●从未有哪个时代像今天一样，科学让人类社会以肉眼可见的速度向前演化。这场两千多年的长程奔跑似乎来到了冲刺阶段，不断有人做出世界末日的预言，那么，科学*终带给我们的究竟是生存还是毁灭？科学研究的目的究竟是什么？科学能告诉我们*真理吗？ 带着这样的终极关怀，《人人都该懂的科学哲学》首先讲述了科学脱离哲学、独立成长的过程，然后以智慧设计论、弦理论、占星术、有神论、社会建构主义、女性主义等充满争议的问题为例，辨析了科学的定义、方法和目的，科学和社会的关系。伟大的科学哲学家亚里士多德、笛卡儿、休谟、培根、波普尔、库恩等纷纷出场，上演了一场绵亘数千年的*辩论。 面对未来的挑战，无论人类能否破解“公地悲剧”、实现星际殖民、活到长生不老，杰弗里·戈勒姆以科学哲学的视角安慰我们：“当生命终结，人类文化仍然存在，只不过是存在于过去。希望它永远存在就太过分了，无异于希望巴黎时时处处是春天。” ●《人人都该懂的科学哲学》属于湛庐文化重磅推出的“新核心素养”系列图书之一。本系列图书致力于推广通识阅读，扩展读者的阅读面，培养批判性思考的能力。其中涵盖了哲学、心理学、法律、艺术、物理学、生物科技等诸多人文科学和自然科学的知识，其中《人人都该懂的科学哲学》的内容涵盖了科学哲学的核心思想，让你一本书了解科学哲学的核心智慧。

Human reason, in one sphere of its cognition, is called upon to consider questions, which it cannot decline, as they are presented by its own nature, but which it cannot answer, as they transcend every faculty of the mind. It falls into this difficulty without any fault of its own. It begins with principles, which cannot be dispensed with in the field of experience, and the truth and sufficiency of which are, at the same time, insured by experience. With these principles it rises, in obedience to the laws of its own nature, to ever higher and more remote conditions. But it quickly discovers that, in this way, its labours must remain ever incomplete, because new questions never cease to present themselves; and thus it finds itself compelled to have recourse to principles which transcend the region of experience, while they are regarded by common sense without distrust. It thus falls into confusion and contradictions, from which it conjectures the presence of latent errors, which, however, it is unable to discover, because the principles it employs, transcending the limits of experience, cannot be tested by that criterion. The arena of these endless contests is called Metaphysic.Time was, when she was the queen of all the sciences; and, if we take the will for the deed, she certainly deserves, so far as regards the high importance of her object-matter, this title of honour. Now, it is the fashion of the time to heap contempt and scorn upon her; and the matron mourns, forlorn and forsaken, like Hecuba: At first, her gover Modo maxima rerum, Tot generis, natisque potens... Nunc trahor exul, inops. —Ovid, Metamorphoses. xiii under the administration of the dogmatists, was an absolute despotism. But, as the legislative continued to show traces of the ancient barbaric rule, her empire gradually broke up, and intestine wars introduced the reign of anarchy; while the sceptics, like nomadic tribes, who hate a permanent habitation and settled mode of living, attacked from time to time those who had organized themselves into civil communities. But their number was, very happily, small; and thus they could not entirely put a stop to the exertions of those who persisted in raising new edifices, although on no settled or uniform plan. In recent times the hope dawned upon us of seeing those disputes settled, and the legitimacy of her claims established by a kind of physiology of the human understanding—that of the celebrated Locke. But it was found that—although it was affirmed that this so-called queen could not refer her descent to any higher source than that of common experience, a circumstance which necessarily brought suspicion on her claims—as this genealogy was incorrect, she persisted in the advancement of her claims to sovereignty. Thus metaphysics necessarily fell back into the antiquated and rotten constitution of dogmatism, and again became obnoxious to the contempt from which efforts had been made to save it. At present, as all methods, according to the general persuasion, have been tried in vain, there reigns nought but weariness and complete indifferentism—the mother of chaos and night in the scientific world, but at the same time the source of, or at least the prelude to, the re-creation and reinstallation of a science, when it has fallen into confusion, obscurity, and disuse from ill directed effort. I do not mean by this a criticism of books and systems, but a critical inquiry into the faculty of reason, with reference to the cognitions to which it strives to attain without the aid of experience; in other words, the solution of the question regarding the possibility or impossibility of metaphysics, and the determination of the origin, as well as of the extent and limits of this science. All this must be done on the basis of principles. ABOUT AUTHOR: That all our knowledge begins with experience there can be no doubt. For how is it possible that the faculty of cognition should be awakened into exercise otherwise than by means of objects which affect our senses, and partly of themselves produce representations, partly rouse our powers of understanding into activity, to compare to connect, or to separate these, and so to convert the raw material of our sensuous impressions into a knowledge of objects, which is called experience? In respect of time, therefore, no knowledge of ours is antecedent to experience, but begins with it. But, though all our knowledge begins with experience, it by no means follows that all arises out of experience. For, on the contrary, it is quite possible that our empirical knowledge is a compound of that which we receive through impressions, and that which the faculty of cognition supplies from itself (sensuous impressions giving merely the occasion), an addition which we cannot distinguish from the original element given by sense, till long practice has made us attentive to, and skilful in separating it. It is, therefore, a question which requires close investigation, and not to b

A fi rom?n? ?E o ru?ine!“, exclama Cioran. ?n ce m?sur? filosoful de la Paris avea dreptate? Ce ?nseamn? ?a fi rom?n“ ?ntr-o fals? tranzi?ie care aparent nu se mai termin?? La aceste ?i multe alte ?ntreb?ri ?ncearc? s? r?spund? scriitorul Ionel Necula ?n opus-ul de fa??, care ?nsumeaz? analize ale r?sturn?rilor sociale evidente, ?nregistrate ?n ultimii ?aptesprezece ani. Nu ?ntotdeauna comod, spiritul coroziv al autorului ??i spune cuv?ntul, av?nd uneori accente incendiare.

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

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.

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.“

当今社会，到处洋溢着“透明”的热情，而人们的当务之急是培养一下对距离的热情。 距离和羞耻心无法被纳资本、信息及交际的高速循环。因此，人们便以“透明”的名义消除了所有谨慎的回旋余地。它们被照得通亮，被剥夺殆尽。世界也因此变得更加无耻、更加赤裸。 恰恰于信任不在时，人们对“透明”的呼求声才愈发响亮。在以信任为基础的社会中，人们是不会执意要求透明的。透明社会是一个不信任的、怀疑的社会，由于信任日渐消失，社会便始依赖监控。对透明的大声呼求恰恰表明，社会的道德基础已然脆弱不堪，真诚、正直等道德价值越来越失去意义。 作为一项新的社会命令，透明正在取代日渐式微的道德审查机构。 ------------- 韩炳哲作品系列（见识城邦出品）（已出齐） 《精神政治学》（2019年3月） Psychopolitik 《爱欲之死》（2019年3月） Agonie des Eros 《在群中》（2019年3月） Im Schwarm 《他者的消失》（2019年6月） Die Austreibung des Anderen 《倦怠社会》（2019年6月） Müdigkeitsgesellschaft 《娱乐何为》（2019年6月） Gute Unterhaltung 《暴力拓扑学》（2019年10月） Topologie der Gewalt 《透明社会》（2019年10月） Transparenzgesellschaft 《美的救赎》（2019年10月） Die Errettung des Sch?nen

本书首先依据西方马克思主义探讨了马克思主义的“真精神”，特别是探讨了马克思主义与哲学，以及马克思主义哲学与本体论之关系，然后着重从马克思主义的思考角度和范式来审视和反思当今的世界，特别是当今的中国。本书通过对马克思走向政治经济学批判的三次飞跃的分析，发出了“回归政治经济学批判”的呼唤；用马克思两大发现的整体视角剖析了资本主义的“经济人”，并基于此对当今学术界的一些人无原则地宣扬“经济人”展了批判；揭示了改革放以来我国学术界理解马克思主义哲学的三种路向，特别是批判了对马克思主义做启蒙主义和后现代主义解释的缺陷；归纳了马克思主义哲学与中国道路的双向促；用马克思主义公平观审视了社会的不平等，用马克思主义生态观审视了生态危机；描述了“马中西”三大资源在中国道路中的交互汇通。

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。

我们看的动画片里的狮子在说着人类的语言，蛇说出了邪恶的诅咒，小马们会爆发出快乐的笑声，小猪一家过着像人类家庭一样的生活。然而，在现实生活中， 如果动物真的会说话，那么我们该如何反应？ 如果动物会说话，我们是否就一定可以听懂？ 如果动物真的能感知世界，它们又是如何看待人类的? 当一只猫或狗到底是什么感觉? 猫和狗知道自己浑身是毛吗？ 我们为什么把狗当作儿子，却把猫称为主子？ 在《假如猫狗会说话》一书中，史文德森研究了人类是如何试图理解其他动物（从黑猩猩到章鱼，但他主要关注的是我们日常生活中近的动物——猫和狗）的生活的，并深探讨了动物的交流、心智、自我意识、孤独和悲伤，但基本的问题还是人类和动物如何共同生活并建立友谊。这本有趣而又发人深省的书，可以帮助动物爱好者和宠物主人对动物和人类自身有更一步的理解。

《传习录》是记录王阳明思想的语录体著作。初由王阳明的首徒徐爱提议，经由路侃、南大吉、钱德洪等众人之手，后形成了现在通行的三卷本《传习录》。书后附有《朱子晚年定论》。 “传习”一词，语自《论语·学而》:“曾子曰:‘吾日三省吾身，为人谋而不忠乎 ? 与朋友交而不信乎? 传不习乎 ?’” 传，是老师向学生传授知识；习，不仅仅指学生对老师所传授的知识行学习、温习，更是践习。全书采用学生问，王阳明答的形式展，又收有一些书信，内容丰富，王阳明的主要哲学观，“心即理”“知行合一”“致良知”和“万物一体”等，?在《传习录》中均有体现。王阳明心学是中国心性儒学的高峰，黄宗羲在《明儒学案》中说:“有明之学，至白沙始精微，......至阳明而后大。”钱穆认为，《传习录》是中国人的七部经典之一。梁启超称，学阳明先生思想，应读《传习录》。

全书分四编。编考察儒、道对政治义务的看法。“政治义务”是西方政治哲学使用的概念，主要追问“人可否独立于国家之外？”这样的问题，在儒家那里，体现为所谓“君臣之义”。儒家为政治义务行辩护，而道家不认为存在政治义务这样的东西。第二编讨论孝道难题。儒家认为成年子女对父母负有不可推卸的义务（亦即“孝”），而道家不承认有这样的义务，道家还对儒家的道德至上主义整体持一种消极评价。第三编介绍儒、道关于女性的看法。儒家以阴阳模式说明两性关系，阴（女）与阳（男）既有互补的一面，同时，阴（女）对阳（男）又有服从的一面。道家同样用阴阳模式理解男女关系，但更推崇阴（女性）的力量。第四编介绍儒、道对动物的态度。虽然儒家与道家都诉诸“自然论证”，却得出相反的结论，前者认为自然赋予了人类使用动物的合理性，后者却反对人类使用动物。

细论老子之学，极其博大而尽精微，极其悠久而通造化，以自然为宗，大道为体，以天地为炉，以万物为化。其内修，重在以清虚谦退自守，以柔弱卑下自持，以恬憺寂静自适，以归真返朴自颐。其应世之法，则以无为为大为，以无用为大用，以无治为至治，以不争为至争。广大精微，本末备具，与时推移，因物变化，综三代之统，赅百家之长。本书分八大部份，层层解析：（1）本文。（2）章旨。（3）注释。（4）传统译解。（5）玄妙义疏。（6）周易贯通之参悟。（7）南华经旁通。（8）史証之启示与应世之方。 本书之完成，但愿「道」「德」的木铎声，成为提升人类精神境界的「加油站」，共勉之。

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》。

由中国人民大学哲学院教授李秋零主编、主译的《康德著作全集》（9卷本），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。

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。

本书是在中国人民大学哲学院举办的讲座“哲学的星空”季的基础上整理汇集而成的。本书分别阐述了阅读《资本论》的难度和门槛、斯金纳的技治术、实验哲学的兴起及其意义、批判性阅读与写作、道家的自然观念、生命复制的两种含义、罗尔斯的“公平的机会平等”思想、民法典与中国社会的伦理走向、“格义”之广狭二义及其在佛教中国化中的历史作用、中国哲学形上学、身份政治时代的社会正义、先秦法家的历史际遇与价值重估、从“哲学”到“中国哲学”、晚年恩格斯正义观的实践逻辑，各位学者或深分析了新的哲学问题，或对经典文本和经典命题做出新阐释。

人生的目的和价值何在？怎样获取人生的幸福？每个人都会追问自己这些问题。 本书是著名哲学家冯友兰重要代表作，分为两部分：“一种人生观”和“人生与哲学”，共计21篇文章。部分是其20世纪20年代的冯友兰重要著作《一种人生观》一书，第二部分“人生与哲学”是冯友兰文章精选，是对《一种人生观》所阐述的人生哲学观念的补充。在本书中，冯友兰先生从哲学角度，于中国传统文化的精神与血脉之中摄取养分，为我们提供了人生观问题的一种答案。