Pub Date : 2023-10-30DOI: 10.1177/07255136231199782
Jiayang Qin
The article ‘Aesthetic culture’ was written in 1908. Although it is in the same period as Soul and Form, in essence, the ideas expressed in this article go beyond the pure philosophy of life and the theory of form, which is different from the idealistic tendency of Lukács in this period. Moreover, ‘Aesthetic culture’ and History and Class Consciousness have ontological and epistemological consistency in subject–object relation and class consciousness. This was the first Marxist reflection of Lukács, and also a reliable sign that he was to join the Hungarian Communist Party 10 years later and turned to Marxism. By criticizing the paradox of aesthetic culture itself, Lukács tried to construct a culture as a whole as a category, and tried to solve the deep contradiction between the freedom of consciousness and the passive form of the subject in modern society. This kind of culture as a whole would be based on the class consciousness of the proletariat itself and take life as the main category, so as to provide the proletariat with practical theoretical conception to expand their space for living in bourgeois culture.
{"title":"The first Marxist reflection of Georg Lukács","authors":"Jiayang Qin","doi":"10.1177/07255136231199782","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07255136231199782","url":null,"abstract":"The article ‘Aesthetic culture’ was written in 1908. Although it is in the same period as Soul and Form, in essence, the ideas expressed in this article go beyond the pure philosophy of life and the theory of form, which is different from the idealistic tendency of Lukács in this period. Moreover, ‘Aesthetic culture’ and History and Class Consciousness have ontological and epistemological consistency in subject–object relation and class consciousness. This was the first Marxist reflection of Lukács, and also a reliable sign that he was to join the Hungarian Communist Party 10 years later and turned to Marxism. By criticizing the paradox of aesthetic culture itself, Lukács tried to construct a culture as a whole as a category, and tried to solve the deep contradiction between the freedom of consciousness and the passive form of the subject in modern society. This kind of culture as a whole would be based on the class consciousness of the proletariat itself and take life as the main category, so as to provide the proletariat with practical theoretical conception to expand their space for living in bourgeois culture.","PeriodicalId":54188,"journal":{"name":"Thesis Eleven","volume":"140 ","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136102712","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-30DOI: 10.1177/07255136231199783
David Roberts
The following reflections, occasioned by Agnes Heller’s death, attempt to reconstruct Heller’s sense of temporality and historicity as the key to her rethinking of the idea of philosophy of history after the demise of the grand narratives in the form of a fragmentary philosophy of history and a theory of history.
{"title":"Agnes Heller: The time of your life","authors":"David Roberts","doi":"10.1177/07255136231199783","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07255136231199783","url":null,"abstract":"The following reflections, occasioned by Agnes Heller’s death, attempt to reconstruct Heller’s sense of temporality and historicity as the key to her rethinking of the idea of philosophy of history after the demise of the grand narratives in the form of a fragmentary philosophy of history and a theory of history.","PeriodicalId":54188,"journal":{"name":"Thesis Eleven","volume":"98 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136102957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-27DOI: 10.1177/07255136231202057
Eduardo Enríquez Arévalo
Democracy is seen today as being in erosion or crisis both in the Global North and South. This article puts forward the concept of ‘dependent democracy’ in order to explain that much of the lack of success of democracy in the South in guaranteeing political participation and economic inclusion and wellbeing for the majority of the population is due to a specific tendency of democracy there. Adapting some insights from the more economics focused Dependency theory towards a more contemporary point of view from political sociology and international political sociology, dependent democracy is understood as a democracy that exists in a subaltern position within the hierarchical, post-imperial and neo-imperial global capitalist order. Dependent democracies thus tend to be less ‘democracies’ and more ‘oligarchies’ within a form of government in the South that can be understood as existing in a global pyramid of semi-peripheries, middle peripheries and outer peripheries.
{"title":"Towards a theory of dependent democracy","authors":"Eduardo Enríquez Arévalo","doi":"10.1177/07255136231202057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07255136231202057","url":null,"abstract":"Democracy is seen today as being in erosion or crisis both in the Global North and South. This article puts forward the concept of ‘dependent democracy’ in order to explain that much of the lack of success of democracy in the South in guaranteeing political participation and economic inclusion and wellbeing for the majority of the population is due to a specific tendency of democracy there. Adapting some insights from the more economics focused Dependency theory towards a more contemporary point of view from political sociology and international political sociology, dependent democracy is understood as a democracy that exists in a subaltern position within the hierarchical, post-imperial and neo-imperial global capitalist order. Dependent democracies thus tend to be less ‘democracies’ and more ‘oligarchies’ within a form of government in the South that can be understood as existing in a global pyramid of semi-peripheries, middle peripheries and outer peripheries.","PeriodicalId":54188,"journal":{"name":"Thesis Eleven","volume":"42 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136262089","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-27DOI: 10.1177/07255136231206181
Lorenzo Veracini, Dan Tout
Federated Australia was seen for a long time as a significant social ‘laboratory’. The Commonwealth itself was seen as an ‘experiment’. This widespread metaphor relied on a particular pattern of perception: the country was ‘new’ (it was not), and the country was allegedly isolated (it was not, at least not completely). Many believed that its social environment could be controlled, like that of a scientific laboratory. A laboratory is designed to shut all disturbances out – the value of the data and experiments depends on it. This article outlines this metaphor in the context of Australian history during the 20th century, its rhetorical power and what made it discursively possible.
{"title":"The negative Commonwealth: Australia as ‘laboratory’, then and now","authors":"Lorenzo Veracini, Dan Tout","doi":"10.1177/07255136231206181","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07255136231206181","url":null,"abstract":"Federated Australia was seen for a long time as a significant social ‘laboratory’. The Commonwealth itself was seen as an ‘experiment’. This widespread metaphor relied on a particular pattern of perception: the country was ‘new’ (it was not), and the country was allegedly isolated (it was not, at least not completely). Many believed that its social environment could be controlled, like that of a scientific laboratory. A laboratory is designed to shut all disturbances out – the value of the data and experiments depends on it. This article outlines this metaphor in the context of Australian history during the 20th century, its rhetorical power and what made it discursively possible.","PeriodicalId":54188,"journal":{"name":"Thesis Eleven","volume":"100 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136262238","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-26DOI: 10.1177/07255136231199781
John Grumley
In this article I give an overall interpretation of the development of the Budapest School in Australia as political emigres, who initially worked and wrote in Melbourne and Sydney until the final years when Heller and Feher moved on to New York in the mid-1980s and then back to Budapest in 1993. The translation of How Is Critical Economic Theory Possible? has allowed us to better grasp the motivations and theoretical innovations of the Budapest School, to appreciate their internal disputes and to recognise fundamental continuities and difference in these two key thinkers. This book was a gallant retrieval of democratic potentials in Marx. It excavated Marx’s own appreciation of needs produced by, and critical of, the alienations of the capitalist system. Ultimately, this early work was unable to realise its ambition to educate the diverse progressive movements of the times. I will show later that the retrieval of progressive potentials took a more social democratic form in the work of Maria Márkus on needs as she encountered them later in the Hawke Labor Government of Australia from 1983. Introducing the world media to the Budapest School in The Times Literary Supplement on 15 February 1971, Lukács described Márkus as ‘75% mensch’. When Lukács first met him, George already had his own philosophical interests, which he would bring with him when he became a key figure in ‘the Budapest School’. Márkus had studied in Moscow where he wrote his dissertation on the topic History and Consciousness and met his Polish wife, Maria. George used to modestly say that he was an expert only on the works of Karl Marx. That was despite that he had taught the history of modern philosophy at Eotvös Loránd University to Hungary’s most promising philosophers for a decade and later to philosophy students at Sydney University for the next 20 years. In the early 1970s, George invited Janos Kis and György Bence to work on his next project that would become the Hungarian version of Überhaupt, which was to become How Is Critical Economic Theory Possible? The new English translation published by Brill this year opens this important rethinking of the work of Marx to an international readership.
{"title":"György Márkus, 75% mensch: On the occasion of the publication of the English version of <i>How Is Critical Economic Theory Possible?</i>","authors":"John Grumley","doi":"10.1177/07255136231199781","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07255136231199781","url":null,"abstract":"In this article I give an overall interpretation of the development of the Budapest School in Australia as political emigres, who initially worked and wrote in Melbourne and Sydney until the final years when Heller and Feher moved on to New York in the mid-1980s and then back to Budapest in 1993. The translation of How Is Critical Economic Theory Possible? has allowed us to better grasp the motivations and theoretical innovations of the Budapest School, to appreciate their internal disputes and to recognise fundamental continuities and difference in these two key thinkers. This book was a gallant retrieval of democratic potentials in Marx. It excavated Marx’s own appreciation of needs produced by, and critical of, the alienations of the capitalist system. Ultimately, this early work was unable to realise its ambition to educate the diverse progressive movements of the times. I will show later that the retrieval of progressive potentials took a more social democratic form in the work of Maria Márkus on needs as she encountered them later in the Hawke Labor Government of Australia from 1983. Introducing the world media to the Budapest School in The Times Literary Supplement on 15 February 1971, Lukács described Márkus as ‘75% mensch’. When Lukács first met him, George already had his own philosophical interests, which he would bring with him when he became a key figure in ‘the Budapest School’. Márkus had studied in Moscow where he wrote his dissertation on the topic History and Consciousness and met his Polish wife, Maria. George used to modestly say that he was an expert only on the works of Karl Marx. That was despite that he had taught the history of modern philosophy at Eotvös Loránd University to Hungary’s most promising philosophers for a decade and later to philosophy students at Sydney University for the next 20 years. In the early 1970s, George invited Janos Kis and György Bence to work on his next project that would become the Hungarian version of Überhaupt, which was to become How Is Critical Economic Theory Possible? The new English translation published by Brill this year opens this important rethinking of the work of Marx to an international readership.","PeriodicalId":54188,"journal":{"name":"Thesis Eleven","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136381930","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-16DOI: 10.1177/07255136231199787
Norbert Ebert
Like a message in a bottle, How Is Critical Economic Theory Possible? originally written in the late 1960s in Hungarian, has recently arrived on the shores of critical theory in the form of an English translation. As a critique of Marx’s economic determinism, the authors aim to set Marxist thinking on a more realistic path. This article looks first, at what the authors think are flawed premises in Marx’s work. Second, I sketch the contemporary economic context of a global digital economy to point at issues a critical economic theory inevitably has to contend with today to prove its relevance. Finally, I argue that Maria Márkus’s ideas of a politicisation of needs and civil/decent society make a significant contribution to a potential answer to How Is Critical Economic Theory Possible? and also advance the idea of a mixed economy with the goal to sustain an economic order that allows a maximum of economic and political freedom while simultaneously reducing economic and political inequalities to a minimum.
{"title":"Critical economic theory and Maria Márkus’s politicisation of needs","authors":"Norbert Ebert","doi":"10.1177/07255136231199787","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07255136231199787","url":null,"abstract":"Like a message in a bottle, How Is Critical Economic Theory Possible? originally written in the late 1960s in Hungarian, has recently arrived on the shores of critical theory in the form of an English translation. As a critique of Marx’s economic determinism, the authors aim to set Marxist thinking on a more realistic path. This article looks first, at what the authors think are flawed premises in Marx’s work. Second, I sketch the contemporary economic context of a global digital economy to point at issues a critical economic theory inevitably has to contend with today to prove its relevance. Finally, I argue that Maria Márkus’s ideas of a politicisation of needs and civil/decent society make a significant contribution to a potential answer to How Is Critical Economic Theory Possible? and also advance the idea of a mixed economy with the goal to sustain an economic order that allows a maximum of economic and political freedom while simultaneously reducing economic and political inequalities to a minimum.","PeriodicalId":54188,"journal":{"name":"Thesis Eleven","volume":"184 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136114094","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-03DOI: 10.1177/07255136231202043
Peter Beilharz
This research note discusses the text of How Is Critical Economic Theory Possible, seeking to locate it in the moment of its own creation; against the object of its critique, in Das Kapital itself; and to relate it to the moment of the arrival of the Budapest School in Australia and its effects and influence on the emergent journal Thesis Eleven.
{"title":"Is critical economy at all possible? A research note on Márkus, Bence and Kis","authors":"Peter Beilharz","doi":"10.1177/07255136231202043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07255136231202043","url":null,"abstract":"This research note discusses the text of How Is Critical Economic Theory Possible, seeking to locate it in the moment of its own creation; against the object of its critique, in Das Kapital itself; and to relate it to the moment of the arrival of the Budapest School in Australia and its effects and influence on the emergent journal Thesis Eleven.","PeriodicalId":54188,"journal":{"name":"Thesis Eleven","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135695987","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-03DOI: 10.1177/07255136231199777
Fu Qilin
György Márkus, as a leading member of the Budapest School led by György Lukács in Hungary, is closely concerned with aesthetics. His final unfinished writings in political exile in Sydney were focused on the question of modern cultural autonomy. From the 1960s to the new century, from Budapest to Sydney in Australia, he established a new form of Neo-Marxist aesthetics on the basis of critical theory drawn from Lukács to the Frankfurt School. His aesthetics includes three dimensions: an aesthetics of praxis, a reconstruction of Lukács’s aesthetics and a theory of aesthetic modernity. His aesthetics is characteristic of analytic philosophy, especially ‘categorical analysis’. It shifts from philosophical aesthetics in the Hungarian period, which is based on an ontological foundation, that is, materialist phenomenology, to social or sociological aesthetics in the Australian period concerning social modernity, institution, constitution, culture, and so on. This is a turn from a philosophical paradigm to a structural one as regards aesthetics, which indicates a break with Lukács’s late return in the early 1960s to Hegelian inspired Ontology of Social Being. Márkus is strictly and essentially an essayist in fragments, who distinguishes himself from the other members of the Budapest School in this way. Ironically, this genre is once again influenced by the young Lukács’s aesthetics.
György Márkus作为匈牙利György Lukács领导的布达佩斯学派的主要成员，密切关注美学。在悉尼政治流放期间，他最后未完成的作品集中在现代文化自治问题上。从20世纪60年代到新世纪，从布达佩斯到澳大利亚悉尼，他以Lukács到法兰克福学派的批判理论为基础，建立了一种新马克思主义美学的新形式。他的美学包括三个维度:实践美学、Lukács美学的重构和审美现代性理论。他的美学具有分析哲学的特点，特别是“直言分析”。它从匈牙利时期基于本体论基础即唯物现象学的哲学美学转向澳大利亚时期关于社会现代性、制度、宪法、文化等的社会或社会学美学。这是美学从哲学范式到结构范式的转变，这表明了Lukács在20世纪60年代早期晚期回归到黑格尔启发的社会存在本体论的决裂。Márkus严格来说，本质上是一个碎片散文家，在这一点上，他与布达佩斯学派的其他成员区别开来。具有讽刺意味的是，这种类型又一次受到了年轻的Lukács美学的影响。
{"title":"An introduction to György Márkus’s aesthetics: Transformation from praxis aesthetics to theory of aesthetic modernity","authors":"Fu Qilin","doi":"10.1177/07255136231199777","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07255136231199777","url":null,"abstract":"György Márkus, as a leading member of the Budapest School led by György Lukács in Hungary, is closely concerned with aesthetics. His final unfinished writings in political exile in Sydney were focused on the question of modern cultural autonomy. From the 1960s to the new century, from Budapest to Sydney in Australia, he established a new form of Neo-Marxist aesthetics on the basis of critical theory drawn from Lukács to the Frankfurt School. His aesthetics includes three dimensions: an aesthetics of praxis, a reconstruction of Lukács’s aesthetics and a theory of aesthetic modernity. His aesthetics is characteristic of analytic philosophy, especially ‘categorical analysis’. It shifts from philosophical aesthetics in the Hungarian period, which is based on an ontological foundation, that is, materialist phenomenology, to social or sociological aesthetics in the Australian period concerning social modernity, institution, constitution, culture, and so on. This is a turn from a philosophical paradigm to a structural one as regards aesthetics, which indicates a break with Lukács’s late return in the early 1960s to Hegelian inspired Ontology of Social Being. Márkus is strictly and essentially an essayist in fragments, who distinguishes himself from the other members of the Budapest School in this way. Ironically, this genre is once again influenced by the young Lukács’s aesthetics.","PeriodicalId":54188,"journal":{"name":"Thesis Eleven","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135695933","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-21DOI: 10.1177/07255136231199828
Galin Tihanov
This article examines Alexandre Kojève’s attempts to differentiate between philosophy and wisdom; he thought of the two, particularly later on in his career, but also earlier, as distinctly non-identical. I trace Kojève’s transition from philosophy to practice in the corridors of power, motivated by his quest for wisdom, by outlining in some detail his stance on globalisation and the role of the state in his post-war dialogue with Carl Schmitt.
{"title":"Alexandre Kojève: Adventures between Philosophy and Wisdom","authors":"Galin Tihanov","doi":"10.1177/07255136231199828","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07255136231199828","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines Alexandre Kojève’s attempts to differentiate between philosophy and wisdom; he thought of the two, particularly later on in his career, but also earlier, as distinctly non-identical. I trace Kojève’s transition from philosophy to practice in the corridors of power, motivated by his quest for wisdom, by outlining in some detail his stance on globalisation and the role of the state in his post-war dialogue with Carl Schmitt.","PeriodicalId":54188,"journal":{"name":"Thesis Eleven","volume":"2015 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136236950","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-20DOI: 10.1177/07255136231199786
Shuai Shao
This article elucidates Márkus’ new Marxist philosophy of language based on his critique of the paradigm of language represented by Popper, Wittgenstein, Lévi-Strauss, and Gadamer. His critique suggests that instrumental rationality, pure reason, alienated reason, and objective and idealistic rationality of the paradigm of language are elements that should be overcome. From his critical perspective, value rationality, practical reason, personal reason, and historical materialism are advocated instead. He not only critically develops the philosophy of language but also adds new levels of meaning to Marxism.
{"title":"On Márkus’ new Marxist philosophy of language","authors":"Shuai Shao","doi":"10.1177/07255136231199786","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07255136231199786","url":null,"abstract":"This article elucidates Márkus’ new Marxist philosophy of language based on his critique of the paradigm of language represented by Popper, Wittgenstein, Lévi-Strauss, and Gadamer. His critique suggests that instrumental rationality, pure reason, alienated reason, and objective and idealistic rationality of the paradigm of language are elements that should be overcome. From his critical perspective, value rationality, practical reason, personal reason, and historical materialism are advocated instead. He not only critically develops the philosophy of language but also adds new levels of meaning to Marxism.","PeriodicalId":54188,"journal":{"name":"Thesis Eleven","volume":"99 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136308420","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","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：