Academic Controversy Research Articles

Brief discussion of the differences in the acupoint location between Meridians and Acupoints and Acupuncture and Moxibustion.

There are the differences in the location of some acupoints between textbooks Meridians and Acupoints and Acupuncture and Moxibustion. Both of the textbooks are in the category of the "14th Five-Year Plan". The differences in acupoint location have brought some confusion for students, full-time teachers and researchers in the field of traditional Chinese medicine. In the paper, based on GB/T 12346-2021： Nomenclature and Location of Meridian Points, published in2021, and in reference with GB/T 12346-2006： Nomenclature and Location of Acupuncture Points, published in 2006, the discrepancy in the acupoint location was systematically collated in the aspects of the expression style and layout, text expression and potential difference of location between these two textbooks, published by China Press of Traditional Chinese Medicine, People's Medical Publishing House and China Science Publishing. Based on the historical evolution and the academic controversy of acupoint positioning, the reasons of the differences in acupoint location were analyzed, the potential influences on the teaching, examination, competition and research of Chinese medicine acupuncture were explored, and the suggestions for solution were proposed.

Article: Open-Price Contracts Under the CISG: The Law in Action

The CISG is undoubtedly the most successful instrument of international trade law. While in former times the international sale of goods was regulated by domestic laws, today the international community is able to offer a truly international regime for these contracts. However, the CISG is not free from ambiguities and contradictions. One of the most famous is between Articles 14(1) and 55. This interplay has ignited the well-known academic controversy over the validity of sale of goods contracts without an agreed price under the CISG. The purpose of this article is to look at this contradiction from a different point of view. While in theory it is possible to argue that there is a stalemate between the supporters of validity of open-price contracts and their opponents, this stalemate is the law on the book. The law in practice offers a different landscape. It shows that in practice open-price contracts are regarded as valid under the CISG, although the adjudicators still struggle with the correct application of Article 55. Open-price contracts, Article 14, Article 55, agreements to agree, tentative prices, determinable price, contractual validity, market price, reasonable price.

Garden on the Great Wall—A Sustainable Solution for the Plants on the Top Surface of the Great Wall Heritage Site

The Great Wall is a world-renowned cultural heritage site and a national key protected cultural relic in China. The plants on the top surface of the Great Wall heritage site are one of the factors leading to the occurrence and continuous deterioration of the Great Wall. Therefore, there is ongoing academic controversy on how to scientifically dispose of the plants on the top surface of the Great Wall heritage site. Taking Beijing Dazhuangke Great Wall as an example, the preliminary field research was completed. This paper further describes the key technology for the disposal of remaining roots after removing the ground part of the plants from the top surface of the Great Wall heritage site and clarifies the basic idea of using the original covered soil on the top surface of the Great Wall heritage site, back-filling the original covered soil stripped via reparation of the layers and the regenerated plants in a seed bank to create ‘soft capping’ protection. This study provides a basic framework for ‘soft capping’ on the top surface of the Great Wall heritage site and construction of the cultural landscape of the ‘Garden on the Great Wall’.

Using Structured Academic Controversy for STEM Education Leadership Programs

Using Structured Academic Controversy for STEM Education Leadership Programs

The Affects of Academic Controversy Method on Students’ Speaking Skills

The Affects of Academic Controversy Method on Students’ Speaking Skills

Deepening Understanding of Specific Issues through Structured Academic Controversy: A Perspective of Cooperative Learning

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk memperkenalkan dan menekankan pemanfaatan kontroversi akademik terstruktur sebagai model teknik pembelajaran kooperatif bagi mahasiswa universitas. Meskipun pentingnya berpikir kritis dan pembelajaran kooperatif dalam pendidikan tinggi semakin meningkat, kurangnya teknik yang efektif menghambat perkembangan keterampilan penting ini. Tujuan utama dari penelitian ini adalah untuk menunjukkan efektivitas kontroversi akademik terstruktur dalam meningkatkan keterampilan berpikir kritis dan mempromosikan pembelajaran kolaboratif di kalangan mahasiswa universitas yang mempelajari bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa asing (EFL). Melalui tinjauan komprehensif terhadap literatur yang ada dan studi kasus, penelitian ini menyoroti implementasi sukses kontroversi akademik terstruktur dalam beragam pengaturan kelas EFL, menampilkan adaptabilitas dan efektivitasnya dalam memfasilitasi pembelajaran kooperatif dan keterampilan berpikir kritis di antara mahasiswa.Temuan menunjukkan peningkatan yang signifikan dalam kemampuan mahasiswa untuk menganalisis secara kritis isu-isu kompleks, mengembangkan pandangan yang nuansat, dan berinteraksi secara konstruktif dengan sudut pandang yang berlawanan, mengindikasikan potensi kontroversi akademik terstruktur dalam menciptakan lingkungan pembelajaran yang kokoh. Sebagai kesimpulan, integrasi sistematis kontroversi akademik terstruktur dalam lingkungan pembelajaran EFL dapat secara signifikan berkontribusi pada pengembangan keterampilan berpikir kritis dan mempromosikan suasana pendidikan yang kolaboratif dan intelektual yang merangsang.

Models of the Self: The Potential for Developing and Enhancing of Subjectness of Self

The paper presents a distinctive experience of dialogue between two researchers that is comprised of the creative synthesis of their original concepts of Subjectness of Self and ways of enhancing it. Here, the dialogical interaction of scientists is manifested not in academic controversy, but in “integrating”, or connecting, the researchers’ concepts related to a common study object and providing profound insight into this object that is unattainable outside of dialogue. The problems solved by the researchers are associated, firstly, with a new reflection on their relevant research; secondly, with the development of the scientific theory of the Self of Personality; thirdly, with substantiating the possibility of achieving “creative consistency”, or “creative partnership” in theoretical research; and, fourthly, with demonstrating the significance of scientific dialogue in psychology of personality as the art of aligning researchers’ standpoints for the benefit of human cognition. The purpose and original result of the dialogical integration of the presented concepts was deeper and more expanded knowledge about the structure of Self the Subject, about the properties of the Self that determine its subjectness, about the Unknown Self and the active attitude of the personality towards it, about self-identity of the Self and ways to achieve it, and about the self-causality of the Self and methods of its empirical research. The method of conceptual analysis and synthesis, the method of hermeneutics, and reflexive and phenomenological methods were applied for searching, operating and revealing knowledge about the Self and its subjectness. The dialogue was within the space of general personology, a trend in the study of personality that was founded by the researchers. It presupposes the unity of cultural-hermeneutic, theoreticalempirical, practical and self-positing approaches in research, counseling and psychotherapy of personality. The dialogue has resulted in the development of a new field of science, personology of Self. The paper contains the voices of both the authors and all those who have inspired their views and ideas.

End-of-Life Narratives of Patients who Request Medical Assistance in Dying: A Qualitative Study Protocol

Many groups (healthcare professionals, lawyers, philosophers, non-governmental organisations, bioethics committees, journalists, religious groups, etc.) participate in the bioethical debate about medical assistance in dying (MAiD). Bioethics literature on the topic involve different approaches (analytic, empirical, policy oriented, activist) and various normative perspectives (discourses based on deontological premises as the sanctity of life and human dignity, or on utilitarianism, libertarianism, etc.), some of which are at times irreconcilable. Regarding empirical studies, some voices (e.g., healthcare professionals) have been widely considered but the voice of people who request MAiD has been neglected. Understanding the personal and medical circumstances that lead to MAiD, which can only be achieved by listening to the phenomenological discourse of those involved, is key. This study aims to provide knowledge from the testimonies and experiences of patients who have initiated a MAiD request. We believe this research protocol can increase our understanding of a social and academic controversy that lacks important information to be complete. By doing so, this type of research could inform and improve end-of-life public policies, and particularly the health care of individuals who request a MAiD. We propose a qualitative phenomenological study using semi-structured interviews of people in the process of requesting MAiD, as outlined in the Ley Orgánica 3/2021, de regulación de la eutanasia (LORE), the Spanish Law on the Regulation of Euthanasia. The study is conducted nationally using a convenience sampling. The number of interviews is determined sequentially and cumulatively, depending on the richness of the narratives and the saturation of the information that has been collected. For the purposes of analysis, the interviews are transcribed verbatim and pseudonymised afterwards. Data analysis is conducted at the same time as data collection. The proposed study has received a favourable report from the Coordinating Committee on Biomedical Research Ethics of Andalusia (CCEIBA).

Academic ‘ethics’ and the Schøyen Collection Aramaic incantation bowls: a personal narrative

The Aramaic incantation bowls in the possession of the Schøyen Collection have been the subject of academic controversy and police search. This paper discusses the ethical dimensions of scholarly engagements with the bowls, with a special focus on the actions of University College London and the British Academy. It concludes that there is little evidence of ethical reflection on the part of these institutions, and considers the chilling effects exerted by a wealthy private individual upon academic freedom.

Research on the Procedure Construction of China’s Personal Bankruptcy System

Nowadays, the establishment of a nationwide personal bankruptcy system as soon as possible has been a unified view in academic circles. However, the specific setup of this system and the connection and interaction of various supporting systems are still hot issues of academic controversy. From the initial exploration to the continuous prosperity of the local pilot works, the rich pilot experience provides a practical basis for theoretical research. At the same time, new reform trends and changes have emerged in the international frontier legislation. Therefore, this research attempts to give suggestions for the procedural design of the establishment of a national personal bankruptcy legal system in China. Drawing on new experiences and new models domestic and abroad, the selection of personal bankruptcy procedures should adhere to liquidation as the criterion, and attach importance to the role of reorganization, as well as maintain the stability of social and economic order and promote the development and improvement of the legal system.

Respect for juries: A rejoinder to Hemming on Pell

The High Court decision in Pell v The Queen continues to be the subject of extensive academic controversy. In a pair of important articles, evidence and criminal law scholar Andrew Hemming has defended the Court’s decision. This rejoinder critiques Hemming’s defence (and, by extension, the High Court’s decision) on three grounds. First, because the decision conflates unchallenged testimony with honest and reliable testimony. Second, because it relies on ad hoc probabilistic determinations of discrete and unreplicable historical events. Third, because it fails to answer a key epistemological question: how could the High Court know more about what really did or did not happen in that sacristy than the jury?

Paradigms for Political Action. A Draft for a Repertoire

Whether politics is a separate sphere or an aspect of human action is a subject of academic controversy. I focus here on the political aspect of action, which is not exclusive of other aspects. There are no ‘naturally political’ issues nor is there anything completely devoid of a political aspect. I am now taking a step backwards to discuss the seemingly simple ‘political or not’ question, as compared to the ‘political in which sense’ question, which I have discussed elsewhere. In this article, I stay on the ideal–typical level, as I want to discuss alternative ways of marking the criteria for the political aspect, without discussing the views of other scholars in detail. I call the procedure for judging and naming this aspect political literacy, a way of making explicit the presence of the political aspect in some phenomena or questions. What is political at a certain time can, in other words, be judged as the result of a politicising reading of the phenomena in question. Here I shall construct a repertoire of certain ideal–typical criteria for marking the political aspects and making sense of actual disputes regarding the political. The repertoire includes the criteria of political action under such headings as expediency, partisanship, controversy and contingency. I regard the view of politics as belonging to a separate sphere as a zero option. All of the paradigms can be regarded as different facets of politics as a contingent activity.

Conceptualizing legitimacy: What to learn from the controversies related to an “essentially contested concept”

Based on a genealogy of the concept of Legitimacy, the goal of the paper is to develop a proposal that unites normative-theoretical and empirical approaches and hence reconciles two different conceptual-theoretical camps in legitimacy research. Legitimacy is a core concept in Political Science that relates to fundamental questions of politics, polity and policy–the relation between rulers and ruled, the properties of a political system, its democratic quality, the rule of law, and its policy output. However, in academia, no consensus has evolved on the conceptual and empirical core of legitimacy, it is still essentially contested. One main reason for this is that a concept such as legitimacy is not only a tool for analysis, but can also become an object of academic controversy itself, as researchers give different answers to key questions related to conceptualizing it. This is why academic controversies on a concept highlight key issues, questions and dimensions of understanding, defining, and operationalising it—which is also the case for legitimacy. The paper therefore recollects the main controversies around the concept of legitimacy since the 1950's by tracing a genealogy of legitimacy in the Social Sciences. A genealogy is a methodological tool in intellectual and conceptual history. Different from a classical literature review, a genealogy summarizes the main lines and traditions of thinking on a concept, the key controversies, predominant understandings, and crucial issues of conceptualizing it. In the conceptual debates on legitimacy in Political Science, the core controversy is the one between normative-theoretical and empirical approaches. Based on the genealogy, we develop a proposal for conceptualizing legitimacy that enables to reconcile the normative-theoretical and empirical camps in legitimacy research.

How time pressure is associated with knowledge sharing: a dual-path mechanism study

PurposeThis study aims to explore the dual-path effects of challenge (CTP) and hindrance time pressure (HTP) on knowledge sharing, which provides theoretical reference for knowledge teams to carry out knowledge sharing smoothly.Design/methodology/approachThis study collected two waves of data and surveyed 416 employees in China. Regression analysis, bootstrapping and structure equitation modeling was adopted to test the hypotheses.FindingsCTP has a positive impact on employee knowledge sharing, while HTP has a negative impact on employee knowledge sharing. Self-efficacy plays a mediating role between CTP and knowledge sharing, and emotional exhaustion plays a mediating role between HTP and knowledge sharing. The perceived organizational support can moderate the relationship between CTP and self-efficacy and between HTP and emotional exhaustion.Originality/valueThis study explains the reasons for the academic controversy about the effect of time pressure, enhances the scholars’ attention and understanding of the dual-path mechanism between time pressure and knowledge sharing and augments the theoretical research of time pressure and knowledge sharing.

The Burden of Proof studies: assessing the evidence of risk

Exposure to risks throughout life results in a wide variety of outcomes. Objectively judging the relative impact of these risks on personal and population health is fundamental to individual survival and societal prosperity. Existing mechanisms to quantify and rank the magnitude of these myriad effects and the uncertainty in their estimation are largely subjective, leaving room for interpretation that can fuel academic controversy and add to confusion when communicating risk. We present a new suite of meta-analyses—termed the Burden of Proof studies—designed specifically to help evaluate these methodological issues objectively and quantitatively. Through this data-driven approach that complements existing systems, including GRADE and Cochrane Reviews, we aim to aggregate evidence across multiple studies and enable a quantitative comparison of risk–outcome pairs. We introduce the burden of proof risk function (BPRF), which estimates the level of risk closest to the null hypothesis that is consistent with available data. Here we illustrate the BPRF methodology for the evaluation of four exemplar risk–outcome pairs: smoking and lung cancer, systolic blood pressure and ischemic heart disease, vegetable consumption and ischemic heart disease, and unprocessed red meat consumption and ischemic heart disease. The strength of evidence for each relationship is assessed by computing and summarizing the BPRF, and then translating the summary to a simple star rating. The Burden of Proof methodology provides a consistent way to understand, evaluate and summarize evidence of risk across different risk–outcome pairs, and informs risk analysis conducted as part of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study.

Which Tradition, Whose Authority? Quests and Tensions in Contemporary Chinese Reception of Greek Antiquity

What is the mission of classical studies in present-day China? Is it a professional discipline governed by Western models and standards, or should it have its own agendas and methods? Should classical antiquity be studied first and foremost on its own terms, or does the most important value of such study lie in the lessons and tools it could provide for China’s persistent quest for an alternative modernity? This article explores the deep rift over these issues between two camps of Chinese scholars by examining an academic controversy that occurred in 2015. This dispute bears strong echoes of two much earlier conflicts: that between Nietzsche and Wilamowitz in the late nineteenth century, and that between Mao and the Comintern in the 1940s. The analysis of these intriguing historical parallels and the light they shed on the nature of the 2015 event reveals that the highly contested role of classical studies in China’s modernization process has taken on new significance in the twenty-first century.

The Affects of Academic Controversy Method on Students’ Speaking Skills

This study aimed at investigating the effect of Structured Academic Controversy(SAC) on students speaking skill. Academic Controversy is a cooperative learningactivity that leads students to argue different sides of an issue. Academic controversy islearning to take a position and defend it with reason is an essential skill in democraticsociety. The method involves a cooperative form of debate in which groups of four,divided into two groups, take turns representing two opposing views on an issue beforeattempting to reach a consensus on the issue. Students work in pairs to become familiarwith one side of an issue, and then debate with another pair who has become familiar withthe opposing side. Pairs then switch “sides,” become familiar with the opposingargument, and debate again. Finally, the two pairs come together to discuss the strengthsand weakness of each side of the argument, come to a consensus about their collectiveopinion about the argument, and present that idea to the other quads. Finally, one othercooperative learning principle that can inform the use of Academic Controversy is‘cooperation as a value’. Academic controversy method canimprove students’ speakingskill, by academic controversy, the students will be taught step by step to argue . Theteacher can apply Academic controversy method to overcome the students’ speakingskill.

Healthcare Professionals' Understandings of the Definition and Determination of Death: A Scoping Review.

Background.During the 1950s, advances in critical care, and organ transplantation altered the relationship between organ failure and death. There has since been a shift away from traditional cardiocirculatory based to brain-based criteria of death, with resulting academic controversy, despite the practice being largely accepted worldwide. Our objective is to develop a comprehensive description of the current understandings of healthcare professionals regarding the meaning, definition, and determination of death.Methods.Online databases were used to identify papers published from 2003 to 2020. Additional sources were searched for conference proceedings and theses. Two reviewers screened papers using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Complementary searches and review of reference lists complemented the final study selection. A data extraction instrument was developed to iteratively chart the results of the review. A qualitative approach was conducted to thematically analyze the data.Results.Seven thousand four hundred twenty-eight references were identified. In total, 75 papers met the inclusion criteria. Fourteen additional papers were added from complementary searches. Most were narratives (35%), quantitative investigations (21%), and reviews (18%). Identified themes included: (1) the historical evolution of brain death (BD), (2) persistent controversies about BD and death determination, (3) wide variability in healthcare professionals’ knowledge and attitudes, (4) critical need for BD determination revision.Conclusions.We concluded that although BD is widely accepted, there exists variation in healthcare providers’ understanding of its conceptual basis. Death determination remains a divisive issue among scholars. This review identified a need for increased opportunities for formal training on BD among healthcare providers.

Some Damages Dilemmas in Private Law

It is universally accepted that, subject to various restrictions including remoteness and mitigation of damage, the purpose of damages for breach of civil obligations is to put the parties whose rights have been breached in the same position, so far as money can do so, as if their rights had been observed. This is commonly referred to as the overriding compensatory principle. Nevertheless, although the principle can be quite simply stated, its application in practice commonly provokes much judicial disagreement and academic controversy. In this article, Professor McLauchlan discusses some of the modern leading cases that arguably could or should have been decided differently. As the title of the article suggests, the cases can fairly be described as giving rise to damages dilemmas.

THE CONCEPT OF PERSONAL DATA: FROM ACADEMIC PERSPECTIVE TO PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

This article is dedicated to the concept of personal data. Although notion of the personal data was introduced to data protection legislation quite a while ago, a number of issues has still remained unresolved. One of such issues is the identifiability, a condition for qualification of certain data as the personal data. This condition ignited an academic controversy resulted in a juxtaposition of the absolute and relative approaches to the concept of personal data and, subsequently, pseudonymised data. Yet, both these approaches are observable in the GDPR. Consequently, application of a moderate approach (in-between the absolute and relative approaches) may be suggested. Application of the moderate approach is a means to balance the protection of personal data against other EU rights and freedoms, such as the conduct of business. Finally, by the way of the moderate approach a legal status of the initial data controller may be distinguished from a subsequent recipient of pseudonymised data.