When the war broke out at Alexandria, Caesar sent to Rhodes, Syria, and Cilicia, for all his fleet; and summoned archers from Crete, and cavalry from Malchus, king of the Nabatheans. He likewise ordered military engines to be provided, corn to be brought, and forces dispatched to him. Meanwhile he daily strengthened his fortifications by new works; and such parts of the town as appeared less tenable were strengthened with testudos and mantelets. Openings were made in the walls, through which the battering-rams might play; and the fortifications were extended over whatever space was covered with ruins, or taken by force. For Alexandria is in a manner secure from fire, because the houses are all built without joists or wood, and are all vaulted, and roofed with tile or pavement.

Julius Caesar, holding the election as dictator, was himself appointed consul with Publius Servilius; for this was the year in which it was permitted by the laws that he should be chosen consul. This business being ended, as credit was beginning to fail in Italy, and the debts could not be paid, he determined that arbitrators should be appointed: and that they should make an estimate of the possessions and properties of the debtors, how much they were worth before the war, and that they should be handed over in payment to the creditors. This he thought the most likely method to remove and abate the apprehension of an abolition of debt, the usual consequence of civil wars and dissensions, and to support the credit of the debtors.

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.

Eve's Ransom is the story of a mechanical draughtsman named Maurice Hilliard, who comes into some money, which enables him to live without working. As part of his resulting travels, he meets and falls in love with Eve Madeley, a book keeper.

A son was born to a poor peasant. He rejoiced and went to a neighbour to ask him to stand as godfather to the boy. The neighbour refused. He did not want to be godfather to a poor man’s son. So the peasant went to another neighbour and he, too, refused. He walked from house to house, but could find no one who would be godfather to his son, so he set out to another village.

On Interpretation is among the earliest surviving philosophical works in the Western tradition to deal with the relationship between language and logic in a comprehensive, explicit, and formal way.

The reasons for some animals being long-lived and others short-lived, and, in a word, causes of the length and brevity of life.

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.

Satisfacerea neîngr?dit? a nevoilor instinctuale ale omului este oare compatibil? cu limit?rile impuse de progresul civiliza?iei? Lansat? de Freud în celebrul text Disconfort în cultur? (1930), întrebarea este reluat? peste un sfert de veac de c?tre Herbert Marcuse, eminent filosof din ?coala de la Frankfurt. În vreme ce Freud ofer? un r?spuns pesimist, vorbind despre inevitabila subjugare a instinctelor umane de c?tre societatea represiv?, Marcuse întrevede o cale de îmblânzire a agresivit??ii Civiliza?iei prin for?a unificatoare, vital? ?i ludic? a Erosului. Solu?iile de emancipare sugerate de c?tre Marcuse au influen?at profund mi?c?rile studen?e?ti, ecologice, anticolonialiste sau de eliberare sexual? din ultima jum?tate de secol. De aceea interesul pentru criticile sale trece dincolo de ?tiin?ele socio-umane, înspre to?i cei ce vor s? în?eleag? mecanismele alienante ale „societ??ii abunden?ei“. Acest eseu folose?te categorii psihologice, deoarece ele au devenit categorii politice. Exist? procese psihice, alt?dat? autonome ?i identificabile, care sunt absorbite de func?ia individului în stat - de c?tre existen?a sa public?. Problemele psihologice se transform? a?adar în probleme politice. ?– Herbert Marcuse Pornind de la Freud ?i de la tradi?ia eliberatoare a filosofiei ?i culturii, Marcuse schi?eaz? tabloul unei civiliza?ii în care alienarea ?i reprimarea sunt înlocuite de dimensiunea libidinal? ?i nealienant? a muncii, jocului ?i sexualit??ii libere ?i deschise, toate acestea conducând mai departe c?tre emancipare ?i fericire. – Douglas Kellner, editor al seriei The Collected Papers of Herbert Marcuse

De numele lui Sigmund Freud (1856-1929) se leag? poate cea mai controversat? teorie din filosofia culturii ultimelor secole: psihanaliza. ?nceput? ca ?ntreprindere psihoterapeutic?, prima cur? – din punct de vedere istoric – ?n care rolul terapeutic revenea exclusiv cuv?ntului, psihanaliza a fost condus? de Freud ?n mod firesc ?i ?n direc?ia descoperirii resorturilor abisale ale culturii.Disconfort ?n cultur? (1930) este o lucrare de maturitate ?n care p?rintele psihanalizei investigheaz? mecanismele care men?in coeziunea social?, respectiv contraponderea lor, manifestat? prin senza?ia de disconfort care ?nso?e?te mai mult sau mai pu?in evident fiin?a social?.?Supraeul unui epoci culturale are o origine asem?n?toare cu a celui individual; se sprijin? pe impresia pe care au l?sat-o mari personalit??i conduc?toare, oameni de o for?? spiritual? cople?itoare sau cei la care una dintre tendin?ele umane a g?sit configura?ia cea mai puternic? ?i mai pur?, de aceea adesea ?i cea mai unilateral?.“ - Sigmund Freud

《论证是一门学问》是一本清晰、简洁、实用、有趣的论证规则手册。本手册能够使你的文章、谈话、辩论及论文写作更有理有据，更有说服力，更容易被读者、听众和对手欣然接受。 作者运用大量易于理解、趣味性十足、生活化的例证，归纳了 50 条论证规则，涵盖各学科、各种类型的论证。 本书首先告诉你构建简论的通则：如何从可靠的前提出发，如何理顺思路，如何使自己的论证简明、具体；其次，介绍了举例论证、因果论证和演绎论证，讨论了详论、口头陈述以及议论文写作和公共辩论所应遵循的规则；后，作者又揭开了论证过程中常见的谬误及陷阱。 《思维的模式》是20世纪伟大的思想家怀特海的代表著作之一，书中收录了他的九篇演讲，在这些演讲中，他阐述了自己综合性的思维模式。 现代科学给我们建立了一种思维模式，即在有限前提下作出假定。怀特海反对这种固有的思考模式。 他认为，我们不应该将自己的视野局限于此，而不思索世界和生活的整体。他认为哲学产生于好奇，如果缺乏兴趣，我们对任何问题的探讨都会是机械的。 怀特海所说的兴趣不是建立在对一般环境条件反射的基础之上，不是对琐碎细节的兴趣，他认为高级思维应该在世间万物中间建立联系，每一个事实都包含无限的细节，无限的细节会生发无数的结果。 这种综合的思维模式能够带给我们新颖的思考角度，开拓我们的视野，激发我们的创造力和创新性思维。它能够使我们打破固有的思考方式，建立灵活、多变的思维模式，实现学习、职场和生活的进阶。 《我们如何思维》是著名哲学家、教育学家约翰?杜威的代表作之一，详述了思维的过程和本质，并通过大量实例帮助我们提高思维能力。指出思维的本质并非记忆、听来的故事或偏见，而是经过批判、推理、论证结论之后的信念；提出了反省思维的必要性，表明只有正确思维才能提高规划与谋略能力，获取避免不良后果的措施；提供了进行思维训练的一系列步骤，包括加入逻辑推理要素，进行系统性的推论和试证，引入实例验证思维结果的正确性，等等。有助于我们对思维有一个全新而正确的认识，突破本能的禁锢，跳出思维舒适区，掌握科学有效的思维方法，并终提升实践活动中的效能。

Critica ra?iunii pure, tradus? de Nicolae Bagdasar ?i Elena Moisuc ?n 1969, a ajuns la cea de-a treia edi?ie. Cu acest prilej, profesorul dr. Ilie P?rvu, de la Facultatea de Filosofie a Universit??ii din Bucure?ti a ?ngrijit noua opera?ie de editare, fiind astfel corectate unele erori de tipar ?i unele inconsecven?e terminologice. Totodat?, exist? un motiv ?n plus pentru ca studen?ii care posed? edi?ia a II-a a traducerii, ap?rut? ?n 1995, s? apeleze ?i la cea de-a treia edi?ie: ?n aceasta din urm? au fost indicate diferen?ele dintre edi?ia I german? (din 1781) ?i edi?ia a II-a (din 1787).

Volumul red? circuitului public, pentru prima oar? ?n limba rom?n?, trei din operele g?nditorului atenian. Este vorba de Scrisori (?n num?r de treisprezece, deosebit de importante pentru cunoa?terea g?ndirii platoniciene, dar ?i pentru ?n?elegerea epocii ?i a personalit??ilor cu care a venit ?n contact filosoful), Dialoguri suspecte (Minos, Rivalii, Theages, Hipparhos, Clitofon) ?i Dialoguri apocrife (Axiohos, Despre drept, Despre virtute, Demodocus, Sisyfos, Eryxias).Traducerea apara?ine lui ?tefan Bezdechi, care a realizat ?i aparatul critic al Scrisorilor (introducere ?i note).

"A megsemmisülés rejtélyes sz?vege egyszerre filozófiai traktátus, misztikus beavatás és poszthumán próza. A kortárs irodalomban egyre inkább feler?s?dik ez a nem-antropocentrikus hang, mely nem emberi sorsokat akar elbeszélni, hanem a nyelv és az ember k?z?s hiányt?rténetére mutat rá. ?Mennyien kapaszkodtak a létbe, mint egy végtelen fa t?rzsébe” - írja Horváth Márk és Lovász ?dám, hiszen az emberi állapot csak a társadalmi, nyelvi és metafizikai katasztrófa terében értelmezhet?. Apokaliptikus (neo)romantika és abszurd k?ltészet. Az utolsó ember kézik?nyve a túlélés lehetetlenségér?l."Nemes Z. Márió Az Idegenre hárult a sors ajándéka, hogy els?ként az utolsó emberek k?zu?l végignézze minden ku?ls?dleges k?telék pusztulását, és bizalmát lelkébe, s?t a lelkén is túlra helyezze, minden emberit maga m?g?tt hagyva. Minden ház gerendái k?z?tt barátságok és szerelmek jól táplált holttestei indultak oszlásnak, míg csak a csont fehérlett ki a vízb?l. Mint rég elhagyott kik?t?k tornyai, olyan hívogatóak voltak ezek a csontok az új kor embere számára.

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

《印度哲学概论》原为梁漱溟于1918—1919年在北京大学哲学系教授印度哲学课程期间的讲义，后经修订由商务印书馆出版。全书分“印度各宗概略”“本体论”“认识论”“世间论”四篇，全面介绍了印度哲学各宗的思想及其与佛教的关系，启了学院派研究的先河，是中国现代印度哲学研究的典范之作。

《中国政治哲学史》（*卷）系统考察了老子、孔子、墨子、商鞅、孟子、庄子、荀子、韩非八位思想家，以及黄老学派、名家学派的政治哲学，希望以带面，由及面，逐步深，层层推，对中国先秦政治哲学史做出较为全面、系统的把握。本书在孔子的正名哲学、名家的政治哲学内涵、孟荀政治哲学的对比、道德与政治的关系、法家政治哲学的特色等方面提出了自己的看法，可供学界参考。本书由多位学者共同撰写，既相互呼应，又保持相对独立性，是一部集体合作完成的政治哲学史著作。

1840年之后，中国经历西方的冲，在政治合法性和社会秩序的原则的认知上都产生了根本性的变化，在这样的古今之变和中西之别的背景下，中国近代的政治思想家们一方面试图以中国古典的政治观念来吸纳乃至批判西方的启蒙政治思想，另一方面则又深感中西政治思想的巨大鸿沟。由此，这个时期的政治哲学呈现出明显的中西杂糅的特征。通过对康有为、章太炎、孙中山等人的政治哲学的分析，可以看到，传统儒家经典中的政治原则虽然始动摇，但依然是人们思考政治问题的出发。而西方的民权、自由、民主、立宪、共和等始成为中国政治理论的重要观念。在国家富强和民族独立的目标下，民族主义、保守主义和自由主义、社会主义等政治思潮衬托出这个时期政治哲学的创性和丰富性。

《中国的宗教：儒教与道教》是韦伯在宗教社会学上的第二本主要著作，与《新教伦理与资本主义精神》同属于三大卷本的《宗教社会学论文集》首卷。在本书中，韦伯专注于探索中国社会里那些与西欧不同的地方，以此突显西方基督教文明的特色，并且提出了一个问题：为什么资本主义没有在中国发展呢？韦伯所着手探讨的对象，特别是中国与印度，都是既庞大复杂又源远流长的文化体。身为西欧近代文明之子的韦伯遂以“理性化”作为其研究世界各大文化的“利器”。他的着眼在于：宗教与社会其他层面、理念与利益在人类文明的整体发展上究竟有着什么样的互动关系，在种种互动关系下呈现出怎样的理性内涵。韦伯在本书中分析了中国的国家、法律、城市、行会、士人阶层、正统礼教、异端信仰等，无非是想借此构筑出：中国人想的是什么、做出来的又是什么，以及所想与所做之间的关系。而儒教官绅知识阶层，在韦伯所构筑的传统中国历史舞台上，展现出使中国整体文明与西方文明大相径庭的坚实活力。

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。

道德经解析一书是一位八旬老人在对《道德经》行二十余年的自学、摸索、思考、体悟之后，所总结出的心得与体会。作者以长沙马王堆汉墓帛书《老子》甲本为底本，以帛书乙本和王弼本或傅奕本之文字补足缺字。在此基础上，作者对每一章的字词均作了详尽的注释，并逐句逐段行详细的语法结构分析，帮助读者弄懂字词句的意思，此为作者的研读方法，也是此书的一大特色。在解读部分，作者注重理论与实践的结合，引人思考。全书观新颖，有助于读者对《道德经》行全面的了解和学习。