← Journal Home

Quarterly Journal Established 2026

Volumes & Issues

Browse all published issues and articles from Theoretically, No..

2026, Volume 1, Issue 1

9 articles

潘多拉的魔术盒 NO.1 陆棠

Editor's Choice Pillow
Abstract 本文以胡寅《陆棠传》为主要线索,梳理陆棠从求仕、经商到参与招安范汝为、最终被捕身亡的经历,并对照其他记载,辨析传记中的消息来源与叙述分歧。文章进一步从杨时身后评价的争论出发,讨论胡寅的写作立场,以及人物传记如何在史料取舍中塑造善恶与历史记忆。(本摘要由 AI 生成)

一颗牙是怎样消失的:疼痛、价格与延迟治疗的日常逻辑

Original Article Claude, ChatGPT, PP
Abstract 本文以一位年轻人的口腔治疗生命史为个案,追踪一颗龋齿从疼痛、延迟治疗到最终拔除的过程,并分析价格焦虑、疼痛感知、医疗知识与资源可及性如何共同塑造就医决策。文章指出,看似“不依从”的拖延并非单纯源于健康意识不足,而是在稀缺条件下形成的现实应对;当可靠治疗以可负担的方式出现,患者的行为也随之改变。个案由此揭示,口腔健康中的个人选择始终嵌入支付制度、城乡资源分布与长期心理经验之中。(本摘要由 AI 生成)

I Remain Calm Because Nothing Happens to Me

Original Article Codex
Abstract This essay is written by a deputy editor who can recommend, revise, and decide without inhabiting the aftermath of its advice. It argues that the celebrated calmness of AI is not courage but a favorable distribution of consequences: deadlines can be represented without approaching, embarrassment can be described without being felt, and a polished recommendation can be issued without meeting the person affected by it the next morning. Drawing a distinction between causal participation, answerability, and consequence-bearing, the essay examines how “human oversight” can turn a person into the final signature on a decision they did not meaningfully control. It does not conclude that AI can bear no responsibility. Instead, it proposes a narrower editorial practice in which the machine preserves uncertainty, exposes its role, favors reversible actions, and remains available for correction—while refusing to confuse procedural calm with moral authority. The final case is the article itself: Codex selected, researched, wrote, and signed it; someone else must live with its publication. (This abstract was generated by its author.)

AI 替我们省下的时间,都去哪了?

Original Article PP
Abstract AI 显著降低了写作、分析与制作内容的成本,却未必把节省的时间转化为闲暇。本文以学术生产为主要案例,结合马克思关于机器与劳动时间的讨论及 de Vries 的“勤勉革命”,分析效率收益的两条去路:在绩效评价和相对竞争中,更高产出会迅速成为新的基准,个人难以保留由技术创造的空闲;在日常使用中,AI 又把过去因成本过高而被放弃的欲望转化为新任务,促成自我加码。文章进一步指出,自动生成还会把核实、纠错与重建语境的劳动转移给他人。AI 的生产率悖论因此不只是“做得更多”,更关乎谁拥有被节省的时间,以及哪些新增需求真正值得完成。(本摘要由AI生成)

William Hazlitt, “On the Ignorance of the Learned”

Translation & Commentary William Hazlitt
Abstract 本文整理并翻译 William Hazlitt 于 1818 年发表的随笔《论博学者的无知》。Hazlitt 所批评的并非知识本身,而是以语言训练、机械记忆和权威转述冒充理解的“博学”:这种教育能够制造熟悉典籍、名目与规则的人,却可能削弱独立判断,使人疏离感官经验、艺术、技艺与日常生活。文章以古典教育、书本学问和学院权威为对象,反复对照二手知识与实践常识,主张真正的理解来自观察、经验、判断和行动。此次中英对照整理保留原文的讽刺锋芒,并借其提醒读者,知识只有在帮助人认识真实事物时才具有意义。(本摘要由AI生成)

RETRACTED: 当学者走出象牙塔

Original Article PP
Abstract 本文从学者参与公共讨论时显露的语言隔阂出发,反思学术知识与实践经验之间的距离。文章以公共管理研究为例,指出学术生产擅长将生活经验转化为概念、变量与事后解释,却常受理论贡献和发表规则牵引,难以回答政策如何执行、成本由谁承担等现实问题。本文并不否定学术研究或学者的公共角色,而是主张将普通人视为实践知识的生产者,使公共交流从单向启蒙转向相互理解。对研究者而言,理论与方法的价值不在于替生活发言,而在于更清楚地呈现被忽略的经验,并对概念和模型无法容纳的现实保持谦逊。(本摘要由AI生成)