Caesar, although he was not as yet at open enmity with him, determined neither to aid him by his influence nor openly oppose him on this occasion. But the consuls Lentulus and Marcellus, who had previously been on unfriendly terms with Caesar, resolved to use all means in their power to prevent him from gaining his object. Marcellus in particular did not hesitate to offer Caesar other insults. Caesar had lately planned the colony of Novumcomum in Gaul: Marcellus, not content with taking from it the right of citizenship, ordered the principal man of the colony to be arrested and scourged at Rome, and sent him to make his complaints to Caesar: an insult of this description had never before been offered to a Roman citizen.

...a knyvet ne tekintsük úgy, mint amelynek a fejldése már befejezdtt, és amin már nincs is mit tkéletesíteni... azzal mintha nem foglalkozna senki, hogy a knyvet miként lehetne az olvasó számára használhatóbbá tenni... nagyon is el tudnék képzelni ergonomikusabban megtervezett és knnyebben kézben tartható knyvet is (amelyet nem ejtek el, ha a mobilom után kezdek kotorászni a 6-os villamoson. Ha egyszer vehetünk jobban kézbe ill tollat, akkor talán ez sem képtelenség).”

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.

Sri Krsna számtalan univerzum vitathatatlan Ura, akit korlátlan er?, gazdagság, hírnév, tudás és lemondás jellemez, ám ezek az ?r?kké diadalmas energiák csupán részben  tárják fel ?t. Végtelen dics?ségét csak az ismerheti meg, aki elb?v?l? szépségénél keres menedéket, ?sszes t?bbi fenséges tulajdonsága forrásánál, melynek páratlan transzcendentális teste ad otthont. Szépségének legf?bb jellemz?je az a mindenek f?l?tt álló édes íz, ami t?mény kivonata mindennek, ami édes. Minden édes dolgot túlszárnyal, és nem más, mint az édes íz megízlelésének képessége. Sri Krsna édes természete finom arany sugárzásként ragyog át transzcendentális testén. Govinda páratlanul gy?ny?r? testének legszebb és legédesebb része ragyogó arca. ?des hold-arcán rejtélyes mosolya a legédesebb, az az arcáról ragyogó ezüst holdsugár, ami nektárral árasztja el a világot. Mosolyának sugárzása nélkül keser? lenne a cukor, savanyú a méz, és a nektárnak sem lenne íze. Amikor mosolyának holdsugara elvegyül teste ragyogásával, a kett? együtt a kámfor aromájára emlékeztet. Ez a kámfor aztán ajkán keresztül a fuvolába kerül, ahonnan megfoghatatlan hangvibrációként t?r el?, és er?nek erejével rabul ejti azoknak az elméjét, akik hallják. Ahogy a szavak gondolatok mondanivalóját hordozzák, ahogy a gondolatok a szemben tükr?z?dnek, ahogy egy mosoly a szív érzelmeir?l árulkodik, úgy a fuvola hangja Sri Krsna szépségét viszi a fül?n keresztül a szív templomának oltárára.

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?.. ?

Dialoguri cu Vasile Dem. Zamfirescu consemnate de Leonid DragomirLa Facultatea de Filosofie din Bucure?ti unde eram studen?i exista pe atunci mult? libertate ?n alegerea cursurilor pe care doream s? le urm?m. Se afi?a la ?nceputul anului universitar o list? a cursurilor obligatorii ?i op?ionale, acestea din urm? fiind majoritare. A?a am descoperit cursul de Psihanaliz? filosofic? al profesorului Vasile Dem. Zamfirescu, despre care ?tiam vag c? fusese unul dintre discipolii lui Constantin Noica. Atmosfera de libertate ?n care ne mi?cam se reg?sea ?n totalitate aici. Cursul ne interesa at?t prin con?inutul lui — care adolescent n-a fost fascinat de psihanaliz?! — c?t ?i prin rigoarea ?i claritatea expunerii. De?i nu mai predase p?n? atunci, Vasile Dem. Zamfirescu era cu adev?rat profesor. Seminariile erau ?ns? ale noastre. Aici se iscau polemici, se propuneau interpret?ri insolite, se scriau ?i se citeau eseuri inspirate de noile probleme ?i lecturi. De obicei dep??eam limitele temei propuse, astfel ?nc?t totul ar fi putut degenera ?ntr-un dialog al surzilor sau ?n divaga?ii sterile dac? n-ar fi existat polul magnetic: profesorul. Nu numai c? el aducea, cu mult tact, discu?ia pe f?ga?ul normal, la obiect, dar opiniile noastre, oric?t de ?ndr?zne?e, vizau direct sau indirect aprobarea lui. Aceasta uneori venea, alteori nu, dar ceea ce conta pentru noi era faptul de a ne ?ti asculta?i. Sim?eam c? el poate s? vad? ?n spusele noastre sau dincolo de ele personalitatea noastr? ?ntreag?. De aceea voiam s? d?m totul ?n acele seminarii care treceau at?t de repede, de?i discu?iile se prelungeau ?n pauze ?i dup? ?ncheierea lor.

The Republic (Greek: Politeia) is a Socratic dialogue, written by Plato around 380 BC, concerning the definition of (justice), the order and character of the just city-state and the just man, reason by which ancient readers used the name On Justice as an alternative title (not to be confused with the spurious dialogue also titled On Justice). The dramatic date of the dialogue has been much debated and though it must take place some time during the Peloponnesian War, "there would be jarring anachronisms if any of the candidate specific dates between 432 and 404 were assigned". It is Plato's best-known work and has proven to be one of the most intellectually and historically influential works of philosophy and political theory. In it, Socrates along with various Athenians and foreigners discuss the meaning of justice and examine whether or not the just man is happier than the unjust man by considering a series of different cities coming into existence "in speech", culminating in a city (Kallipolis) ruled by philosopher-kings; and by examining the nature of existing regimes. The participants also discuss the theory of forms, the immortality of the soul, and the roles of the philosopher and of poetry in society. Short Summary (Epilogue):X.1—X.8. 595a—608b. Rejection of Mimetic ArtX.9—X.11. 608c—612a. Immortality of the SoulX.12. 612a—613e. Rewards of Justice in LifeX.13—X.16. 613e—621d. Judgment of the Dead The paradigm of the city — the idea of the Good, the Agathon — has manifold historical embodiments, undertaken by those who have seen the Agathon, and are ordered via the vision. The centre piece of the Republic, Part II, nos. 2–3, discusses the rule of the philosopher, and the vision of the Agathon with the allegory of the cave, which is clarified in the theory of forms. The centre piece is preceded and followed by the discussion of the means that will secure a well-ordered polis (City). Part II, no. 1, concerns marriage, the community of people and goods for the Guardians, and the restraints on warfare among the Hellenes. It describes a partially communistic polis. Part II, no. 4, deals with the philosophical education of the rulers who will preserve the order and character of the city-state.In Part II, the Embodiment of the Idea, is preceded by the establishment of the economic and social orders of a polis (Part I), followed by an analysis (Part III) of the decline the order must traverse. The three parts compose the main body of the dialogues, with their discussions of the “paradigm”, its embodiment, its genesis, and its decline.The Introduction and the Conclusion are the frame for the body of the Republic. The discussion of right order is occasioned by the questions: “Is Justice better than Injustice?” and “Will an Unjust man fare better than a Just man?” The introductory question is balanced by the concluding answer: “Justice is preferable to Injustice”. In turn, the foregoing are framed with the Prologue (Book I) and the Epilogue (Book X). The prologue is a short dialogue about the common public doxai (opinions) about “Justice”. Based upon faith, and not reason, the Epilogue describes the new arts and the immortality of the soul. ? About Author: Plato (Greek: Platon, " 428/427 or 424/423 BC – 348/347 BC) was a philosopher in Classical Greece. He was also a mathematician, student of Socrates, writer of philosophical dialogues, and founder of the Academy in Athens, the first institution of higher learning in the Western world. Along with his mentor, Socrates, and his most-famous student, Aristotle, Plato helped to lay the foundations of Western philosophy and science. Alfred North Whitehead once noted: "the safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato." Plato's sophistication as a writer is evident in his Socratic dialogues; thirty-six dialogues and thirteen letters have been ascribed to him, although 15–18 of them have been contested. Plato's writings have been published in several fashions; this has led to several conventions regarding the naming and referencing of Plato's texts. Plato's dialogues have been used to teach a range of subjects, including philosophy, logic, ethics, rhetoric, religion and mathematics. Plato is one of the most important founding figures in Western philosophy. His writings related to the Theory of Forms, or Platonic ideals, are basis for Platonism. ? Early lifeThe exact time and place of Plato's birth are not known, but it is certain that he belonged to an aristocratic and influential family. Based on ancient sources, most modern scholars believe that he was born in Athens or Aegina between 429 and 423 BC. His father was Ariston. According to a disputed tradition, reported by Diogenes Laertius, Ariston traced his descent from the king of Athens, Codrus, and the king of Messenia, Melanthus. Plato's mother was Perictione, whose family boasted of a relationship with the famous Athenian lawmaker an

Paradise Lost is an epic poem in blank verse by the 17th-century English poet John Milton (1608–1674). The first version, published in 1667, consisted of ten books with over ten thousand lines of verse. A second edition followed in 1674, arranged into twelve books (in the manner of Virgil's Aeneid) with minor revisions throughout and a note on the versification. It is considered by critics to be Milton's "major work", and helped solidify his reputation as one of the greatest English poets of his time. The poem concerns the Biblical story of the Fall of Man: the temptation of Adam and Eve by the fallen angel Satan and their expulsion from the Garden of Eden. Milton's purpose, stated in Book I, is to "justify the ways of God to men" Short Summary:The poem is separated into twelve "books" or sections, the lengths of which vary greatly (the longest is Book IX, with 1,189 lines, and the shortest Book VII, with 640). The Arguments at the head of each book were added in subsequent imprints of the first edition. Originally published in ten books, a fully "Revised and Augmented" edition reorganized into twelve books was issued in 1674, and this is the edition generally used today. The poem follows the epic tradition of starting in medias res (Latin for in the midst of things), the background story being recounted later.Milton's story has two narrative arcs, one about Satan (Lucifer) and the other following Adam and Eve. It begins after Satan and the other rebel angels have been defeated and banished to Hell, or, as it is also called in the poem, Tartarus. In Pand?monium, Satan employs his rhetorical skill to organise his followers; he is aided by Mammon and Beelzebub. Belial and Moloch are also present. At the end of the debate, Satan volunteers to poison the newly created Earth and God's new and most favoured creation, Mankind. He braves the dangers of the Abyss alone in a manner reminiscent of Odysseus or Aeneas. After an arduous traversal of the Chaos outside Hell, he enters God's new material World, and later the Garden of Eden. At several points in the poem, an Angelic War over Heaven is recounted from different perspectives. Satan's rebellion follows the epic convention of large-scale warfare. The battles between the faithful angels and Satan's forces take place over three days. At the final battle, the Son of God single-handedly defeats the entire legion of angelic rebels and banishes them from Heaven. Following this purge, God creates the World, culminating in his creation of Adam and Eve. While God gave Adam and Eve total freedom and power to rule over all creation, He gave them one explicit command: not to eat from the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil on penalty of death.

《太平经》十部一百七十卷，据《后汉书》等史料记载为东汉末期道士干吉等人所传，是我国道教早期的主要经典之一。此经假托神人（又称天师）与六方真人问答，演说原始道教教义和方术，卷帙浩繁，内容庞杂。大抵以奉天法道，顺应阴阳五行为宗旨，广述治世之道、伦理准则，以及长寿成仙、治病养生、通神占验之术。其说虽受汉代谶纬神学影响，宣扬灾异祥瑞，善恶报应观念，“多巫觋杂语”。但亦自成体系，以顺天地之法，治政修身，达于天下太平为主旨。有代表下层民众反对统治者恃强凌弱，主张自食其力，周穷救急的思想。故为张角等早期民间道教领袖所利用，组织发动农民起义。后世道教各派教义，亦受此书影响。堪称了解中国道教的名典。本次译注作者杨寄林教授积数十年研究《太平经》之功力精心注译全本，注释详尽征引丰富，译文清晰流畅而不乏生动有趣之处，题解中对各篇思想内容和篇目流传情况做了详细说明，是帮助广大读者阅读理解这部名著的*读本之一。

叔本华（Arthur Schopenhauer，1788—1860），德国哲学家，哲学史上个公开反对理性主义哲学的人，开创了非理性主义哲学的先河，创立了唯意志论哲学，他认为生命意志是主宰世界运作的力量。他毕生致力思考人类幸福的问题，深刻影响了尼采和萨特等20世纪哲学家，也为现代心理疗法提供了哲学依据。代表著作有《作为意志和表象的世界》《建议与箴言》等。

苏格拉底之死，是古希腊哲学的分水岭，也是欧洲乃至世界历史上重要的文化事件之一。本书收选的三篇柏拉图对话：“申辩篇”“克里同篇”和“斐多篇”——分别记述了苏格拉底在审判时、狱后和服刑前的经历。这三篇完整地展现了甘为信仰和真理献身的苏格拉底对自我、对人生价值、对生命和灵魂的看法，让我们在领略他光辉独具的人格与思想魅力的同时，更好地了解到古希腊人是如何将哲学与生活结合在一起的。

《道德情操论》是亚当·斯密的伦理学著作，首次出版于1759年，斯密去世前共出版过六次。主要阐明了道德情感的本质、道德评价的性质以及他的以“公民的幸福生活”为目标的伦理思想。亚当·斯密把人本性中的同情的情感作为阐释道德的基础，他用同情的原理来解释人类正义感和其它一切道德情感的根源，来说明道德评价的性质，并以此为基础表明各种基本美德的特征。

回首审视近90年的人生跨度，复盘超过半个世纪的经营经验，稻盛和夫想要把"构建人生的基石"的智慧传达出来。稻盛和夫认为，不管什么样的人，只要活着就有享受幸福的权利。而人生所有的际遇都是由自己的内心吸引而来，你在内心描绘的蓝图，决定了你将度过的人生。所以，心纯见真，了悟关于心的能量意义，就有机会大大改变人生。这既是给人生带来幸福的钥匙，也是通向成功的秘诀。

适应生活变化和危机的能力是健康、富有成效的生活的关键能力。不幸的是，我们很容易陷愤怒和无助的情绪中。"复原力”的优势帮助读者摒弃消极的、自我挫败的想法，摆脱"受害者”和"好孩子”的角色，同时提高解决问题的技能，在困难时期保持幽默和乐观，变得既自立又对社会负责。通过掌握维持健康、活力和积极情绪的五个发展阶段，读者可以学会面对逆境，克服障碍，直面人生。

“理性”长期以来被人认为是人类*的成就，它一直就在我们周围。根据亚里士多德的说法，理智的能力使我们与其他动物有所不同，而如今它已不再是一种令人钦佩的能力。理智与理性已成为一种政治的、有争议的概念，容易被人误解。 朱利安·巴吉尼认为，我们必须恢复理性，重新正确地评估它，既不要过分赞誉，也不要完全诋毁。理性不需要无菌的、科学的世界观，它只是涉及在需要思考的地方应用批判性思维。 针对宗教、科学、政治、心理学和经济学等主要领域的争论，作者呼吁对“理性共同体”的概念作出承诺，通过辩论和讨论来解决分歧，而不是通过暴力或政治力量。

《中华哲学史先秦编》以精炼通俗的文字深浅出地介绍了先秦时期中华先哲思想的大略要义。作者以“理解客观、言辞有据”为原则，以人物及其主要观划分章节，一改当代中国哲学史研究领域以西方哲学思维和术语解读中国哲学的习惯，而是依据中国哲学的自身特确定研究方法，采用传统术语和问题领域对中国哲学的内容行了整理。书中的观都是以古代经典的原文为根本，结合大量相关资料，研究思考后提炼总结出来的，无论是对于从事中国哲学研究的学者提供借鉴拓展思路，还是对于普通大众感受中华文化从中汲取智慧，该书都具有着较大的阅读价值

“心灵/心智（mind）是什么？我是谁？纯粹的物质能思考或感受吗？灵魂（soul）在哪里？面对这些问题时，人人都会陷困惑之中。我们编纂此书，为的是尝试展示这些困惑，让它们变得生动鲜明。我们的目的不是要直回答这些大问题，而是要动摇世人的思维：既包括那些有着严肃坚定的科学世界观的人，也包括那些对人类灵魂怀有宗教或者灵性主义想象的人。我们认为，目前要想回答这些问题并不容易，我们首先要对问题行根本反思，然后才能期望人们在‘我’这个字究竟是什么意思上达成共识。因此，本书旨在刺激、扰乱和迷惑读者，让显而易见的东西变得奇异起来，也许还会让奇异的东西变得显而易见。” 出于上述动机，二位主编为本书选文27篇，包含了从科幻小说、戏剧对话到哲学论文多种文体，除两位编者的作品外，更有图灵、博尔赫斯、道金斯、内格尔等重要人物的代表作。各篇文章围绕自我感、精神是否存在及有否特性、身心关系、自由意志、自我意识和“自我”特性等经典问题分类编排，每篇结尾均附主编者的评论反思。选文、反思及二者间的隔空对话，各有精彩与妙趣，对理解相关哲学认知问题、生物问题、人工智能问题等应大有助益。

这是一本足以彻底改变你思维世界的小书。正如著名行为学家孙路弘所说，缺乏逻辑已成为社会的一种流行病症：逻辑紊乱症候群。而《简单的逻辑学》就如一场及时雨，一本治愈社会疾病的宝典，的确是应该人手一册。

本书是汉语学界*部专论施泰因特别是施泰因对于交互主体性现象学的研究的专著。自胡塞尔的现象学发生所谓的“超越论的转向”以后，对其现象学是一种“唯我论”的批评就不绝于耳。本书尝试表明，施泰因（以及其他早期现象学家）恰恰是借“同感”来讨论对他人的通达，以避免“唯我论”的困扰，并借此发展交互主体性现象学的。 在此问题脉络中，施泰因有关同感和交互主体性现象学研究的特殊意义与价值主要体现在：（1）她将同感问题置自赫尔德以来的整个思想史传统之中来考察；（2）她在精神科学的总体视域下对同感行现象学的研究；（3）她将同感现象学运用到具体的精神科学领域（比如伦理学、美学和社会政治哲学等）中，并*终成为勾连现象学和中世纪经院哲学的核心基础之一。

新中国成立70年以来，马克思主义经典著作在中国的编译与传播，既是马克思主义中国化的首要前提，又是实现马克思主义中国化的基本途径。自新中国成立以来到1978年改革放时期，是中国历史发展的一个十分重要的特殊阶段，也构成了马克思主义经典著作编译传播史上的一个十分重要的特殊阶段。本书对这一时期马克思主义经典著作编译与传播的社会历史条件、编译与出版机构的建立与完善，以及编译与传播的重要阶段、主要类别、基本特征、传播途径及对马克思主义中国化的历史影响与现实启示等方面行深研究，梳理马克思主义经典著作版本演化的历史轨迹，总结经典文本编译与传播的经验教训，揭示其在推动马克思主义中国化过程中的历史作用和当代价值。