54089,"journal":{"name":"MODERN JUDAISM","volume":"189 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142267220","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This essay explores the attitudes of five prominent German-speaking intellectuals, active in the early twentieth century, to the Talmud: Martin Buber, Max Brod, Shmuel Hugo Bergmann, Franz Rosenzweig, and Gershom Scholem. All were central and influential figures in the turn to irrationalism that characterized this period whose discovery of Kabbalah and Hasidism is well documented. However, this essay explores their interest in the Talmud and how it was related to their take on the trend toward irrationalism. These five intellectuals renounced the critical view of the Talmud that was prevalent during the Jewish Enlightenment (Haskalah), and were inspired by the pivotal role of the Talmud in pre-modern and present East-European Jewry. Nevertheless, their turn was ambivalent, as they kept some of the Enlightened images of the Talmud, and were influenced by Buber’s disdain of the Halachic part of Judaism.
{"title":"An Ambivalent Turn: The Changing Image of the Talmud Among Twentieth-Century German-Jewish Intellectuals","authors":"Zohar Maor","doi":"10.1093/mj/kjae017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mj/kjae017","url":null,"abstract":"This essay explores the attitudes of five prominent German-speaking intellectuals, active in the early twentieth century, to the Talmud: Martin Buber, Max Brod, Shmuel Hugo Bergmann, Franz Rosenzweig, and Gershom Scholem. All were central and influential figures in the turn to irrationalism that characterized this period whose discovery of Kabbalah and Hasidism is well documented. However, this essay explores their interest in the Talmud and how it was related to their take on the trend toward irrationalism. These five intellectuals renounced the critical view of the Talmud that was prevalent during the Jewish Enlightenment (Haskalah), and were inspired by the pivotal role of the Talmud in pre-modern and present East-European Jewry. Nevertheless, their turn was ambivalent, as they kept some of the Enlightened images of the Talmud, and were influenced by Buber’s disdain of the Halachic part of Judaism.","PeriodicalId":54089,"journal":{"name":"MODERN JUDAISM","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142211227","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The encounter between West Bank settlers and the archeologists who came to survey and excavate in their midst at the beginning of the 1980s was a formative moment that led to the settlers’ embrace of the field of archeology. The findings of the surveys and excavations that were conducted in the region, however, raised new insights regarding the early years of the Jewish People and the historical reliability of some of the biblical texts, forcing the settlers to face a complicated reality. Except for their selective adoption of researchers and of conclusions they viewed as supporting the biblical narrative, the settlers accused researchers who presented new conclusions of nontopical deviation and presented an alternative paradigm of their own that does not stand up to criticism. In contrast, researchers from the second generation of West Bank settlers have employed a more professional approach to archeology and do not see themselves as using it to prove identity or ownership. It appears that, in addition to academic influences and their sense of “indigenousness,” this reality is the product of a fundamental crisis that has befallen the religious-ideological public, the thrust of which has been a deconstruction of the harmony of the messianic vision, one expression of which has been the changing intergenerational approach to the role of archeology.
{"title":"Religious-Zionist Right-Wing Israelis: Their Expectations of Archeological Research in Judea and Samaria and Their Ways of Contending With the Resulting Complicated Findings","authors":"Mordechay Lash","doi":"10.1093/mj/kjae007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mj/kjae007","url":null,"abstract":"The encounter between West Bank settlers and the archeologists who came to survey and excavate in their midst at the beginning of the 1980s was a formative moment that led to the settlers’ embrace of the field of archeology. The findings of the surveys and excavations that were conducted in the region, however, raised new insights regarding the early years of the Jewish People and the historical reliability of some of the biblical texts, forcing the settlers to face a complicated reality. Except for their selective adoption of researchers and of conclusions they viewed as supporting the biblical narrative, the settlers accused researchers who presented new conclusions of nontopical deviation and presented an alternative paradigm of their own that does not stand up to criticism. In contrast, researchers from the second generation of West Bank settlers have employed a more professional approach to archeology and do not see themselves as using it to prove identity or ownership. It appears that, in addition to academic influences and their sense of “indigenousness,” this reality is the product of a fundamental crisis that has befallen the religious-ideological public, the thrust of which has been a deconstruction of the harmony of the messianic vision, one expression of which has been the changing intergenerational approach to the role of archeology.","PeriodicalId":54089,"journal":{"name":"MODERN JUDAISM","volume":"73 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2024-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139921010","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 1927, a small book titled Lebenserinnerungen des Kabbalisten Vital (The Memoires of the Kabbalist Vital) was published in Vienna. Its author was Chajim Bloch (1881–1973), a Rabbi, independent scholar, translator, author, and erstwhile forger. The book includes a German rendition of Sefer ha-Hezyonot (The Book of Visions), the memoirs and dream diary of the famous 16th century Kabbalist Hayyim Vital (1542–1620), along with introductions and postscripts written by Bloch himself, as well as by the esotericist and German nationalist Franz Spunda (1890–1963) and the Jewish-Austrian psychoanalyst Wilhelm Stekel (1868–1944). The Memoires of the Kabbalist Vital sheds interesting light on Vienna’s interwar culture and the revival of interest in Kabbalah and Hasidism in the modern period. However, this intriguing book and its colorful author has received very little scholarly attention until now. This article delves into Bloch’s intellectual biography, with a focus on his rendition of The Book of Visions and its paratexts. It also explores some later accounts given by Bloch regarding the publication of the book. The article examines the various interconnected contexts of the translation and publication of the book, revealing interesting connections between Kabbalah, Western esotericism, psychoanalysis, and antisemitism in Vienna in the interwar period.
1927 年，一本名为《卡巴拉学者维塔的回忆录》（Lebenserinnerungen des Kabbalisten Vital）的小书在维也纳出版。这本书的作者是查吉姆-布洛赫（1881-1973 年），他是一位拉比、独立学者、翻译家、作家，也曾是伪造者。该书收录了 16 世纪著名卡巴拉学者哈伊姆-维塔尔（1542-1620 年）的回忆录和梦境日记 Sefer ha-Hezyonot（《幻象之书》）的德文版本，以及布洛赫本人、神秘主义者和德国民族主义者弗朗茨-斯本达（1890-1963 年）和犹太裔奥地利精神分析学家威廉-施特克尔（1868-1944 年）撰写的介绍和跋文。卡巴拉学者维塔的回忆录》对维也纳的战时文化以及近代以来人们对卡巴拉和哈西德教兴趣的恢复提供了有趣的启示。然而，直到现在，这本引人入胜的书及其丰富多彩的作者却很少受到学术界的关注。本文深入探讨了布洛赫的思想传记，重点是他对《幻象之书》及其副译本的演绎。文章还探讨了布洛赫后来关于该书出版的一些说法。文章研究了该书翻译和出版的各种相互关联的背景，揭示了卡巴拉、西方神秘主义、精神分析和战时维也纳反犹太主义之间的有趣联系。
{"title":"Between Safed and Vienna: Chajim Bloch’s The Memoires of the Kabbalist Vital","authors":"Boaz Huss","doi":"10.1093/mj/kjae001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mj/kjae001","url":null,"abstract":"In 1927, a small book titled Lebenserinnerungen des Kabbalisten Vital (The Memoires of the Kabbalist Vital) was published in Vienna. Its author was Chajim Bloch (1881–1973), a Rabbi, independent scholar, translator, author, and erstwhile forger. The book includes a German rendition of Sefer ha-Hezyonot (The Book of Visions), the memoirs and dream diary of the famous 16th century Kabbalist Hayyim Vital (1542–1620), along with introductions and postscripts written by Bloch himself, as well as by the esotericist and German nationalist Franz Spunda (1890–1963) and the Jewish-Austrian psychoanalyst Wilhelm Stekel (1868–1944). The Memoires of the Kabbalist Vital sheds interesting light on Vienna’s interwar culture and the revival of interest in Kabbalah and Hasidism in the modern period. However, this intriguing book and its colorful author has received very little scholarly attention until now. This article delves into Bloch’s intellectual biography, with a focus on his rendition of The Book of Visions and its paratexts. It also explores some later accounts given by Bloch regarding the publication of the book. The article examines the various interconnected contexts of the translation and publication of the book, revealing interesting connections between Kabbalah, Western esotericism, psychoanalysis, and antisemitism in Vienna in the interwar period.","PeriodicalId":54089,"journal":{"name":"MODERN JUDAISM","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2024-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139909497","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article examines the evolution and transformation in the Lubavitcher Rebbe’s perspective concerning the Holocaust. It traces the Rebbe’s viewpoint on the Holocaust by analyzing his various insights and observations in his sermons and writings over the years, and highlights a significant shift in his stance whereby he reached the conclusion that the Holocaust is exceptional and does not fall into the terms of sin, punishment, or even Tikkun (metaphysical rectification)—concepts which he himself previously utilized in earlier stages of his life. In his most recent phase, the Lubavitcher Rebbe posited that the Holocaust is an unprecedented and exceptional occurrence, both on historical and theological grounds. This assertion is not commonly espoused by traditional Jewish theologians and orthodox rabbis, thus rendering the Lubavitcher Rebbe relatively distinctive.
{"title":"The Holocaust as An (UN)Exceptional Phenomenon: Development and Change in the Lubavitcher Rebbe’s Outlook","authors":"Daniel Reiser","doi":"10.1093/mj/kjae003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mj/kjae003","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the evolution and transformation in the Lubavitcher Rebbe’s perspective concerning the Holocaust. It traces the Rebbe’s viewpoint on the Holocaust by analyzing his various insights and observations in his sermons and writings over the years, and highlights a significant shift in his stance whereby he reached the conclusion that the Holocaust is exceptional and does not fall into the terms of sin, punishment, or even Tikkun (metaphysical rectification)—concepts which he himself previously utilized in earlier stages of his life. In his most recent phase, the Lubavitcher Rebbe posited that the Holocaust is an unprecedented and exceptional occurrence, both on historical and theological grounds. This assertion is not commonly espoused by traditional Jewish theologians and orthodox rabbis, thus rendering the Lubavitcher Rebbe relatively distinctive.","PeriodicalId":54089,"journal":{"name":"MODERN JUDAISM","volume":"61 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2024-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139760500","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
During the period from 1943 to 1948, the American Jewish grassroots movement organized to pressure Congress and President Truman in support of the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. This effort was led by Jewish leaders such as Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver, who worked to promote the Zionist vision of a Jewish state as proclaimed in the Balfour Declaration and endorsed by the San Remo Conference. The activities of the Jewish lobby during this period were numerous and varied. They worked to establish the American Jewish Conference, which operated in the U.S. and abroad to promote the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. Additionally, members used their influence in Congress and the media to push for support of the Zionist cause. Through these efforts, the Jewish lobby was able to exert significant pressure on Truman and other decision makers, ultimately leading to the creation of the State of Israel. President Truman found himself caught between the hammer and the anvil of the competing interests of Arabs and Jews, as well as conflicting views within his own administration. Despite these challenges, Truman ultimately played a crucial role in the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948.
{"title":"From the American Jewish Conference to the Establishment of Israel: The First Jewish Zionist Grassroots Movement and President Truman","authors":"Kobby Barda","doi":"10.1093/mj/kjae004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mj/kjae004","url":null,"abstract":"During the period from 1943 to 1948, the American Jewish grassroots movement organized to pressure Congress and President Truman in support of the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. This effort was led by Jewish leaders such as Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver, who worked to promote the Zionist vision of a Jewish state as proclaimed in the Balfour Declaration and endorsed by the San Remo Conference. The activities of the Jewish lobby during this period were numerous and varied. They worked to establish the American Jewish Conference, which operated in the U.S. and abroad to promote the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. Additionally, members used their influence in Congress and the media to push for support of the Zionist cause. Through these efforts, the Jewish lobby was able to exert significant pressure on Truman and other decision makers, ultimately leading to the creation of the State of Israel. President Truman found himself caught between the hammer and the anvil of the competing interests of Arabs and Jews, as well as conflicting views within his own administration. Despite these challenges, Truman ultimately played a crucial role in the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948.","PeriodicalId":54089,"journal":{"name":"MODERN JUDAISM","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139771331","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract On December 9, 1998, the Dutch court in Amsterdam ruled Anne Frank’s diary to be authentic, and that anyone who cast doubt on its authenticity was breaking the law and would be fined. This article examines the ongoing battle between those who view themselves as charged with the legacy of the diary and the Holocaust deniers; it also examines the methods used by the latter and their possible influence on society. The first half deals with the events leading to the writing of the diary, its publication, theatrical and cinematic adaptations, and examines how the Holocaust deniers came to use those events in their claims. The second half deals with the claims themselves and their development over the years, and the deniers’ attempts to reach the widest possible audience in an attempt to sully the image of one of the central symbols of the Holocaust period, Anne Frank, The Diary of a Young Girl.
{"title":"A FORTY-YEAR-OLD CAMPAIGN: ANNE FRANK’S DIARY AND THE HOLOCAUST DENIERS, 1958–1998","authors":"Dina Porat","doi":"10.1093/mj/kjad013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mj/kjad013","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract On December 9, 1998, the Dutch court in Amsterdam ruled Anne Frank’s diary to be authentic, and that anyone who cast doubt on its authenticity was breaking the law and would be fined. This article examines the ongoing battle between those who view themselves as charged with the legacy of the diary and the Holocaust deniers; it also examines the methods used by the latter and their possible influence on society. The first half deals with the events leading to the writing of the diary, its publication, theatrical and cinematic adaptations, and examines how the Holocaust deniers came to use those events in their claims. The second half deals with the claims themselves and their development over the years, and the deniers’ attempts to reach the widest possible audience in an attempt to sully the image of one of the central symbols of the Holocaust period, Anne Frank, The Diary of a Young Girl.","PeriodicalId":54089,"journal":{"name":"MODERN JUDAISM","volume":"106 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136232851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article considers Rabbi Yitz Greenberg’s version of open orthodoxy and its development. Greenberg initially framed his theological journey as a “paradigm shift.” Archival materials from “before” and “during” this theological breakdown are discussed, and a fine-tuning of Greenberg’s narrative is suggested. The article demonstrates how overemphasizing what changed in Greenberg’s views misses the structural continuities in his writings across the decades. Finally, three shifts or “transgressions” are discussed: religious feminism, openness towards world religions, and denominational pluralism. The reception of these shifts is described as a function of a Kuhnian-inspired linguistic incommensurability. However, the Kuhn model, which describes winning and losing camps, is called into question.
{"title":"Are You My Rabbi? Yitz Greenberg’s Intellectual Biography in Kuhnian Terms","authors":"Netta Schramm","doi":"10.1093/mj/kjad010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mj/kjad010","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article considers Rabbi Yitz Greenberg’s version of open orthodoxy and its development. Greenberg initially framed his theological journey as a “paradigm shift.” Archival materials from “before” and “during” this theological breakdown are discussed, and a fine-tuning of Greenberg’s narrative is suggested. The article demonstrates how overemphasizing what changed in Greenberg’s views misses the structural continuities in his writings across the decades. Finally, three shifts or “transgressions” are discussed: religious feminism, openness towards world religions, and denominational pluralism. The reception of these shifts is described as a function of a Kuhnian-inspired linguistic incommensurability. However, the Kuhn model, which describes winning and losing camps, is called into question.","PeriodicalId":54089,"journal":{"name":"MODERN JUDAISM","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135994817","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The controversial Israeli public intellectual Yeshayahu Leibowitz (1903–1994) has jokingly been called “the Leibowitzer Rebbe.” The humor is in the obvious incongruity of associating Leibowitz with anything Hasidic. He was the most rationalist of religious thinkers and said disparaging things about Hasidism and its leaders. Yet Leibowitz and Hasidism are closer than they appear. Building on insights from other scholars, I will show the affinities between Leibowitz and some of the Hasidic masters. Drawing on his writings, interviews, and correspondence, I will demonstrate that Leibowitz read and cited Hasidic books; he engaged with Hasidic teachings, and acknowledged learning from them. I argue that a full understanding of his challenging thinking must take Hasidic sources into account. This paper makes a contribution to scholarship on Leibowitz, one of the most interesting modern Jewish thinkers, and to our understanding of the relationship of Hasidism with modern Judaism as a whole.
{"title":"THE LEIBOWITZER REBBE: YESHAYAHU LEIBOWITZ AND HASIDISM","authors":"Justin Jaron Lewis","doi":"10.1093/mj/kjad009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mj/kjad009","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The controversial Israeli public intellectual Yeshayahu Leibowitz (1903–1994) has jokingly been called “the Leibowitzer Rebbe.” The humor is in the obvious incongruity of associating Leibowitz with anything Hasidic. He was the most rationalist of religious thinkers and said disparaging things about Hasidism and its leaders. Yet Leibowitz and Hasidism are closer than they appear. Building on insights from other scholars, I will show the affinities between Leibowitz and some of the Hasidic masters. Drawing on his writings, interviews, and correspondence, I will demonstrate that Leibowitz read and cited Hasidic books; he engaged with Hasidic teachings, and acknowledged learning from them. I argue that a full understanding of his challenging thinking must take Hasidic sources into account. This paper makes a contribution to scholarship on Leibowitz, one of the most interesting modern Jewish thinkers, and to our understanding of the relationship of Hasidism with modern Judaism as a whole.","PeriodicalId":54089,"journal":{"name":"MODERN JUDAISM","volume":"196 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135010725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：