Despre guvernarea reprezentativ” este o carte plin de surprize i sugestii despre bunele practici ale guvernrii, care nu trebuie s lipseasc din bibliotecile celor preocupai de zona politicii. Volumul de fa a vzut prima dat lumina tiparului n 1861 i reunete principiile la care a lucrat filosoful britanic John Stuart Mill n cea mai mare parte a vieii sale. Aceast lucrare publicat la mijlocul secolului al XIX-lea i pstreaz prospeimea i relevana pn astzi, cnd suntem tot mai aproape de a ncheia a doua decad a secolului XXI. n primul rnd, pentru c imagineaz pn n cele mai mici detalii acel model politic pe care l numim democraia reprezentativ”. Winston Churchill spunea despre acesta c este prost, dar e cel mai bun dintre cele pe care le-a inventat omenirea”. John Stuart Mill i descrie organizarea, detaliaz rolul instituiilor, felul n care sunt alei sau numii demnitarii i explic atribuiile fiecruia. Pune n eviden atu-urile, dar i vulnerabilitile guvernrii reprezentative, comparnd-o cu alte sisteme politice din vremea sa. n final, ajunge la o concluzie foarte asemntoare cu cea a premierului britanic din secolul urmtor. Colecia IN NUCE reunete fragmente venic verzi” din cultura omenirii, mpletind discursuri din art, literatur, tiine sociale i religie. Dincolo de renumele autorilor i de valoarea titlurilor pentru fiecare domeniu n parte, acestea sunt pilde ale nelepciunii universale din toate vremurile. De acelasi autor: Utilitarismul

Hegel este cel mai sistematic filozof, a c?rui oper? este coerent articulat? ?i sus?inut? de o dens? ?es?tur? conceptual? ?i o teleologie cu un pronun?at caracter axiologic. Hegel a vrut ?i ?n parte a reu?it s? construiasc? o concep?ie articulat? ?i cuprinz?toare despre om, societate, natur? ?i divinitate. Fiecare component? a sistemului s?u filozofic, structurile logice, societatea, arta, politica sau istoria nu pot fi ?n?elese f?r? ?ntregul care le cuprinde, le determin? d?ndu-le transparen?? ?i sens. G?ndirea politic? hegelian? nu e o simpl? medita?ie asupra statului ?i a institu?iilor sale determinat? de conjunctur? sau de vreo implica?ie practic? a filozofului ?n politica din timpul s?u. Medita?ia hegelian? asupra politicului este consecin?a necesar? a g?ndirii speculative cuprins? ?n masiva sa oper? filozofic?. Politicul este o component? important? a structurii ontologice a lumii, un moment esen?ial al realiz?rii ?i func?ion?rii Libert??ii. Ra?iunea ?n act, cristalizat? ?ntr-o diversitate de conduite, structuri ?i institu?ii configureaz? universul practic, concretiz?nd spiritul teoretic ?i organiz?nd a nou? regiune ontic?.

Geli?mi?li?in ??karsamalar?nda ilk akla gelen ?l?üt, meden? olarak ilerleme kaydetti?ini iddi? eden, d??avurumcu insanlar toplulu?unun bencil yap?la?mas?ndan ge?mektedir. Ara?t?rmalar sonucunda elde edilebilen, g?rsel, i?itsel, yaz?l?, ar?iv v.b tüm veriler do?rultusunda ayd?nlat?lm?? ger?ekler düny?si mevcuttur. Asalak olarak hayata tutunmaya ?al??an, ?z bireyci katmanlar?n en alt?na indirgenmi? insan say?lan varl?klar?n, niteliksel ?zelliklerle ?a?a tutunmas? imk?nsizdir. "En ?ok ben kazanay?m." s?yleminden yola ??karak, rahatl?k ve konforun adresinde bulu?an simbiyoz ya?ant?lar?n; ?a?d??? kalm??, kendi dü?üncesi h?ricindekileri yok sayan, ?ok katmanl? yüzeysel düny?s?nda gezinmenin verdi?i ferahl?k, bir?ok insan? cezbederek, ?ekilsiz ya?ant? portrelerini bilfiil olu?turmu?tur. Dü?ünceleri ve mevc?diyeti ?imento ile kaplanan nesillerin, zenginlik saltanat?na ayak ba?? olmas?ndan korkan erkin, katmerli yapt?r?mlar? bulunmaktad?r. D??s?z kalm?? medeniyetin, ??karsamalarla dolu ??karc? düny?s?nda, kendine en ufak bir yer edinimini ba?ar? sayan birey, ya?ant? düny?sinin ger?ek yüzeyine ula?t??? i?in mutlu olmal? m?d?r? G?rülen ve g?sterilen, verilen, yapt?r?lan tüm edimlerin ve edinimlerin, do?rultusunda, bireyin ??karc? sistem adamlar? ile yapt??? yolculu?a dikkat etmesi gerekir. Ritüel h?line gelmi?, paradoksal d?ngüde her d?im ba?lad??? yerden farkl? bir sona ula?mas? gereken yolculu?u yapan bireyin de, beklentisi bu olan macer?s?nda, üzüntü ve yenilgi verici sonucun, ayn? ?ekilde ikinci, ü?üncü defa ger?ekle?mesi ve ?o?u insan?n, bunun fark?ndal???nda olmay???n?n verdi?i bocalamayla ge?en ?mrünün c?resizli?inde ??rp?nmas? ve bo?ulmas? an meselesidir. Yapt?r?mlar yapt?r?mlar?, bilgisizlik ve c?hillik yeni olu?umlar? tetikleyecektir. ?nemli olan her insan?n asl?nda bir paradoks denkleminde, paradoks yolunda oldu?unu bilmesi ve ba?lad??? noktaya geldi?inde, nas?l bir düzenin i?erisinde ritüel yapt???n?n fark?nda olmas? gerekmektedir. Naz?re davran??lar?, sistem i?erisinde en az?ndan denemek, ayn? dü?üncede bulunan insanlar? bir araya getirmek ?artt?r. Ulusal bilincin her d?im uyan?k tutulmas?, paradokslarla sava??n en mükemmel ?rneklerinden birini olu?turacakt?r. ?nsan?n kat etti?i yol da, bu s?yede dünden kopu?un de?il, yar?n?n güvence alt?na al?nmas?n? tetikleyecektir. Yar?n? güvence alt?na al?nan bireyler de; kof, mesnetsiz, yalan ve riy?karl??a dayal? sistemleri ??kertme ve kendi hastal?kl? sistemlerini dayatmaya ?al??an ?o?unlu?un, katmerli ezici üstünlü?ü alt?nda direni? g?stermenin, mutlak gayreti i?erisinde olacakt?r. ?nsan?n yahut insanl???n bu eylemi ger?ekle?tirmeye ?al??mas?n?, en az?ndan denemesini diliyorum. N??M ONUR TEZMEN, 2013 MUSTAFA VE AY?E Mustafa’ya g?re; canl?lar?n, kompleks ya?am süreci i?erisinde, kabullenebilir davran?? grafi?ini topluma uydurmak ve o uyumu devam ettirme g?revi, bireysel sorumluluk gerektirmekteydi. Toplum i?erisindeki statüsünü belirleyen birtak?m rolleri üstlenen bireyin, davran?? biliminde girece?i rollerin karma?as?na kap?lmadan, gerekli ve ?l?ülü davran??, sosyal bilim do?rulu?u vey? bu do?rulu?a en yak?n olmay? gerektiren tüm birle?imler; bireyin ?zünü, karakterini ve bili?sel zek?sini olu?turmaktayd?. En az?ndan Mustafa'n?n dü?ünceleri ?????nda, akl?n? yordu?u; bilgi, kültür, gelenek ve g?renek birikimi ile a??klamas? buydu. Varolu?unun aksine, ayn? y?nde kürek ?ekmesine ba?l? olan ya?amsal uzamda, kendi do?ruluk pay?n? olu?turmas? ve bu pay?, ?evresindeki insanlara sunmas?, ona zevkli bir hus? veriyordu. Mustafa’ya g?re bilgelik, kazan?lan tecrübelerle birlikte, birikimlerin, paralel vey? ayn? düzlem i?erisinde hareket ettirebilmenin yoluydu. Bundan ??karacak ders de, birine bir do?ruyu empoze etmeden, ikn? k?biliyetini, ki?inin benzer birle?imlerinde ivme kazanan ara?lar gibi haz?rlamak ve var??a ondan ?nce vararak, kendi do?rusunun en yak?n bile?enine, kar??s?ndaki insan? ?ekebilmekti.

Volumul cuprinde dou? traduceri clasicizate, semnate de Victor Scorade?, Dincolo de bine ?i de r?u, ?i de Janina Iano?i ?i Horia Stanca, Genealogia moralei. Un mare vinovat f?r? vin?, sihastrul de la Sils-Maria a dinamitat g?ndirea secolului al XIX-lea, figur?nd – al?turi de Dostoievski – printre uria?ii profe?i ai omenirii, care au proorocit nenorocirile ce-au urmat, crimele ?n numele unei idei, rasismul, precum ?i devastatorul totalitarism ro?u. Dincolo de bine ?i de r?u e una dintre capodoperele g?nditorului german.

Such is the system which underlies the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius. Some knowledge of it is necessary to the right understanding of the book, but for us the chief interest lies elsewhere. We do not come to Marcus Aurelius for a treatise on Stoicism. He is no head of a school to lay down a body of doctrine for students; he does not even contemplate that others should read what he writes. His philosophy is not an eager intellectual inquiry, but more what we should call religious feeling. The uncompromising stiffness of Zeno or Chrysippus is softened and transformed by passing through a nature reverent and tolerant, gentle and free from guile; the grim resignation which made life possible to the Stoic sage becomes in him almost a mood of aspiration. His book records the innermost thoughts of his heart, set down to ease it, with such moral maxims and reflections as may help him to bear the burden of duty and the countless annoyances of a busy life. It is instructive to compare the Meditations with another famous book, the Imitation of Christ. There is the same ideal of self-control in both. It should be a man's task, says the Imitation, 'to overcome himself, and every day to be stronger than himself.' 'In withstanding of the passions standeth very peace of heart.' 'Let us set the axe to the root, that we being purged of our passions may have a peaceable mind.' To this end there must be continual self-examination. 'If thou may not continually gather thyself together, namely sometimes do it, at least once a day, the morning or the evening. In the morning purpose, in the evening discuss the manner, what thou hast been this day, in word, work, and thought.' But while the Roman's temper is a modest self-reliance, the Christian aims at a more passive mood, humbleness and meekness, and reliance on the presence and personal friendship of God. The Roman scrutinises his faults with severity, but without the self-contempt which makes the Christian 'vile in his own sight.' The Christian, like the Roman, bids 'study to withdraw thine heart from the love of things visible'; but it is not the busy life of duty he has in mind so much as the contempt of all worldly things, and the 'cutting away of all lower delectations.' Both rate men's praise or blame at their real worthlessness; 'Let not thy peace,' says the Christian, 'be in the mouths of men.' But it is to God's censure the Christian appeals, the Roman to his own soul. The petty annoyances of injustice or unkindness are looked on by each with the same magnanimity. 'Why doth a little thing said or done against thee make thee sorry? It is no new thing; it is not the first, nor shall it be the last, if thou live long. At best suffer patiently, if thou canst not suffer joyously.' The Christian should sorrow more for other men's malice than for our own wrongs; but the Roman is inclined to wash his hands of the offender. 'Study to be patient in suffering and bearing other men's defaults and all manner infirmities,' says the Christian; but the Roman would never have thought to add, 'If all men were perfect, what had we then to suffer of other men for God?' The virtue of suffering in itself is an idea which does not meet us in the Meditations. Both alike realise that man is one of a great community. 'No man is sufficient to himself,' says the Christian; 'we must bear together, help together, comfort together.' But while he sees a chief importance in zeal, in exalted emotion that is, and avoidance of lukewarmness, the Roman thought mainly of the duty to be done as well as might be, and less of the feeling which should go with the doing of it. To the saint as to the emperor, the world is a poor thing at best. 'Verily it is a misery to live upon the earth,' says the Christian; few and evil are the days of man's life, which passeth away suddenly as a shadow. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?*** ? "MARCUS AURELIUS ANTONINUS" was born on April 26, A.D. 121. His real name was M. Annius Verus, and he was sprung of a noble family which claimed descent from Numa, second King of Rome. Thus the most religious of emperors came of the blood of the most pious of early kings. His father, Annius Verus, had held high office in Rome, and his grandfather, of the same name, had been thrice Consul. Both his parents died young, but Marcus held them in loving remembrance. On his father's death Marcus was adopted by his grandfather, the consular Annius Verus, and there was deep love between these two. On the very first page of his book Marcus gratefully declares how of his grandfather he had learned to be gentle and meek, and to refrain from all anger and passion. The Emperor Hadrian divined the fine character of the lad, whom he used to call not Verus but Verissimus, more Truthful than his own name. He advanced Marcus to equestrian rank when six years of age, and at the age of eight made him a member of the ancient Salian priesthood. The boy's aunt, A

Egy kétségtelenül szellemes megjegyzés szerint a cím csak akkor fedheti le pontosan a k?nyv tartalmát, ha bet?r?l bet?re megegyezik vele. Valami hasonló mondható a fülsz?vegekr?l is (biztos Boegesnek is tetszene ez a gondolat), és ennek megfelel?en meg sem kísérlem néhány mondatban ?sszefoglalni, hogy mir?l lesz szó. Ehelyett inkább el?sz?r is azt emelem ki, hogy a címnek megfelel?en mir?l nem: például nem magáról Borgesr?l, a 20. század egyik legjelent?sebb argentin írójáról. Hanem inkább arról, hogy a novelláival kapcsolatban milyen, az irodalomtól olyakor látszólag meglehet?sen távol álló kérdések merülhetnek fel kezdve azon, hogy az általa leírt bábeli k?nyvtár valóban olyan teljes és mindenre kiterjed?-e, miként azt Borges sugallja; folytatva azon, hogy van-e egyáltalán értelme felvetni, hogy milyen lenne, ha valaki t?kéletes emlékezettel rendelkezne (nincs). Meg, hogy elképzelhet?-e, nem pedig, hogy létezik vagy legalább lehetséges-e egy olyan pont vagy térrész: egy olyan Alef, amelyen keresztül egyszerre láthatunk mindent. ?s így tovább egészen addig, hogy mit mondhatunk az irodalomkritikáról, az irodalmi zsánerek létrej?ttér?l meg elt?nésér?l vagy éppen az irodalmi halhatatlanságról – ismét csak mint elméleti problémáról. Azaz végs? soron persze mégiscsak egyfajta bolyongás ez a borgesi k?nyvtában, illetve bizonyos, legalább hipotetikusan lehetséges és az irodalomhoz így vagy úgy kapcsolódó kérdések fázisterében még akkor is, ha a fentebbiekben, miként a figyelmes olvasó már észre vehette, éppen azt tettem, amir?l korábban azt sejttettem, hogy nem fogom: néhány példa említésével próbáltam utalni rá, hogy mir?l szól az egész. De talán ez sincs igazi ellentmondásban azzal a megk?zelítéssel, amit ez a k?nyv sugall. Galántai Zoltán tudományt?rténész és író. Korábbi k?nyvei az eClassicnál: K?nyvkett?. A k?nyv, az írás és az irodalom j?v?jér?l (2013) http://eclassic.xyz/shop/bemutato/konyvketto-a-konyv-az-iras-es-az-irodalom-jovojerol/ Monoverzumok. Kozmosz, t?rvény, tudomány (2016) http://eclassic.xyz/shop/szabadpolc/monoverzumok/

Magyarázatok a Srimad-Bhagavatam tizedik éneke harminckettedik fejezetének 16-22. versáhez, az el?z? acaryák írásai alapján. A Na pāraye ’ham három része ?rī K???a, ?rī Caitanya Mahāprabhu és ?rīmatī Rādhārā?ī szeretetét mutatja be. Szeretetük egy-egy hatalmas folyóként h?mp?ly?g a prema óceánja felé. ?cāryáink kegyéb?l a bhakták megérinthetik ennek az óceánnak a partját, s néhány cseppnyi nektárt megízlelhetnek bel?le.

Em Vida sem Princípio , Henry David Thoreau nos apresenta um verdadeiro manual de como viver em sociedade e em contato com a Natureza respeitando a natureza e ao próximo.? puro Transcendentalismo , um apelo para que cada um siga a sua própria luz interior.Este ensaio foi obtido a partir da palestra''What Shall It Profit? ''apresentada ao publico em 06 de dezembro de 1854, no Sal?o Railroad em Providence Rhode Island.Foi publicado pela primeira vez na edi??o de outubro de 1863 The Atlantic Monthly, onde foi dado o título moderno.Vida sem Princípio é um ensaio em que Thoreau coloca o seu programa para viver bem. Incluem-se aqui as suas ideias sobre a forma de abordagem da comunica??o interpessoal, modos de trabalho, sustento financeiro e outros códigos de conduta baseados na filosofia de de vida de Thoreau.'

        本书在伯特兰·罗素的经典著作《西方哲学简史》的结构框架下，广泛吸取其他学界名家的研究成果，精选84位哲学家及其观，用近200幅思维导图与图表，将复杂晦涩的西方哲学图像化，以超图解的手法为你展现西方哲学的发展演，带你探索西方文明的本质与内核。         为什么柏拉图的《理想国》能长居西方高校书单榜首？怎样的哲学思想推了西方现代化程？为何以理性文明著称的欧洲会爆发两次世界大战？         英国著名哲学家、诺贝尔文学奖获得者伯特兰·罗素认为，想要了解一个时代或民族，必须了解其哲学，只有这样才能真正洞悉历史的发展。

A partir de uma sugest?o de Gilles Deleuze e Félix Guattari – a de que todos os filósofos ocidentais terminaram construindo, no interregno do seu pensamento, personagens conceituais, uma espécie de assinatura do filósofo – este livro objetiva identificar esse tra?o a partir da obra de Michel Foucault. A tese em quest?o é que este autor n?o se enquadra em uma imagem única, como a do Juiz em Kant, ou a do sedutor em Kierkegaard, mas em uma imagem híbrida e triádica, fazendo coro com muitos filósofos chamados de transversais e que se instalaram no horizonte de filosofias chamadas de pós-estruturalistas, como Deleuze.

　　《费孝通早期思想探源》的论证有助于理解费孝通的社会改革思想所代表的江南社会精英群体，进一步明晰费孝通“合作主义”和“社会主义”取向的社会来源和思想来源。此外，作者还考证和分析了四十年代中期费孝通对中国文化看法的变化、原因及思想来源，指出费晚年倡导的“文化自觉”思想在1947年初已具雏形。本研究可增进对费孝通整体思想沿革的认识。

《创造化论》是法国哲学大师柏格森的*之作，更是为他带来诺贝尔文学奖的传世名著。本书站在生命化的角度演绎生命的发展历程，不同于环境决定物种演化的观，创造化论主张的是生命存在一种与生俱来的冲力，而这种冲力才是决定物种化繁衍的主要推动力量。 《创造化论》一书结合了生命哲学的有关内容，成为人类史上重新建构哲学的重要典范，它提出意识具有延续性，而一个强有力的证据便是生命的存在。 同时《创造化论》还为人类那神秘莫测的直觉做出了相应的解读，从而披上了一层神秘主义的色彩。作为诺贝尔文学奖作品，《创造化论》也在解放人类思想方面作出了巨大的贡献。

本书是南怀瑾先生一九八一年所讲解《维摩诘经》的记录。 《维摩诘经》全称《维摩诘所说经》，三卷，通行后秦鸠摩罗什译本。内容着重描写达到解脱境界不一定要经过严格的出家修行生活，关键在于主观修养，阐扬大乘般若性空的思想。南怀瑾先生认为，《维摩诘经》是与整个佛法、佛教、东方文化，尤其是中国文化关系、影响深的一部重要经典。《维摩诘经》所代表的精神，是佛法在世间，不离世间本位而解脱成佛的法门，也指出十方三世诸佛如何证道，如何得解脱，如何证得菩提之路。南师用简单明了的语句，深入浅出，让读者能更容易了解原经优美流畅文字下的深厚含义。 本书原由台湾老古文化事业公司出版。兹经版权方台湾老古文化事业公司授权，复旦大学出版社将老古公司二〇〇五年三月版校订出版，以供研究。

二十一世纪初，有感于文化教育之重要，南先生亲自撰成《中国文化教育的自诉》一文，讲述从远古夏商周至清代一脉相承的中华民族文化、历史、教育、生活以及与政治、经济交互影响所产生的演变，叙述清晰扼要，内容发人深省。其后，他随缘讲课，内容广泛，但终不离文化之根本——或讲述二十世纪以来教育的发展历程，或从人生目标、家教、师道等方面漫谈教育。本书将此类话题的讲述行整理，与前文合为一体，南师亲自定名为《廿一世纪初的前言后语》，以突显众所关心之话题。

《参同契》又名《周易参同契》，为东汉魏伯阳著。其学说汇融周易、黄老、丹火之功于一体，用《易》的阴阳变化之理，阐述炼丹、内养之道，证明人与天地、宇宙有同体、同功而异用的法则。 《我说<参同契>》是南怀瑾先生继《论语别裁》后用力*深、*有分量的作品之一，共八十余万言，分上、中、下三册。内容涉及广泛，旁征博引，举证极多，更有南师本人所经历的诸多奇特的人和事，是国人了解、解读《参同契》这部“天书”的选择。

《列子》为道家重要典籍之一，与老庄并列。它高深莫测，易读而难懂，以故事、神话的形态，阐释道家的学术及观念。 《列子臆说》是南怀瑾先生关于《列子》的讲记，共分上中下三册。南怀瑾先生讲述列子，深浅出、生动自在，以《列子》的内容为研究重，带领读者广阔的视野、深难测的奇妙境界，并破了意识的种种局限。列子，这个御风而行的人，要我们从一切自设的框架中突围，成就天地间的自在逍遥。

有些事物，永不消逝，暴力即属此类。 暴力性表达并非现代性的标志。暴力只是变化多端而已，其表现形式随社会局势而变。如今，它回到皮下、交际之下、毛细和神经元的领域，呈现出微观物理学的形态；这种形态的存在，无需在统治或敌对关系中的那种否定或排斥性。 它从可见转为无形，从粗野蛮横转为沉思内省，从正面直转为病毒性感染。暴力起作用的方式不是公然袭，而是蔓延传染。 作者在本书中首次揭示了暴力事件的变形记，从君权和血亲等前现代社会的斩首，经由现代规训社会的畸变，*终到了今天绩效社会和倦怠社会的抑郁。 ------------- 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

《参同契》是早期道教重要典籍，全名《周易参同契》。书中借用乾、坤、坎、离、水、火等法象，以明炼丹修仙之术。为道教系统论述炼丹的早著作，道教奉为“丹经王”，是千古丹经之鼻祖。 本书是南怀瑾先生一九八三年在台湾讲解《参同契》的记录，分上、中、下三册。南怀瑾先生认为：《参同契》参合了三种原则相同的学问，且熔于一炉——老庄、道家的丹道，还有《易经》的学问，是一本非读不可的秘密典籍。《参同契》不止是丹经道书，它既是哲学又是科学，也是古典文学之作，其中包含了中华民族深之承天接地的文化。《参同契》素有“天书”之称。这部因深奥而埋藏已久的天书，因南师深入浅出的讲解而重新散发光芒。

   《列子》为道家重要典籍之一，与老庄并列。它高深莫测，易读而难懂，以故事、神话的形态，阐释道家的学术及观念。 《列子臆说》是南怀瑾先生关于《列子》的讲记，共分上中下三册。南怀瑾先生讲述列子，深浅出、生动自在，以《列子》的内容为研究重，带领读者广阔的视野、深难测的奇妙境界，并破了意识的种种局限。列子，这个御风而行的人，要我们从一切自设的框架中突围，成就天地间的自在逍遥。

《金粟轩纪年诗初集(精)》为南怀瑾先生四十余年旧体诗作品合集，收录他在中国大陆、台湾以及美国等地创作的*句、律诗、长短句共计五百五十余首，根据不同时期，分别命名为《西行集》《海屋集》《海东集》《掩关集》《美京集》，同时又附录其佛门诗偈、楹联及佚诗数十首于后，可谓诗笔琳琅，洋洋大观，充分展现了南先生超拔敏锐的思想见地和丰富细腻的情感世界。

本书从康德遗留于世的300多封信中选出100封书信，根据年代先后按照编年史顺序排列。康德书信是康德哲学思想体系的一个重要组成部分。它们不仅包含了康德对自己思想体系的许多重要的说明和解释，形成了康德哲学著作的一个重要补充，而且以动态的方式再现了康德哲学思想形成的过程。同时，它们也是康德生活与事业的忠实见证人。 此外，本书的附录部分收录了康德三篇重要的论文，即《关于一种出自世界公民意图的普遍历史的观念》《回答一个问题：什么是启蒙》《重新提出的问题：人类是否在不断地向善步？》