From the daily life, how to get the access to philosophy, what is the approaches to philosophy? Regarding the big topics /big affair in the world, are they related to the philosophy? What and how shall the philosophy do? About some concept, word, have we already fully confirmed their meaning? What shall the philosophy do to make their meaning clear and confirmed? Refers to the philosophy itself, have we already confirmed its study objects? What is Philosophy? What is the main study object for the philosophy? It is the pity that till now, for the whole world philosophy field, the main study objects for the philosophy have not been confirmed. There are various kinds of answer; this means philosophy, from the past one hundred years, till now, has not work out the state of downturn and confusion. Since the philosophy itself is not clear , then no wonder from the late of 19 century to now, philosophy seems did lifting achievement for the human being , for the civilization, for the progress, its glory looks gray , compared with Science, which is in fact born by philosophy although. So, before the philosophy could work well for the civilization, firstly, we should make the philosophy clear, confirm the main object of philosophy, target the correct object for philosophy! Only after this first work, we could expect philosophy do well on its tasks and function. For my this paper, its essential point is to present an answer for the target object belongs to the philosophy. Through demonstrate as per scientific logic and philosophy’s whole history, this answer, namely, the only target object belongs to philosophy is the Ontology and Cognition. Let philosophy go back to its correct place, its correct way. Then, it could move ahead. Only after we get new progress on the study of Ontology and Cognition, and with the help of this new achievement of Ontology and Cognition, we can get progress on the study of the fields related to the human being and progress of civilization. As far as what is the Ontology and Cognition, which kind new achievement of Ontology and Cognition we could expect, that is the next step.

As per my new ontology and cognition theory, in my this paper, I demonstrate theory about Moral and Law, point out, the naturally limited freedom is the basis of moral and law. Following is my new ontology and cognition: New ontology: The onto is the uniform contradiction being. The essence of people: The uniformcontrast body within people’s body, is “ego and nonego”. New Cognition: Cognition course moves by the force from the contrast between the Ego and Nonego within an exist being live body. Above ontology and cognition is the theory basis of my this paper.

With the rapid development of modern technology, people has stepped into an risky era. Ethical stipulation is the important means to reduce the risks. But in reality, ethical stipulation of technology always face some kind of dilemma which mainly come from two aspects: one is that when we try to regulate the subject oftechnology, we find that it always difficult to distinguish the responsibilities. The other aspect is that when we try to limit the result of technology, we often have to give up because of lacking feasibility, which means we sink into the famous “Collingridge dilemma”. Are we able to get out of the dilemma? What should we doif we want to got out of it? First, in the modern technological system, individual’s action is taken over by group’s action according to the technological criterion. Any part of the modern technology need multiple subjects finish his job during the course. Therefore a new form of responsibility named group responsibility has been formed. Like Johnas said, in this ethics, ‘I’ will be replaced by ‘we’ and decision will be the business of a group. So it is difficult for us to find out that “I” from “us” once the technological risks happened. We lost the object of ethical stipulation as the result of no convinced standard and principals of prescribing the group responsibility. Second, when we try to stimulate some certain results of technology, we find we lack not only the wisdom of precisely judging or assessingtechnology itself, but also the ability of correcting the bad results if it has. Here again do we fall into the dilemma. This make it difficult for us to stipulate technology with ethic. From above discussion we can see, the stipulation, no matter from the aspect of technological responsibility or from aspect of the application of technology, has been sure to meet the dilemma. If the conflicts between a hypothesis and experiment cannot be eliminated, we have to rethink the theoryand come back again to technology itself and pursue the essence of technology again. Technology is a process from inventing, designing to forming material technological products; is a process from invisible technology to visible technology; is a process potential technology to real-life technology or intellective technology to reallife technology. Technology exists in process. The essential and innate characteristic is it’s process and dynamics. The transition oftechnological form involves many factors of economic, social, historical, constitutional and cultural. Technological creation of intellectual form is the duty of inventor or technologist. And it is entrepreneur’s job to use the technology or invention, and make them in large quantity, apply them in reality or get economic or other profit. Although there need be interaction, understanding, cooperation, support, coordination among scientist, technologist and enterpriser, they have different responsibility and delimitation. Technology exists in process, no doubt, so does modern technology. This decides that the ethical stipulation of modern technology should be a process stipulation . The essence of modern technological is not only the limitation of subject of technology either not only controlthe object of technology. It is the ethical stipulation in the unity of subject and object of technological dynamic process. This is basic point of understanding ethical stipulation of modern technology. Responsibility ethics consider that the group responsibility as the premise of technological stipulation .It noticed the static structure of modern technological system, but neglect the dynamic linkage between factors. And it only analysed the special construction, neglected the evolution of system of technological responsibility and the inter relationship between space dimension and time dimension. If we unfold the group responsibility along with the process of technology, we will see the different responsibility belong to different subject in different stage of the process. We can also see that different actors obey different norm or criteria according to their task. In this case, we can distinct the distribution of the group responsibility. Collingridge fixed the effective control on the two points of “before ”and ”after” the process of the technological action, namely, the stipulation for the staring point and stipulation of terminal point. But the whole process was neglected. According to the point of view of process stipulation .it is not the sudden occurrence for technology from “nothing ”to “having”. There are time and space during the process. From middle experiment to industrial experiment, the most characters of the result of technology will havebeen shown gradually, so will the social results. So we can give the small quantity an ethical evaluation and ethical choice which is possible and feasible. Over all, if we confirm the ethical stipulation of modern technology is a process regulation, we can delimitate the responsibility of the subjects of technology and also settle the prestipulation of the application of technology. At the end, we can eliminate the dilemma of ethical regulation of modern technology.

Hegel "Science of Logic essential theory "Thereunto” essential” Adv of Excoriate target "Sham essential”, with matter together method Identity, so serves as concact” sham Essential” The "Reflection" "Ground”, ” Contradiction” as well as its ” Identity", "Difference” etc. Also Necessarily false doubtless, currently fad make believe becomes reality of viewpoint, by the root perversion speculative philosophy, must be corrected.

Hegel oneself indicate “essential theory " Thereunto category transition, large orientation yes as best as one can in accord with cognize course process of, to this aspect ought earnest comprehend, but history with logicality improbable Absolute coherent, More Plus For the sake of fabricate institutions of demand, additionally have to pray in aid of imaginary, To this aspect ought to appropriate comment critically, though never be able to use dot supplant bodily general denial.

Almost all think Hegel’s Ontology and Cognition is wrong. Yeah, his is wrong. But, what mistake? What mistake is the essential one? How to demonstrate Hegel’s this essential mistake in his great Ontology and Cognition system? This section is Ontology. But, Ontology can not be there without the Cognition. Hegel’s great achievement in philosophy history is his Cognition. While, His main mistake is also in his Cognition, and, his that mistake in Cognition is at the basis of hisOntology, his wrong Ontology. So, before point out Hegel’s mistake in Ontology, we must take out his Cognition, point out his that essential mistake in his Cognition. By law of contradiction, Hegel ever study the Cognition, demonstrated that the Cognition course moves by the force of contradiction from the contrast between the object and knowledge. This was really a great achievement and big progress on the development of Cognition, clear up Kant’s confusion in Kant’sstudy of Cognition. But, now, I ask, is that contradiction from the contrast between the object and knowledge the force to move the Cognition course? Pls be kindly noted, this is the place where Hegel’s essential mistake in Cognition rooted. Pls your attention, how does the contrast between the object and knowledge produce a kind of contradiction force, while the object is external exist, the knowledge is another exist? By law of contradiction, only when a pair of contrast exist in a samebody, that contrast could produce the force. the object and the knowledge, obviously are not in a same being body, so, even though there is the contrast between the object and knowledge, that contrast can not produce the force to more the Cognition. For example, the tree is there as a kind of exist being, the knowledge about the tree is there also as a kind of exist being, or, this knowledge about the tree could be regarded as that in people’s mind, in book. Of course, betweenthe tree and the knowledge about that tree there is the contrast, pls be kindly asked, does this contrast produce the force to move your Cognition about the tree? Can you get? Can you feel that force? of course, the answer is NO. So, the force to move the Cognition course is not from the contrast between the object and knowledge! This is Hegel’s essential mistake in Cognition. So, the force moves the Cognition course must come from one same exist being body, in which a pair of contrast exist. In my this Paper, besides point out above mentioned Hegel’s mistake in Cognition, I already present the pair of contrast, existing in one same exist being body, to produce the force to move the Cognition. The contrast to produce the force is demonstrated out by following steps: Firstly, find out Hegel’s mistake in Ontology, because, his wrong Cognition is on basis of his Ontology. Secondly, demonstrate what is the Ontology. I demonstrated successfully that theuniform contradiction body is just the noumenon, the ONTO, which is the root for everything. Then, people, as a kind of external exist, exist also as per the law of uniform contradiction, is a kind of specific uniform contradiction body, in which, a pair of contrast exist, produce the force to control people’s exist, move. Then, I study this uniform contrast in people’s body, finally, I found out this uniform contrast body within people’s body, it is ego and nonego. Ego, refers to the people’s live body, include the body and the instinct, the desire in mind, etc. Nonego, refers to the Idea in people’s mind, the idea reflects the external exist being. For one person, one live body, the Ego and Nonego is a kind of contrast, producing the force to make this live body move. Cognition is a kind of movement of human, so, Cognition course moves by the force from the contrast between the Ego and Nonego within an exist being live body. Following is the Cognition move course way: “EGO”+“Nonego” →→ Force to move (N times) → → Feeling (N times) → → Idea (N numbers)+ thinking (N times) →→ Knowledge (N numbers) ≈ Object →→＝Object

Self-identity of Individual-subject is evaluative knowledge and factive confirmation on basic of an evaluative knowledge on “who am I”. Crisis of Self-identity of Individual-subject is a extremely stern reality which Individual-subject is confronted with in modern sociality. The paper researches the essence of self-identity of individual-subject, and analyzes the characteristics and reasons of crisis of self-identity of individual-subject from the point of view of theory of evaluation. The paper hold that crisis of self-identity of individual-subject is a difficult position of self-evaluation of individual-subject in modern sociality, and arrives at conclusion that crisis of self-identity of individual-subject can be overcome and prevented by modeling positive self and building a reasonable mechanism of self-evaluation of individual-subject.

In view of previous discussions about national culture were limited in the framework of “traditional-modern”, this essay attempts to re-exam this framework in a wider field of “globalization-nationalization”, and treats the development of national culture under the condition of globalization. Since globalization has become an important background and inner essential factor, no matter maintenance, inheritance, accumulation or development of culture cannot be separated fromglobalization, the new frame of reference. Under the condition of globalization, development of culture has its own new characteristics and inner logic, so development of national culture has to be advanced on basis of following these points and law. If a developing country wants to advance the development of national culture, it has to raise cultural consciousness, adjust cultural mind, strengthen cultural transform, and push cultural conformity and innovation.

As an objective tendency in social development, globalization has experienced three different historical forms. They are globalization as communication survival purposes, globalization for capital expansion and globalization in amalgamation of cultures. The thesis point out that globalization does not equally mean capitalization. The capital expansion, however, is only one of the forms of globalization process. In the era of the new globalization, both the developed and the developing countries have to coordinate and make active and positive use of the favorite conditions as well as opportunities for further development. The developed and developing countries must learn to respect each other and open up more channels of communication to understand each other better in an effort to better serve their own interests and create a win-win situation despite of their different cultures and stages of development. This is the only way to bring about harmonious coexistence for peoples of various countries around the world.

As per my new theory in ontology and cognition, the theory of education could be demonstrated. My this paper is to demonstrate the theory of education as per my new ontology and cognition. Following is my new theory in ontology and cognition: New ontology: The Onto is the uniform contradiction being. The essence of people: The uniform contrast body within people’s body, is “ego and nonego. “New Cognition: Cognition course moves by the force from the contrast between the Ego and Nonego within an exist being live body. Following is the Cognition move course way : “EGO” + “Nonego”→→ Force to move (N times)→→ Feeling(N times)→→Idea (N numbers) + thinking (N times)→→Knowledge (N numbers) ≈ Object →→ ＝ Object As per above new ontology and cognition, Theory ofeducation is demonstrated in my this paper.

This paper represents an introduction to whole approach of mathematics education and takes an example for wholeness principle by area. It is also an introduction to whole approach of education.

This paper adopted a constructive thinking model which is highly abstract and summary to investigate the life phenomena. It is more inclined to avoid detailednonessentials to grasp macroscopic outline trend, which is like: clearly see the direction of mountain range only by climbing to a height and looking forward; the more you enter into the braches and knots of trees, the more difficult to distinguish the general picture of the forest. Adopting this macroscopical mode of thought, it will be easier to break away from the limitation of life body to grasp the inherent essence and common property of life. Any life is like a “running machine” and the running and living life state is the essential property of life. This life state isn’t windy; instead, it is a state of life material system and a state which could makematerial synthesis and energy transfer to keep automatic circulation and linkage running. When this state is established, life is formed. When this state is destroyed, life will be perished, when this state is restored, life could relive. It is the task of chemist and biologist to clarify precise material structure. From the property and characteristics of the life state, we could unearth the common connection and profound value meaning of movement development of objective world. It is Philosopher’s task to make it as the doctrine to guide the development of life world. On the basis of this life state, this paper put forth a theoretical model of life origin, so as to find answer of life origin theoretically. It opened passage between physical world and life world and made the life generated inmaterial system under specific condition to become an inevitable law. It will indicate orientation and a way out for the practical activity of exploring life origin. Meantime, this essay also found the vitality, which created life and push life to continuously run and develop, in addition, it created a significant theory of vitality extension. By means of life body, it downwardly connected with natural science law and upwardly connected with truth and doctrine of human society through life activity. It organically connected with material world, life world, human society and human spirit, offering an explanation to the world. It makes beautiful and simple world weltbild, which is like a developing and rising monument: A stele of weltbild.

Sun Yat-sen’s superior position in modern Chinese history is represented in the movement of the modernization of China with him as a representative went from the stage of ‘imitation’ to the stage of ‘creativity’. He put forward, China, as a country engaging in modernization late, could draw on Western experience and lessons, run (“突驾”) from capitalism directly into socialism, and realize ‘accomplishing both the political revolution and the social revolution at one stroke’. He designed the modernization program of ‘accomplishing both at one stroke’ as the Three People's Principles (Nationalism, Democracy and the People's Livelihood); each separately connects with Human rights, civil rights and national sovereignty pursued by modern Chinese and the essence of them develops around the value of equality approved by socialist thoughts of the day. According to Sun’s thinking: 1. People’s livelihood is the root of the Three People'sPrinciples, which involves most primary human rights --- right of survival because the value of human’s seeking survival necessarily directs to ‘equality and helping each other’, which is the law of the evolution of humanity. So the justice of socialism lies in ‘Leveling out the differences between the rich and the poor’, which can be realized with many ‘artificial’ elements such as nation and morality, etc. What must be done by People’s livelihood in contemporary China are ‘equalizing landownership’, ‘regulating capital’ and ‘developing industry’. 2. Democracy is the request of ‘civil rights’ in the sense of modern democracy. In the special national situation of China, it presents itself as the specific political framework ‘balancing people’s civil rights with elite administration’. 3. The essence of nationalism lies in constructing modern Chinese national country to save the nation from crises. Sun Yat-sen pointed out: First, the foundation on which Chinese nations build up their country is totally different from that of the West. So the country must take ‘collectivism’ as its value direction. Secondly, the ethos of the Chinese nation is different from that of the West. Chinese national country must take ‘morality first’ as the direction of value. Sun’s point of view is unique and single-eyed but contains unavoidable historical limits.

Freedom is natural, Human rights come from nature, human strive for happiness, in a civilization society, how to protect human right? how to help people strive for happiness? The answer is the democracy. Democracy is not simply a kind of political system, but the essence way to protect human right, the best way to help people get the happiness. So, the democracy political system, is used to protect people’s human rights, protect equality. To assist people get happiness, it is not only the political game frame rules. So, the way to judge a country’s political system democracy or not, is to see if that system could protect peoples’s human rights, if it could assist people’s working for happiness in economy and political, if it goes in the direction of human’s civilization. To judge democracy is not by the shape, but the essence inside. So, in different place /country, probably the democracy shape is not the same, but the democracy value, the democracy essence could be the same. Only the democracy political system is the only correct political system in civilization time. The root basis theory of my democracy come from my new ontology and cognition, as following : New ontology: The Onto is the uniform contradiction being. The essence of people: The uniform contrast body within people’s body, is “ ego and nonego.“ New Cognition: Cognition course moves by the force from the contrast between the Ego and Nonego within an exist being live body. “EGO” + “Nonego” →→ Force to move(N times) →→Feeling(N times) →→ Idea(N numbers) + thinking(N times) →→Knowledge (N numbers) ≈ Object →→ ＝Object

There is a discrepancy between human rights theories and the contemporarily international human rights practice. The discrepancy is not only generated by theexpectable distance between the ideal and the real world, but also generated by the consequence which the orthodox conception of human rights theories cannot proper account for the role of human rights in the contemporarily international relations. Furthermore, the orthodox conception cannot be compatible with political pluralism; for it often justify the ground of human rights with human dignity and presuppose the independence and the autonomy of persons. I propose that the orthodox conception fails to supply two good reasons for dispelling the doubt on the western cultural imperialism---one is human rights may beaccepted by the different cultures and moral codes with the method of overlapping consensus; the other is the orthodox conception does not prefer to liberal values. Instead of the orthodox conception, I suggest that we have to justify the ground of human rights according to the political pluralistic conception if we hope human rights can be universalized in the world. The political pluralistic conception will not only avoid the doubt on the western cultural imperialism, but alsoconsist with the role of human rights in the contemporarily international relations.

In order to meet the demand from ego, “I” move.”I” need the freedom to move, the purpose of my move is for my (ego) demand to support my living. And, only “I” know my this living demand, others, who are not in my body, so they do not know. So, in order to make “I” live, “I” must have the right and freedom to move/act/work. Without that right and freedom, “I” can not move, then, can not meet the demand from my “ego”, namely, can not live. So, after “I” was born, thefreedom and right for my living should be there with “me” by way of nature. Human rights just means that basic freedom and right for living gifted by nature when a people was born. Although, of course, very probably somebody seems has no freedom and right for himself, however, he does has his freedom and right which was gifted by the nature, even though his freedom and right was limited by others. If the human right is not gifted by nature, but given by somebody else, then, there will produce two question, one is from where, these “somebody else” who ever “gave” the right and freedom to other people, get their human right? another is , “I” was born by way of nature, if at same time, “I” has not human right, that means I was not able to move to meet my demand from my body , in this way, “I” will die, even though “I” still live, but my demand in my body was sometime or partly satisfied by somebody else, this means, “I” am not independent! But, after born, “I” am independent, an independent being in the world. How to demonstrate that “I” am independent by nature? This is a question. Only this question be resolved, then, human right get root logical basis. The way to confirm if a being independent or not, is to see if this being has a uniform contrast body inside this being. auniform contrast body could produce power itself, with this power, an independent being could exist by itself. To realize the uniform contrast body inside a being, we must find out the root uniform contrast body in the nature, namely, THE ONTO. After we find out the Onto, then, we know any uniform contrast body inside a being, is only a kind of specific uniform contrast body. For example, people, human being, inside a people, what is the uniform contrast body? Following is theanswer: MY New ontology: The Onto is the uniform contradiction being. The essence of people: The uniform contrast body within people’s body, is “ego and nonego. “New Cognition: Cognition course moves by the force from the contrast between the Ego and None go within an exist being live body. Following is the Cognition move course way: “EGO”+“Nonego”→→Force to move(N times)→→Feeling(N times)→→Idea(N numbers) + thinking(N times)→→Knowledge (N numbers) ≈ Object →→ ＝Object WITH ABOVE DEMONSTRATE WAY, we could be clear a human being, “I” was an independent being in the nature. So,human being must has the freedom and right for to be there as a living being.

Based on the strict definitions of concepts, such as deduction, the deduction rule and the deduction system, the form axiom, the substantive axiom, this article clearly shows the essence of the deductive reasoning, namely “Related attribute and the related restriction relations, which are conveyed in what the main concept of the deduction refers to, must be contained in those conveyed in what the premise proposition refers to”。Then puts forward the theorem “contradiction can not be derived from the strict deduction system”, and gives the proofs.

This article focuses on several important but obscure concepts in Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. In order to clarify the concept of “object”, I compare it with “atom”. The analysis of the two concepts explains two important questions which have confused Wittgenstein’s reviewers for long: why is the world not the totality of things? Is object substance? “Logical space” is an important concept in Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, although it only appears several times. If a proposition serves as the coordinates in the logical space, what are the coordinate axes? Is a possible world a point in the logical space, or a set of points in it? Based on symbolic transformations, I suggest that possible worlds serve as coordinate axes in the logical space. The concept of “possible worlds” contradicts with “necessity”. In Wittgenstein’s theory, all possible worlds are “accessible” to one another. This is why Wittgenstein fails to cope with the conflict between “possibility” and “necessity”.

From the daily life, how to get the access to philosophy, what is the approaches to philosophy? Regarding the big topics /big affair in the world, are they related to the philosophy? what and how shall the philosophy do? About some concept, word, have we already fully confirmed their meaning? What shall the philosophy do to make their meaning clear and confirmed? Refers to the philosophy itself, have we already confirmed its study object? What is Philosophy? what is the main study object for the philosophy? It is the pity that till now, for the whole world philosophy field, the main study object for the philosophy have not been confirmed. There are various kinds of answer, this means philosophy, from the past one hundred years, till now, has not work out the state of downturn and confusion. Since the philosophy itself is not clear, then no wonder from the late of 19 century to now, philosophy seems did litting achievement for the human being, for the civilization, for the progress, its glory looks gray, compared with Science, which is in fact born by philosophy although. So, before the philosophy could work well for the civilization, firstly, we should make the philosophy clear, confirm the main object of philosophy, target the correct object for philosophy! Only after this firstwork, we could expect philosophy do well on its tasks and function. For my this paper, its essential point is to present an answer for the target object belongs to the philosophy. Through demonstrate as per scientific logic and philosophy’s whole history, this answer, namely, the only target object belongs to philosophy is the Ontology and Cognition. Let philosophy go back to its correct place, its correct way. then, it could move ahead. only after we get new progress on the study of Ontology and Cognition, and with the help of this new achievement of Ontology and Cognition, we can get progress on the study of the fields related to the human being and progress of civilization. As far as what is the Ontology and Cognition, which kind new achievement of Ontology and Cognition we could expect, that is the next step.