No description available.

'Transcend' comes from the Latin 'tran(s)cendere': 'to climb over or beyond, surmount.' Obsolete uses of 'transcend' reflect this origin, having to do with the surmounting of some obstacle. 'A transcends B' has also been used to imply the relative superiority of A to B. 'Transcendent' has had a technical use in philosophy, where it tends to represent that which falls outside the bounds of some standard classification. Running through the various senses of 'transcendent' is the idea of surmounting limits of various kinds. These may be spoken of in a 'neutral' or a 'loaded' way. In the loaded sense, limits constitute relative disabilities; in which case we are apt to call them 'limitations' . In general, transcendence has to do with rising above limits or limitations. Talk of divine transcendence broadly accords with this. God's being 'above', independent of and distinct from the world, may be construed as his being; unbounded in many ways that the world and its parts are bounded.

No description available.

Recent literature in religious epistemology has overlooked a significant debate in mainstream epistemology. In short, theories in religious epistemology have failed to consider the value problem. This essay, then, hopes to rectify this omission by arguing that one of the most influential accounts of religious epistemology - reformed epistemology - fails to adequately account for the value of knowledge. I argue, however, that a reasonable way out for the reformed epistemologist comes by way of endorsing the achievement thesis. The achievement thesis, put simply, states that knowledge is valuable because it is a cognitive achievement - unlike, for example, mere true belief. The central question of this essay, then, is this: Is Knowledge of God a Cognitive Achievement? In order to better answer this question I highlight two different ways in which one can understand the nature of cognitive achievements. First, a cognitive achievement can be understood as success from ability that is always primarily creditable to the agent. Or, second, a cognitive achievement can be understood as success from ability that is jointly creditable to the agent. Both, I argue, are compatible with knowledge and the achievement thesis. Whether knowledge of God is primarily or jointly creditable, however, will depend on the way in which one understands the role the agent plays in the belief forming process. Given the nature of reformed epistemology, I argue that knowledge of God is the kind of achievement that is jointly creditable. Further, and central to the argument, I argue that the reformed epistemologist is in a good position to meet the requirements for the strong achievement thesis. The strong achievement thesis argues that an achievement should be understood in terms of overcoming some obstacle whereby the agent's belief is the result of some ability that can be credited to the agent. The account I propose not only meets the requirements of the strong achievement thesis, but also retains a distinctive feature of reformed epistemology - namely, that the belief in God can be said to overcome the obstacle of cognitive malfunction that, as the reformed epistemologist argues, is brought about by sin. It's an achievement becasue it overcomes an excessively hostile environment (what I call the maxi-environment) that is not conducive to belief in God given the cognitive consequence of sin. In the end, it is possible to provide an account of reformed epistemology where the value of knowledge (over and above mere true belief) is adequately demonstrated.

[by] Joseph T. Eisinger [and] Benjamin Bederson. / Portion of a thesis. "January 28, 1952." / Bibliography: p. 32. / Army Signal Corps Contract No. DA 36-039 sc-100. Project No. 8-102B-0. Dept. of the Army Project No. 3-99-10-022.

This study was conducted during the first year of the implementation of the Revised National Curriculum Statement (RNCS) in Grade Five in South Africa. It is compulsory for teachers to implement the RNCS in this country. Investigations play a central role in learning in science education, and this study focuses on the Assessment Standard of Learning Outcome 1 in the Natural Sciences Learning Area that relates to children's abilities to ask questions that they can investigate themselves. Children struggle to formulate questions that can be used for investigations, and so they need to be taught how to do this. However, there is a paucity of research literature providing empirical evidence of how to teach children to ask investigable science questions. The aim of this study was to provide empirical data on the use of the teaching strategies suggested in the research literature, that is, to investigate which strategies science teachers use in teaching children how to ask questions that can be used in science investigations.

作者何志華. / 書名原題 : 《淮南子》、《呂氏春秋》、《戰國策》三書高誘《注》斠證. / 論文(博士) -- 香港中文大學硏究院中國語言及文學學部, 1995. / 參考文献 : leaves 399-406. / zuo zhe He Zhihua. / Chapter 第一章 --- 高《注》釋例 --- p.1 / Chapter 1 --- 循文立訓例 --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1 --- 訓解單字例 --- p.1 / Chapter 1.2 --- 訓解兩字詞語例 --- p.5 / Chapter 1.3 --- 訓解多字例 --- p.7 / Chapter 2 --- 稱引師說例 --- p.8 / Chapter 2.1 --- 高誘稱引師說例 --- p.8 / Chapter 2.2 --- 高誘不采師說例 --- p.13 / Chapter 3 --- 互文例 --- p.15 / Chapter 4 --- 闕疑例 --- p.17 / Chapter 4.1 --- 音律 --- p.18 / Chapter 4.2 --- 地理 --- p.18 / Chapter 4.3 --- 時令 --- p.21 / Chapter 4.4 --- 夸誕之說 --- p.22 / Chapter 4.5 --- 鳥獸 --- p.23 / Chapter 4.6 --- 古人姓名事跡 --- p.24 / Chapter 4.7 --- 與書傳所記不合者 --- p.24 / Chapter 4.8 --- 文義未明者 --- p.25 / Chapter 5 --- 高誘聲訓例 --- p.26 / Chapter 5.1 --- 擬音例 --- p.27 / Chapter 5.1.1 --- 讀如 --- p.27 / Chapter 5.1.2 --- 讀若 --- p.28 / Chapter 5.1.3 --- 讀近 --- p.29 / Chapter 5.1.4 --- 讀似 --- p.30 / Chapter 5.1.5 --- 讀與「某」同 --- p.30 / Chapter 5.2 --- 改讀例 --- p.31 / Chapter 5.2.1 --- 據字書訓詁 --- p.33 / Chapter 5.2.1.1 --- 《爾雅》 --- p.33 / Chapter 5.2.2 --- 據傳注舊詁 --- p.34 / Chapter 5.2.2.1 --- 毛《傳》 --- p.34 / Chapter 5.2.2.2 --- 《毛詩》鄭《箋》 --- p.34 / Chapter 5.2.2.3 --- 《周禮》鄭《注》 --- p.35 / Chapter 5.2.3 --- 別書重文 --- p.35 / Chapter 5.3 --- 改字例 --- p.36 / Chapter 5.4 --- 附論：《淮南子》高《注》音讀斠證 --- p.40 / Chapter 6 --- 考文例 --- p.50 / Chapter 第二章 --- 《淮南子》、《呂氏春秋》、《戰國策》三書高《注》引斠證 --- p.57 / Chapter 1 --- 高誘據《文子》爲《注》證 --- p.57 / Chapter 1.1 --- 《文子》因襲《淮南》證 --- p.57 / Chapter 1.2 --- 古人據重文爲注證 --- p.61 / Chapter 1.3 --- 高《注》與《文子》重文相合例 --- p.64 / Chapter 1.4 --- 高《注》與《文子》重文不合例 --- p.71 / Chapter 1.5 --- 結語 --- p.74 / Chapter 1.6 --- 附論 --- p.76 / Chapter 1.6.1 --- 附論一：《淮南子》高誘《注》雖與《文子》相同而非出於 《文子》例 --- p.76 / Chapter 1.6.2 --- 附論二 --- p.81 / Chapter 2 --- 高誘引《老子》考 --- p.82 / Chapter 3 --- 高誘引《莊子》考 --- p.85 / Chapter 4 --- 高誘引《淮南子》考 --- p.89 / Chapter 5 --- 高誘引《呂氏春秋》考 --- p.107 / Chapter 6 --- 高誘引《戰國策》考 --- p.108 / Chapter 7 --- 高誘引《周易》考 --- p.110 / Chapter 8 --- 高誘引¯《‘ة書》考 --- p.113 / Chapter 9 --- 高誘引《逸周書》考 --- p.118 / Chapter 10 --- 高誘用《詩》考 --- p.118 / Chapter 11 --- 高誘引《周禮》考 --- p.151 / Chapter 12 --- 高誘引《禮記》考 --- p.166 / Chapter 13 --- 高誘引《春秋經》考 --- p.172 / Chapter 14 --- 高誘引《春秋左傳》考 --- p.173 / Chapter 15 --- 高誘引《國語》考 --- p.208 / Chapter 16 --- 高誘引《公羊傳》考 --- p.216 / Chapter 17 --- 高誘本《穀梁傳》爲《注》考 --- p.219 / Chapter 18 --- 高誘引《史記》考 --- p.220 / Chapter 19 --- 高誘引《漢書》考 --- p.221 / Chapter 20 --- 高誘引《山海經》考 --- p.224 / Chapter 21 --- 高誘引《論語》考 --- p.230 / Chapter 22 --- 高誘引《孟子》考 --- p.243 / Chapter 23 --- 高誘引《孝經》考 --- p.251 / Chapter 24 --- 高誘據《爾雅》爲訓詁證 --- p.253 / Chapter 25 --- 高誘據毛《傳》爲訓詁證 --- p.271 / Chapter 26 --- 高誘引兵書考 --- p.278 / Chapter 26.1 --- 《孫子》 --- p.278 / Chapter 26.2 --- 《司馬法》 --- p.279 / Chapter 26.3 --- 《尉繚子》 --- p.279 / Chapter 27 --- 高誘引《說苑》考 --- p.280 / Chapter 28 --- 高誘引《楚辭》考 --- p.281 / Chapter 29 --- 高誘引《世本》考 --- p.282 / Chapter 30 --- 高誘引緯書考 --- p.282 / Chapter 30.1 --- 《河圖括地象》 --- p.282 / Chapter 30.2 --- ¯《‘ة書五行傳》 --- p.283 / Chapter 30.3 --- 《洪範五行傳》 --- p.284 / Chapter 第三章 --- 《淮南子》、《呂氏春秋》、《戰國策》三書高《注》互異集證 --- p.287 / Chapter 第四章 --- 《淮南子》、《呂氏春秋》、《戰國策》三書高《注》斠證 --- p.307 / 徵引書目 --- p.399-406

Made available in DSpace on 2014-10-09T12:43:48Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 / Made available in DSpace on 2014-10-09T14:09:49Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 06772.pdf: 7651270 bytes, checksum: aad35d8f09b378cbb730443e1cd36015 (MD5) / Tese (Doutoramento) / IPEN/T / Instituto de Pesquisas Energeticas e Nucleares - IPEN/CNEN-SP

Made available in DSpace on 2014-10-09T12:43:48Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 / Made available in DSpace on 2014-10-09T14:09:49Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 06772.pdf: 7651270 bytes, checksum: aad35d8f09b378cbb730443e1cd36015 (MD5) / Tese (Doutoramento) / IPEN/T / Instituto de Pesquisas Energeticas e Nucleares - IPEN/CNEN-SP

PURPOSE: WIN55,212-2, a potent synthetic agonist of cannabinoid receptor type 1 (CB1) and cannabinoid receptor type 2 (CB2), reduces atherosclerosis in apolipoprotein E (ApoE) null mice. Although pharmacologic evidence suggests the anti-atherosclerotic effects of WIN55,212-2 are mediated CB2, this remains to be confirmed by genetic studies. Therefore, in this study, we investigated the effects of WIN55,212-2 on development of atherosclerosis in low-density lipoprotein receptor (Ldlr) null mice with and without homozygous deletion of the CB2 gene. METHODS: After 6 weeks on an atherogenic diet, groups of CB2 and CB2 Ldlr-null mice received a daily intraperitoneal injection of WIN55,212-2 or vehicle. After two weeks, plasma lipid levels and atherosclerosis in the aortic root were quantified. RESULTS: Plasma cholesterol and triglyceride levels did not differ between CB2 and CB2 mice and WIN55,212-2 had no effect on total cholesterol levels in either genotype. However, triglyceride levels in both CB2 and CB2 mice were significantly lowered by WIN55,212-2. The size of aortic root lesions did not differ significantly between CB2 and CB2 mice with or without WIN55,212-2 treatment. However, WIN55,212-2 treatment significantly lowered lesional macrophage accumulation in CB2 mice, and lesional smooth muscle content in both CB2 and CB2 mice. Lesional apoptosis was also greater in CB2 mice compared to CB2mice, and only reduced by WIN55,212-2 in CB2 mice. Collagen content and elastin fiber fragmentation were unaffected by genotype or WIN55,212-2. CONCLUSIONS: WIN55,212-2 treatment does not alter lesion size in Ldlr null-mice, but does modify lesion cellularity CB2-dependent and CB2-independent mechanisms.