《道德形而上学的奠基（注释本）》以普鲁士王家科学院本（通称“科学院版”）为底本，全部直从德文译出，原文为拉丁文的则直从拉丁文译出。科学院版《全集》包含了康德生前公发表的所有著作和文章，并且经过了德文编辑者的详细校勘。中译者在翻译过程中参考了已有的各种译本，同时也对一些名词、术语提出了自己的独到见解。中译者以其在西方哲学、宗教学、语言学方面的深厚学养，以及十年如一日的苦心孤诣，为我们提供了一个可信、可读的康德著作文本，对康德翻译与研究作出了不朽的贡献。

《幸福之路》是英国哲学家罗素所写的一本关于生活哲理的书。全书分为《不幸福的原因》和《幸福的原因》两部分。罗素将自己的经验和观察证实过的意见归纳总结起来，分析了我们不幸的原因，并告诉我们如何凭着适当的努力变得幸福。罗素在该书中讨论了各种常见的问题，如生存竞争、烦闷、嫉妒、疲劳等，这些会造成人们感到不幸福的原因，并阐述了自己认为可以避免的方式。又从情爱、工作、家庭等方面分析，怎样获得真正的幸福。

　本书收录了*能代表弗洛伊德后期思想的三篇作品，分别是《超越唯乐原则》《集体心理学和自我分析》《自我与本我》。 《超越唯乐原则》提出唯乐原则和现实原则是控制心理活动的两种原则，并借助对移情现象的观察，推论出生的本能与死亡本能的对立。《集体心理学和自我分析》借助力比多理论阐释集体心理结构，将个体心理现象与集体心理现象相联系，并认为这些心理现象是一种原始部落状态的残留。*后，推论出自我与自我理想的对立。《自我与本我》通过将人类精神生活区分为意识、无意识以及潜意识，并借助前两文的结论，构建出人格结构三分法（本我、自我、超我）。

《沉思录》是斯多葛派的代表性作品，在西方哲学史上具有重要地位。作者马可·奥勒留在自己的一篇篇箴言随笔中，对宇宙、社会、人生展了一系列思考，为后人留下了一位有哲学修养的统治者的人生感悟。这些从灵魂深处流淌出的文字，直生命的本质，以至于当今社会的人们仍能与之产生共鸣，让我们持续的焦虑得以缓解，浮躁的灵魂得以安顿。

什么是比知识、智能更高的状态？心如何才能自由自在？人如何通达生死而出于生死？种种我们面对生命的处境和疑惑，《心经》都有核心深的解答。星云大师讲《心经》，透过一则又一则生动的故事，以及佛法的真义，让我们了解《心经》、活用《心经》，在生活中成就本然、美好的生命。

是谁提出“人不能两次踏同一条河流”？为什么斯宾诺莎是被骂名包围的哲学家？ 俄罗斯的飞翔的双头鹰国徽有着怎样的历史渊源？……这些我们都该知道。

本书作者依据其独创的思想构境理论这样一种新的文本解读方式，破了以往那种用传统哲学解释框架反注列宁思想的研究方法，真正诚实地从列宁当时所处的政治与学术争论语境出发，拟现了列宁的读书思路，探讨了列宁理解和发展唯物辩证法思想程中的重要逻辑转变和飞跃性认识的深层意义，揭示出列宁的“哲学笔记”其实是一部经过编辑加工的学术“混成品”，并对其中各个部分尤其是对列宁在一战爆发之际关于黑格尔的哲学笔记行了卓越的解读。

【内容简介】 本书梳理了莫里斯符号学思想的理论渊源，探讨了莫里斯符号学的多元的、折中的、对话性建构方法，归纳了莫里斯符号类型学和话语类型学呈现出的多元而动态的特点，总结了莫里斯符号学的历史贡献，凸显了莫里斯符号学思想的相对优越性，阐释了莫里斯符号学在现代符号学发展中所起到的承上启下的开拓性作用以及在奠定现代符号学跨学科性质方面的突出贡献，进一步证明了莫里斯符号学整体性研究观念在语言学理论、诗歌以及视觉艺术研究中的影响，归纳出了莫里斯符号学思想对于当代学术研究的跨学科的、多元的启迪意义。

生活是自己创造的。每个人都会时常面临来自生活、工作和社会的各种各样的问题。我们的处世方法、工作态度、努力程度、思维方式和心态信念等等决定了我们一生的成败。不论干什么，我们都希望自己能够成功，都试图尽量避免失败或走弯路。每天翻翻这本富有哲理性的“枕边书”，能够让你豁然开朗。

本书结合考古发现、辑佚资料、传世文献及学界成果，主要从思想史、学术史、文学史的角度手，着力于理清孟子与汉代四家诗之间的深层渊源，并对《孟子》在汉代《诗》学发展中的地位和作用予以重新探讨。正文共分五章。章是对孟子与战国秦汉《诗》学发展关系的纵向考察，主要从学术渊源、地缘关系、时代变换与孟子地位变迁三个层面，探讨孟子与周秦两汉的《诗》学渊源。第二、三、四、五章分别以鲁、齐、韩、毛四家诗为主体，从各自的学术渊源、经学特征、诗学主旨、诗义承袭和学者受等角度，分析了孟子与四家诗的深层关联。

本套装包括《逻辑思考的100个关键》《超级大脑的七个习惯》《脑力赋能》《魔力大脑》。

Pamfletul Sim?ul comun (1776) a fost un veritabil best-seller ?n epoc?, succesul de care s-a bucurat reflect?ndu-se ?n numeroasele republic?ri. Lucrarea pledeaz?, cu argumente solide, pentru separarea total? a coloniilor americane de Marea Britanie, invoc?nd drepturile naturale ale oamenilor, egalitatea ?i suveranitatea fiec?rei fiin?e, supunerea doar fa?? de lege ?i caracterul absurd al institu?iei monarhiei. Autorul surprinde cu verv? ?i fine?e toate circumstan?ele favorabile desprinderii de patria-mam?, ?ndemn?ndu-?i concet??enii s?-?i decid? singuri soarta.

It is remarkable how closely the history of the Apple-tree is connected with that of man. The geologist tells us that the order of the Rosaceae, which includes the Apple, also the true Grasses, and the Labiatae, or Mints, were introduced only a short time previous to the appearance of man on the globe.

At the time Thoreau made this wilderness canoe trip he was forty years old. The record of the journey is the latter half of his The Maine Woods, which is perhaps the finest idyl of the forest ever written. It is particularly charming in its blending of meditative and poetic fancies with the minute description of the voyager’s experiences.

The Phaedrus is closely connected with the Symposium, and may be regarded either as introducing or following it. The two Dialogues together contain the whole philosophy of Plato on the nature of love, which in the Republic and in the later writings of Plato is only introduced playfully or as a figure of speech. But in the Phaedrus and Symposium love and philosophy join hands, and one is an aspect of the other. The spiritual and emotional part is elevated into the ideal, to which in the Symposium mankind are described as looking forward, and which in the Phaedrus, as well as in the Phaedo, they are seeking to recover from a former state of existence.

The Protagoras, like several of the Dialogues of Plato, is put into the mouth of Socrates, who describes a conversation which had taken place between himself and the great Sophist at the house of Callias—'the man who had spent more upon the Sophists than all the rest of the world'—and in which the learned Hippias and the grammarian Prodicus had also shared, as well as Alcibiades and Critias, both of whom said a few words—in the presence of a distinguished company consisting of disciples of Protagoras and of leading Athenians belonging to the Socratic circle.

Our next task is to study coming-to-be and passing-away. We are to distinguish the causes, and to state the definitions, of these processes considered in general-as changes predicable uniformly of all the things that come-to-be and pass-away by nature. Further, we are to study growth and 'alteration'. We must inquire what each of them is; and whether 'alteration' is to be identified with coming-to-be, or whether to these different names there correspond two separate processes with distinct natures.

Das Buch besteht aus vier Teilen. Der erste Teil erschien 1883, der zweite und dritte 1884, der vierte 1885 als Privatdruck. 1886 ver?ffentlichte Nietzsche die drei ersten Teile als ?Also sprach Zarathustra. Ein Buch für Alle und Keinen. In drei Teilen.“ Im Gegensatz zu den frühen Werken Nietzsches handelt es sich beim Zarathustra nicht um ein Sachbuch. In hymnischer Prosa berichtet ein personaler Erz?hler vom Wirken eines fiktiven Denkers, der den Namen des Persischen Religionsstifters Zarathustra tr?gt. Nietzsche selbst nennt den Stil, in dem Also sprach Zarathustra geschrieben ist, halkyonisch und wünscht sich Leser, die eines ?gleichen Pathos f?hig und würdig sind“: ?Man muss vor Allem den Ton, der aus diesem Munde kommt, diesen halkyonischen Ton richtig h?ren, um dem Sinn seiner Weisheit nicht erbarmungswürdig Unrecht zu tun“. Dass Nietzsche diese Leserschaft in seiner Gegenwart nicht gesehen hat, legt der Untertitel des Werkes nahe: ?Ein Buch für Alle und Keinen“.

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) este o figur? legendar? a filosofiei germane, opera sa fiind baza ? revolu?iei copernicane“ petrecute ?n istoria g?ndirii ?n plin? er? de av?nt al romantismului. ?n volumul de fa?? sunt cuprinse dou? eseuri foarte pu?in cunoscute publicului amator de filosofie, ?n care vom reg?si g?ndurile filosofului privitoare la ?nceputuri (ale istoriei omenirii) ?i sf?r?ituri (ale lumii ?n general). Scrise dup? celebra triad? a ? Criticilor“, textele poart? amprenta sistemului kantian de g?ndire, dar constituie totodat? ?ncerc?ri remarcabile de abordare a unor subiecte de larg interes, analizate din perspectiva ve?nicei clauze a ? condi?iilor de posibilitate“. Orice minte uman? care va ?ncerca s? cuprind? ?nceputul ?i sf?r?itul se va vedea constr?ns? ?ntr-un fel sau ?n altul de limitele pe care Kant ?ncearc? s? le expun? aici ?n idei c?t mai simple.? Istoria naturii ?ncepe a?adar cu binele, c?ci este lucrarea lui Dumnezeu, iar istoria libert??ii cu r?ul, c?ci este lucrarea oamenilor. Pentru individ, care, ?n exerci?iul libert??ii prive?te doar c?tre sine, o astfel de schimbare a fost o pierdere pentru natur?, ale c?rei scopuri sunt orientate spre oameni ca specie, a fost un c??tig.“

Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea (1855-1920), critic literar ?i politician intelectual, s-a num?rat printre primii sociologi ai Rom?niei. Lucrarea de fa??, care ?ncheie celebrul studiu Neoiobagia, constituie prima analiz? bine ?ntemeiat? a vie?ii sociale care a caracterizat Rom?nia ?ntre 1866 ?i Al Doilea R?zboi Mondial, fiind o concluzie ?i totodata o sintez? a acestui studiu.Dincolo de cifre ?i de personajele citate, dincolo de obiectele specifice ale analizei, cititorul r?bd?tor poate descoperi c?, sub forma diferit?, vom g?si de data aceasta un fond: fibra profund? din care se ?mpletesc ve?nicele noastre probleme na?ionale.? ?i doar? din cele spuse se vede clar unde rezid? r?ul ??rii. O organiza?ie social? ?i de stat antagonic? ?i contradictorie, care preface institu?iile ei ?n aparen?e ?i minciun?. O via?? politic? ?i economic? plin? de resturi feudale, care nu vor s? moar?, ?i bazat? pe capitalismul modern,care nu poate ?nc? s? tr?iasc?.“ - Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea

Lucrarea aceasta se bazeaz? pe teza de doctorat a autorului, sus?inut? ?n iunie 2008, Problema drept??ii ?i restituirea propriet??ilor ?n Rom?nia post-decembrist?, fiind ?ns? o versiune modificat? a tezei. Dup? cum m?rturise?te autorul, unele pasaje tehnice au fost adaptate, pentru a putea fi u?or inteligibile pentru publicul larg. Cartea de fa?? este rezultatul unor ample cercet?ri, ?ncepute ?n 2002. ?Nu mai cred c? principala datorie a filosofului moral este de a produce ?solu?ii? (sentin?e) la problemele etice percepute ca atare ?ntr-un univers social. […] La fel ca ?ntr-un tribunal, pledoariile sunt utile, ?i e bine s? se foloseasc? de argumente c?t mai puternice ?i mai rafinate. Dar, la fel cum cercetarea ?n materie de drept nu-?i poate propune ca obiectiv principal producerea de pledoarii specific avoca?ilor (cu toate c? examinarea fundamentelor legii poate conferi o greutate suplimentar? unei pledoarii particulare sau alteia), tot a?a cercetarea de ordin etic nu-?i poate propune ca obiectiv ceva similar pledoariilor.“ Con?inutul este organizat ?n 7 capitole, concluzii ?i o bibliografie, util? f?r? ?ndoial? pentru oricine ar dori s? aprofundeze chestiunile abordate de autor. Introducerea este urmat? de o discu?ie conceptual? ?i metodologic? despre repara?ie (capitolul 2), rectificare, restitu?ie, drepturile de proprietate ?i evaluarea moral? a restitu?iei. Celelalte capitole se ocup? de urm?toarele teme: nedreptatea na?ionaliz?rii (capitolul 3), restitu?ia post-comunist? (capitolul 4), argumentul coasian (capitolul 5), restitu?ia ?i dreptatea transgenera?ional? (capitolul 6), principiul nozickian al rectific?rii nedrept??ilor (capitolul 7). ?Am ?ncercat apoi s? analizez ce anume presupune c?utarea unui r?spuns la o ?ntrebare de tipul ?Este restitu?ia justificat? ?? (?n 2.3.) Rezultatul important, cred, a fost acela c? nu exist? un r?spuns simplu, ?i c? o astfel de ?ntrebare este prost formulat?. Am propus ?n loc alte cinci ?ntreb?ri, mai precise : dac? actul na?ionaliz?rii a fost unul nedrept, dac? o politic? restitutiv? risc? sau nu s? ?ndrepte o nedreptate trecut? ?nf?ptuind o alta, dac? putem identifica cu precizie obiectele restitu?iei ?i dac? orizontul temporal introduce elemente importante ?n cadrul de evaluare moral? (at?t ca atare, c?t ?i ?n dimensiunea sa intergenera?ional?). ?n primul r?nd, putem afirma c? politica aleas? imediat dup? 1989 (cea a men?inerii status-quo-ului, ?n speran?a c? lucrurile se vor rezolva cumva de la sine sau ca o solu?ie ideal? se va prezenta ?n mod miraculos) a fost at?t lipsit? de vreo justificare moral?, c?t ?i neinspirat? din punct de vedere pragmatic.“