This paper puts forward that there is a deep contradiction between the viewpoint and the method in Mr. Lai Jinliang’s paper. He argues that his basic viewpoint that “human is value itself” by using many methods, su...This paper puts forward that there is a deep contradiction between the viewpoint and the method in Mr. Lai Jinliang’s paper. He argues that his basic viewpoint that “human is value itself” by using many methods, such as one of the empiricism, formalism, historicism or “transverse-transcendence”, recogiticism, resulting at that man with good and evil is equal to the value itself directly. He explains “the value” by “ought to be”, overturning the logical order between the both terms. He defines “the value” and human being by “time”, result at the loss of human being as the origin of value. Moreover, he confuses “meaning” with “significance”, leading human being and the value annihilated by the recognition. Finally, Lai’s paper clears up human being and the value and goes to his opposite.展开更多
文摘This paper puts forward that there is a deep contradiction between the viewpoint and the method in Mr. Lai Jinliang’s paper. He argues that his basic viewpoint that “human is value itself” by using many methods, such as one of the empiricism, formalism, historicism or “transverse-transcendence”, recogiticism, resulting at that man with good and evil is equal to the value itself directly. He explains “the value” by “ought to be”, overturning the logical order between the both terms. He defines “the value” and human being by “time”, result at the loss of human being as the origin of value. Moreover, he confuses “meaning” with “significance”, leading human being and the value annihilated by the recognition. Finally, Lai’s paper clears up human being and the value and goes to his opposite.
