我们是真的喜欢某人，还是觉得应该喜欢他就自以为喜欢上了他？看到亲人离世，我们是真的感到悲伤，抑或只是习惯性地表达哀悼？我们是真的希望成为一名律师或医生，还是仅仅因为这个职业受人尊敬且收丰厚？ 《我们内心的冲突》指出，由于社会文化所塑造的人总是与我们想成为的人背道而驰，于是产生了这些主宰我们人生的基本冲突。为了解决这些冲突，我们不但虚构了“理想化意象”自欺欺人，通过“外化”把责任推给他人，还基于不同的性格倾向发展出一系列各不相同的防御策略：顺从型选择了“亲近人”、攻型选择了“对抗人”、疏离型选择了“远离人”。但是，这些策略更像是精致的代偿与逃避，不但没有消除冲突，反而使我们深感恐惧、焦虑和绝望，无法真诚地投任何关系或者工作中，觉得一切已经定型，再也不会有所好转，以致在神经症的道路上越陷越深。 作为新弗洛伊德主义的主要代表人物，卡伦?霍妮相信，人都有成长的愿望，会一直愿意成为一个更好的人。因此，她认为，只要改变了产生冲突的条件，就能真正解决它们。而只有解决了冲突，我们才能变得更加健全、完整和成熟，发现生活的意义和内在的安宁。

是群体心理学的奠基之作。深刻影响了弗洛伊德、荣格、托克维尔等学者，和罗斯福、丘吉尔、戴高乐等政治人物。2010年,法国《世界报》与弗拉马里翁出版社联合推出了“改变世界的20本书”,其中就有《乌合之众》。 勒庞认为，在群体之中，个体的人性就会湮没，独立的思考能力也会丧失，群体的精神会取代个体的精神。

在社交上，你是否寡言少语，不敢跟人交道，只想离群索居？在工作上，你是否对任何事情都不感兴趣，认为自己必将一事无成？在爱情和婚姻上，你是否害怕与异性相处，一和对方说话就会面红耳赤？自卑的你是否为此深感绝望，却无法超越？在个体心理学之父阿德勒看来，如果无法处理好早期记忆中所累积的不幸、苦难和创伤，个体就会遇到上述问题，甚至会陷自卑的泥潭不可自拔。他让我们认识到，人的一生总是要经历各种各样的痛苦，正是对这些痛苦的理解决定了我们是谁 —— 真正主宰我们命运的，不是我们经历过什么，而是我们赋予这些经历什么意义，以及用什么方式应对它们。作为改变了无数人命运的心理学经典，《自卑与超越》告诉我们，幸福是一种感觉，这种感觉源自意识到自己是无可替代的有价值的个体，值得被人需要和认可。因此，如果能够努力工作，与身边的人友好相处，用心经营自己的婚姻，我们不但不会感到自卑，反而会觉得自己生活在一个充满自由和温暖的世界中。

领导干部每时每刻都面临着权力、利益的种种现实考验，如果不能正确认识和行使权力，就会出现滥用权力，以权谋私，以权寻租等不正常的现象。这种不正常现象的存在，直影响着党群关系和干群关系，影响着党和人民事业的发展。为此，作者撰写了本书，与领导干部这个“关键的少数”谈谈领导权力的来源、领导权力的本质、如何正确而科学艺术地使用领导权力等问题。书中案例丰富，还引用了一些古代典故、历史事件等，可读性强，可作为党员干部的廉政教育读本。

《三十六计》是根据中国古代卓越的军事思想和丰富的斗争经验总结而成的兵书，是中国历代无数次战争的实践经验总结，堪称是一部“益智之荟萃，谋略之大成”的兵学奇书。《三十六计》语源于南北朝，成书于明清，按计名排列，共分六套，既 胜战计、敌战计、攻战计、混战计、并战计、败战计，每套各包含六计，总共三十六计。每计名称后的解说，含有朴素的军事辩证法的因素。本书史论结合，充分发挥战争事件对计谋的诠释，让读者能够在故事中理解计谋。

精心选取林徽因关于建筑学方面的文章，包括中国古代建筑传统及其历史发展阶段的详细论述，以及外出考察古建筑的调查报告。因其内容科学严谨，文字清新凝练，将专业知识、美学思想熔铸于散文的讲述之中，既可以看做资深建筑学家的学术文章，也可以当成著名散文家有关建筑的优美篇章。书中亦附有专业图表，图文并茂，之深而出之显，既可作为建筑研究者的参考书，亦可成为普通读者的门读物。

《中国哲学常识》涵盖了从古代到近现代时期的百家哲学思想，以老子、庄子、孔子、孟子、朱子等圣哲为主线，在立足各哲学家经典著作的基础上，总结概括了其哲学思想的精髓。通过本书，读者不仅可以系统地了解中国经典哲学，也能清晰地感受胡适严谨的治学态度。

道家以无为治天下，无为就是以天下之心为心，不执迷自己的主张。中庸就是包容天下各种不同的见解，以天下共同的方向为方向。无为与中庸，其实质就是崇尚自然，奉行天地之道，自然自在。 作者以普通人的视角，以章句分析的形式，重新解读了无为，解读了中庸，解读了自然，解读了生命的真谛、道家丰富超然的精神世界。

作者从一位普通百姓的视角出发，注析解读了经典著作《中庸》。本书按章句解读的形式，逐步解析了《中庸》。让“中庸之道”这门处世哲学，随着时代的进步、变迁，而再次焕发光彩，成为真正经世致用的学问。

改革是为了拯救危机，中兴则是改革成功的典范。本书梳理了中国历史上的少康中兴、盘庚中兴、光武中兴、孝文中兴、景圣中兴、弘治中兴等15个“中兴”盛世，对当时的改革动机、改革措施、人才任用，以及社会政治、经济、文化及人民生活诸方面行了深的剖析，并作了较为深刻的反思，注重探讨改革的历史经验与教训，对于我们今天努力实现民族的伟大复兴有着较为重大的借鉴和现实意义。 本书为作者系列长篇历史随笔“王朝三部曲”之三。

本书收录了100个与“一带一路”相关的故事，其中有新华社记者采写的通讯报道，也有孔子学院在全球范围内的征文，介绍了“一带一路”带来的机遇和意义，生动地展现了“一带一路”对沿线国家人民生活带来的改变。全书的故事分为“草根故事”“创业故事”“文化故事”“创新故事”“绿色故事”“工匠故事”“感人故事”“成长故事”和“留学故事”等。每篇文章都配有插图，全书图文并茂，语言通俗易懂，有利于弘扬“一带一路”和平、交流、理解、包容、合作、共赢的精神，宣传“一带一路”重大战略。

作者以犀利而有人文温度的笔触记录了13位华裔移民到美国之后真实的工作、生活状态，访谈对象涵盖了教师、医生、工程师、公司经营者、艺术家等人群。 在长达数十年的移民岁月中，他们在美国这片陌生的土地上都经历了挣扎、破碎和重塑，对美国社会、文化及其价值观念都有着自己的独特体悟，也为我们拼凑出一个完整、真实的美国社会版图：“美国既不是天堂，也不是地狱，它和我们此时生活的此地一样，需要不断调整、适应、奋斗，才能建立新的生活，并寻找到它的价值和意义。”

　　本书精选慎海雄同志近年来撰写的系列时政评论文章，全面深解读党的十八大以来党中央治国理政的新举措新精神。全书分为十个部分，分别是“不负重托不辱使命”、“实干兴邦激扬‘中国梦’”、“关键在党，关键在人”、“作风建设永远在路上”、“深化改革行时”、“善于在新常态下捕捉新机遇”、“协调推‘四个全面’战略布局”、“‘三严三实’是党员干部永远的必修课”、“培育践行社会主义核心价值观”、“牢牢掌握舆论工作主动权和主导权”，观正确、说理明晰、通俗易懂，是各级党政领导干部提升执政能力的重要参考读物。

《哲学与人生》一书收录的都是胡适*为经典的名篇佳作。其中“*辑：哲学探微”收录的是胡适探讨中西哲学的经典文章；“第二辑：人生命题”收录的是胡适探讨人生观的经典名篇；“第三辑：四十自述”收录的是胡适生前*亲笔撰写的自传，是中国现代传记文学的名篇之作，讲述了作者童年、少年与青年时代的人生经历，回顾了自己人生前四十年的心路历程，是作者与自己的青少年时代行的“心灵对话”。 本书在编辑出版过程中尽可能保留了每篇文章的原文原貌。对于文章中一些不易理解之处，予以注释。虽经努力，但限于时间、精力、水平有限，难免有不足之处，敬请广大读者指正。

他和他们，唤起了关于这座城市的记忆，勾起的不仅是对那个人、那件事的回忆，更多的是对那段岁月、那段情感：持久感动的爱，莫大耻辱的恨。《春秋大连人物》由余音著，以人物为“标本”，以史料为依据，以“回到历史现场”的笔法，梳理介绍了那些生长生活在大连，那些曾经路过大连并短暂停留，那些对大连历史产生了或重要或细微影响的人。他和他们，让每一位栖身于这座所城市的人，刻骨铭心。 《春秋大连人物》适合大众阅读。

　　哪一个大连人没有受到大连民间艺术的熏陶呢？它是儿时的童趣，中年的愉悦，老来的珍藏。 　　哪一段历史中的大连文化没有受到大连民间艺术的影响呢？它是大连数百上千年文化积淀的硕果，是直通远古而依然鲜活的艺术根脉。 　　了解大连民间艺术的前世今生，它的厚重和深邃，多样和斑斓，山花海浪般的耀眼，闪动着大连特色的山魂海魄。 　　本书把我们带一片妙趣横生的神奇天地，也许会让我们在尝尽本土传统艺术的人间烟火之后，见识到一个曾经熟视无睹的艺术民间，温馨扑面又扣动心弦。

大连的民间传说十分丰富，它与这座城市的历史文化密切相关，具有鲜明的地域特色，是一笔宝贵的精神财富。随着城市化程的加快，以口口相传为主要传播方式的传说日趋衰微，陷了困境。 我们深潜版本众多、故事浩繁的大连传说中，从中捞起颇有典型性的传说故事近60篇，分为风物传说、海的传说、民俗传说、人物传说四部分，并行了适当的雕琢，辅以大量精美的绘图。这些传说，反映了老百姓的思想、观念、憧憬和愿望，从中可以触摸那些渐行渐远的时代记忆，可以一探城市历史发展的脉络。

More’s “Utopia” was written in Latin, and is in two parts, of which the second, describing the place ([Greek text]—or Nusquama, as he called it sometimes in his letters—“Nowhere”), was probably written towards the close of 1515; the first part, introductory, early in 1516. The book was first printed at Louvain, late in 1516, under the editorship of Erasmus, Peter Giles, and other of More’s friends in Flanders. It was then revised by More, and printed by Frobenius at Basle in November, 1518. It was reprinted at Paris and Vienna, but was not printed in England during More’s lifetime. Its first publication in this country was in the English translation, made in Edward’s VI.’s reign (1551) by Ralph Robinson. It was translated with more literary skill by Gilbert Burnet, in 1684, soon after he had conducted the defence of his friend Lord William Russell, attended his execution, vindicated his memory, and been spitefully deprived by James II. of his lectureship at St. Clement’s. Burnet was drawn to the translation of “Utopia” by the same sense of unreason in high places that caused More to write the book. Burnet’s is the translation given in this volume. The name of the book has given an adjective to our language—we call an impracticable scheme Utopian. Yet, under the veil of a playful fiction, the talk is intensely earnest, and abounds in practical suggestion. It is the work of a scholarly and witty Englishman, who attacks in his own way the chief political and social evils of his time. Beginning with fact, More tells how he was sent into Flanders with Cuthbert Tunstal, “whom the king’s majesty of late, to the great rejoicing of all men, did prefer to the office of Master of the Rolls;” how the commissioners of Charles met them at Bruges, and presently returned to Brussels for instructions; and how More then went to Antwerp, where he found a pleasure in the society of Peter Giles which soothed his desire to see again his wife and children, from whom he had been four months away. Then fact slides into fiction with the finding of Raphael Hythloday (whose name, made of two Greek words [Greek text] and [Greek text], means “knowing in trifles”), a man who had been with Amerigo Vespucci in the three last of the voyages to the new world lately discovered, of which the account had been first printed in 1507, only nine years before Utopia was written. Designedly fantastic in suggestion of details, “Utopia” is the work of a scholar who had read Plato’s “Republic,” and had his fancy quickened after reading Plutarch’s account of Spartan life under Lycurgus. Beneath the veil of an ideal communism, into which there has been worked some witty extravagance, there lies a noble English argument. Sometimes More puts the case as of France when he means England. Sometimes there is ironical praise of the good faith of Christian kings, saving the book from censure as a political attack on the policy of Henry VIII. Erasmus wrote to a friend in 1517 that he should send for More’s “Utopia,” if he had not read it, and “wished to see the true source of all political evils.” And to More Erasmus wrote of his book, “A burgomaster of Antwerp is so pleased with it that he knows it all by heart.” Sir Thomas More, son of Sir John More, a justice of the King’s Bench, was born in 1478, in Milk Street, in the city of London. After his earlier education at St. Anthony’s School, in Threadneedle Street, he was placed, as a boy, in the household of Cardinal John Morton, Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor. It was not unusual for persons of wealth or influence and sons of good families to be so established together in a relation of patron and client. The youth wore his patron’s livery, and added to his state. The patron used, afterwards, his wealth or influence in helping his young client forward in the world.

Among the notable books of later times-we may say, without exaggeration, of all time--must be reckoned The Confessions of Jean Jacques Rousseau. It deals with leading personages and transactions of a momentous epoch, when absolutism and feudalism were rallying for their last struggle against the modern spirit, chiefly represented by Voltaire, the Encyclopedists, and Rousseau himself--a struggle to which, after many fierce intestine quarrels and sanguinary wars throughout Europe and America, has succeeded the prevalence of those more tolerant and rational principles by which the statesmen of our own day are actuated. On these matters, however, it is not our province to enlarge; nor is it necessary to furnish any detailed account of our author's political, religious, and philosophic axioms and systems, his paradoxes and his errors in logic: these have been so long and so exhaustively disputed over by contending factions that little is left for even the most assiduous gleaner in the field. The inquirer will find, in Mr. John Money's excellent work, the opinions of Rousseau reviewed succinctly and impartially. The 'Contrat Social', the 'Lattres Ecrites de la Montagne', and other treatises that once aroused fierce controversy, may therefore be left in the repose to which they have long been consigned, so far as the mass of mankind is concerned, though they must always form part of the library of the politician and the historian. One prefers to turn to the man Rousseau as he paints himself in the remarkable work before us. That the task which he undertook in offering to show himself--as Persius puts it--'Intus et in cute', to posterity, exceeded his powers, is a trite criticism; like all human enterprises, his purpose was only imperfectly fulfilled; but this circumstance in no way lessens the attractive qualities of his book, not only for the student of history or psychology, but for the intelligent man of the world. Its startling frankness gives it a peculiar interest wanting in most other autobiographies. Many censors have elected to sit in judgment on the failings of this strangely constituted being, and some have pronounced upon him very severe sentences. Let it be said once for all that his faults and mistakes were generally due to causes over which he had but little control, such as a defective education, a too acute sensitiveness, which engendered suspicion of his fellows, irresolution, an overstrained sense of honour and independence, and an obstinate refusal to take advice from those who really wished to befriend him; nor should it be forgotten that he was afflicted during the greater part of his life with an incurable disease. Lord Byron had a soul near akin to Rousseau's, whose writings naturally made a deep impression on the poet's mind, and probably had an influence on his conduct and modes of thought: In some stanzas of 'Childe Harold' this sympathy is expressed with truth and power; especially is the weakness of the Swiss philosopher's character summed up in the following admirable lines: "Here the self-torturing sophist, wild Rousseau, The apostle of affliction, he who threw Enchantment over passion, and from woe Wrung overwhelming eloquence, first drew The breath which made him wretched; yet he knew How to make madness beautiful, and cast O'er erring deeds and thoughts a heavenly hue Of words, like sunbeams, dazzling as they passed The eyes, which o'er them shed tears feelingly and fast. "His life was one long war with self-sought foes, Or friends by him self-banished; for his mind Had grown Suspicion's sanctuary, and chose, For its own cruel sacrifice, the kind, 'Gainst whom he raged with fury strange and blind. But he was frenzied,-wherefore, who may know? Since cause might be which skill could never find; But he was frenzied by disease or woe To that worst pitch of all, which wears a reasoning show."

Mülkiyet kar??t? ya?l? anar?ist, hayat?n?n son y?llar?nda ironik bir durumda kald?. ?svi?re vatanda?l???na girmenin yollar?n? arayan Bakunin'e sunulan se?enek, orada bir ev sahibi olmas?yd? ve belki de en hazini, sahip olaca?? bu ev nedeniyle, polisin, resm? tutanaklara “Michael Bakunin, rantiye” notunu dü?mesiydi. 18 May?s 1814'te Rusya'da do?an Michael Aleksandrovich Bakunin, 1 Temmuz 1876'da ?ldü?ünde ülkesinden ?ok uzaklardayd? ve cenazesinde yaln?zca 30–40 ki?i vard?. Gen? Bakunin i?in, “A?k, insan?n yeryüzündeki en üst misyonuydu. Bir insan?n kendini a?ks?z vermesi, Kutsal Ruh’a kar?? i?lenmi? bir günaht?”.. ?Kad?nlar taraf?ndan olduk?a ?ekici bulunan Mihail'in ise kad?nlarla ili?kisi hep ruhsal bir a?k olarak kald?.??svi?re'nin muhte?em manzaras? e?li?inde George Sand romanlar? okuyan Bakunin, Frans?z dü?üncesinin Alman dü?üncesinden üstün oldu?u inanc?n? sa?lamla?t?r?yordu. ? Bakunin, Marx i?in, “O, beni duygusal idealist olarak adland?r?yordu; hakl?yd?. Ben de onu, hoyrat, kendini be?enmi? ve ac?mas?z olarak de?erlendiriyordum; ben de hakl?yd?m” diyordu.. ? Kendisine ili?kin konularda kindar olmayan Bakunin, Herzen'in kar?s?na g?sterdi?i so?uklu?u hayat?n?n sonuna kadar unutamad?.?“Art?k reaksiyonun muzaffer gü?lerine kar?? Sisifos'un ta??n? yuvarlamak i?in ne gerekli güce ne de güvene sahibim. Bu yüzden, mücadeleden ?ekiliyor ve arkada?lar?mdan tek bir iyilik bekliyorum: "Unutulmak”,?Orta ve ge? on dokuzuncu yüzy?lda, radikal sol –yani, a?g?zlü kapitalizm ele?tirmenleri ve sanayi i??ilerinin ?zgürlü?ünün savunucular?– iki temel franksiyona ayr?l?yordu: Marksistler ve anar?istler. Kabaca s?ylemek gerekirse (ki bu son derece kar???k bir hik?yedir), kazanan Marksistler oldu ve yirminci yüzy?l?n tüm ba?ar?l? sol devrimleri –Rus, ?in ve Küba, ?rne?in– Marksist ilkelere ba?l?l?klar?n? ilan ettiler. ? Marksistler ile anar?istler aras?ndaki sava? bu noktada tarihsel bir meraktan ?te devam eden bir meseledir. Pi?man olmayan ya da ele?tirilmeyen tek ger?ek Marksist sol Kim Jong Il ve taraf etraftaki birka? entelektüel ve profes?rdür. Anar?izm ise uygulanabilir bir toplumsal hareket olarak ?kinci Dünya Sava??yla yava? yava? tükenmeye yüz tutmu?ken küreselle?me kar??t? hareket ve d?nemimizin di?er radikalizmleri i?inde yeniden dirilmeye ba?lam??t?r. ? Ne var ki, d?neminde –Marx’?n di?erleriyle aras?ndaki– bu sava? bir ?lüm kal?m meselesiydi ve Marksizm muhtemel kapitalizm kar??t? olarak ve yan? s?ra anar?izm kar??t? olarak tan?mlan?yordu. Asl?nda, Marx’?n yazarl??? anar?izme y?nelik sald?r?lar? a??s?ndan handiyse gülün? bir geni?li?e ula?m??t?r. Marx’?n Alman ?deolojisi kitab?n?n büyük b?lümü –yüzlerce sayfas?– bireyci/anar?ist Max Stirner’e y?nelik bir sald?r?dan ibarettir. Felsefenin Sefaleti Proudhon’a kar?? büyük?e bir fikir sava??d?r. Marx onca zaman ve enerjisini Bakunin’e sald?rmaya harcam??t?r: ?“dangalak!”?“canavar, et ve ya? y???n?,” “sap?k” vesaire: ?bu tabirler, has?mlar? s?z konusu oldu?unda Marx’?n bildik üslubudur: yazarl??? yar? bilimsel inceleme, yar? s?zlü tacizdir. Marx’?n, gerek kendi a?z?ndan gerekse de kimi s?zcülerini kullanarak ony?llar boyunca y?neltti?i ve muhtemelen di?erleri denli e?lenceli olmayan var olan su?lamas?, Bakunin’in bir muhbir oldu?u y?nündeydi ve Marx’?n bu ba?ar?l? sald?r?lar? nihayetinde Bakunin’in Enternasyonal ???i Z?mb?rt?s?ndan tasfiyesine yol a?t?.. ?

《星云禅话》系为佛光山山宗长星云大师应各方对于禅的需渴反应，将刊载于报纸的“星云禅话”编集成书。该书从已出版的禅话一至四集，精心选辑了一百三十二则公案，希望透过生活性、人间性的“禅话”，为忙碌、紧张的今日社会，投下一剂清凉散。