O parte dintre noi au tr?it vremuri grele pe care uneori le mai vis?m, le povestim sau despre care scriem ?nc?, f?r? patima cumplit? care i-a cuprins pe profitorii de atunci, care ?i ast?zi ne fac r?u, ?i chiar mai r?u dec?t ?pe vremea aceea“, cum se zice. E drept c? noi am prev?zut-o ?ntr-un fel sau altul, spun?nd-o celor care se-ncumetau s? ne asculte, f?r? preten?ia, Doamne, fere?te!, de a ne considera ?i disiden?i, cum o f?cur? cei men?iona?i mai sus. Previziunile noastre s-au bazat pe o anume cunoa?tere a mersului istoriei, care, cum se ?tie, se tot repet?, cu mici deosebiri, fire?te. Oricum, ceva cuno?tin?e de economie politic? nu ne stric? nici ?n zilele noastre, pentru a ne da seama de jocul frecvent al trecerii de la economia politic? la politica economic? ?i, mai ales, al trecerilor de la un sistem sau or?nduire economic? la alta ?i invers, cum le-am tr?it noi: de la capitalism la socialism ?i viceversa. Ca un fel de ciud??enie, au r?mas considera?iunile despre noul eon sau noua er? (New Age) ale filosofului din Lancr?m, mai ales c? acestea s-au realizat abia dup? c?derea comunismului, pe care n-o mai prev?zuse Blaga. (Alexandru Surdu) Eseuri filosofice de acela?i autor 1. Voca?ii filosofice rom?ne?ti, Editura Aca?de?miei Rom?ne, Bucure?ti, 1995, 216 p.; edi??ia a II-a, Editura Ardealul, T?rgu-Mure?, 2003, 206 p. 2. Confluen?e cultural-filosofice, Editura Pai?de?ia, Bucure?ti, 2002, 219 p. 3. M?rturiile anamnezei, Editura Paideia, Bu?cu?re?ti, 2004, 193 p. 4. Comentarii la rostirea filosofic?, Editura Kron-Art, Bra?ov, 2009, 186 p. 5. Izvoare de filosofie rom?neasc?, Editura Biblioteca Bucure?tilor, Bucure?ti, 2010, 171 p.; edi?ia a II-a, Editura Renaissance, Bucu?re?ti, 2011, 161 p. 6. A sufletului rom?nesc cinstire, Editura Re?naissance, Bucure?ti, 2011, 197 p. 7. Pietre de poticnire, Editura Ardealul, T?r?gu-Mure?, 2014, 179 p.

One of the greatest works of philosophy, political theory, and literature ever produced, Plato’s Republic has shaped Western thought for thousands of years, and remains as relevant today as when it was written during the fourth century B.C.Republic begins by posing a central question: "What is justice, and why should we be just, especially when the wicked often seem happier and more successful?" For Plato, the answer lies with the ways people, groups, and institutions organize and behave. A brilliant inquiry into the problems of constructing the perfect state, and the roles education, the arts, family, and religion should play in our lives, Republic employs picturesque settings, sharply outlined characters, and conversational dialogue to drive home the philosopher’s often provocative arguments.Highly regarded as one of the most accurate renderings of Plato's Republic that has yet been published, this widely acclaimed work is the first strictly literal translation of a timeless classic. This Special Collector's Edition includes a new introduction by Prof. Colin Kant, PH.D, a noted Platonian and Socratic scholar.

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.

n concepia religioas a lui Gogol, diavolul este esena mistic i fiina real n care sa concentrat negarea lui Dumnezeu, rul etern. Gogol, ca artist, la lumina rsului, studiaz natura acestei esene mistice; ca om, cu arma rsului, lupt mpotriva acestei fiine reale: rsul lui Gogol este lupta omului cu diavolul. Dumnezeu este infinitul, sfritul i nceputul existenei; diavolul este negarea lui Dumnezeu i, prin urmare, negarea oricrui nceput i a oricrui sfrit; diavolul este nceputul i neterminatul care se d drept nenceput i infinit; diavolul este mijlocul numenal al existenei, negarea tuturor profunzimilor i culmilor, este platitudinea etern, venica trivialitate. Unicul obiect al creaiei gogoliene este diavolul chiar n acest sens, adic drept manifestare a nemuritoarei trivialiti omeneti”, observat dincolo de toate condiiile de timp i de spaiu – de istorie, popor, stat, societate –, manifestarea rului indiscutabil, etern i universal; – trivialitatea sub speciae aeterni, sub nfiarea eternitii”. (Dmitri Merejkovski)

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?.. ?

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

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."

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.

Euthyphro (Ancient Greek: Euthuphron) is one of Plato's early dialogues, dated to after 399 BC. Taking place during the weeks leading up to Socrates' trial, the dialogue features Socrates and Euthyphro, a religious expert also mentioned at Cratylus 396a and 396d, attempting to define piety or holiness. Background The dialogue is set near the king-archon's court, where the two men encounter each other. They are both there for preliminary hearings before possible trials (2a).Euthyphro has come to lay manslaughter charges against his father, as his father had allowed one of his workers to die exposed to the elements without proper care and attention (3e–4d). This worker had killed a slave belonging to the family estate on the island of Naxos; while Euthyphro's father waited to hear from the expounders of religious law (exegetes cf. Laws 759d) about how to proceed, the worker died bound and gagged in a ditch. Socrates expresses his astonishment at the confidence of a man able to take his own father to court on such a serious charge, even when Athenian Law allows only relatives of the deceased to sue for murder. Euthyphro misses the astonishment, and merely confirms his overconfidence in his own judgment of religious/ethical matters. In an example of "Socratic irony," Socrates states that Euthyphro obviously has a clear understanding of what is pious and impious. Since Socrates himself is facing a charge of impiety, he expresses the hope to learn from Euthyphro, all the better to defend himself in his own trial. Euthyphro claims that what lies behind the charge brought against Socrates by Meletus and the other accusers is Socrates' claim that he is subjected to a daimon or divine sign which warns him of various courses of action (3b). Even more suspicious from the viewpoint of many Athenians, Socrates expresses skeptical views on the main stories about the Greek gods, which the two men briefly discuss before plunging into the main argument. Socrates expresses reservations about such accounts which show up the gods' cruelty and inconsistency. He mentions the castration of the early sky god, Uranus, by his son Cronus, saying he finds such stories very difficult to accept (6a–6c). Euthyphro, after claiming to be able to tell even more amazing such stories, spends little time or effort defending the conventional view of the gods. Instead, he is led straight to the real task at hand, as Socrates forces him to confront his ignorance, ever pressing him for a definition of 'piety'. Yet, with every definition Euthyphro proposes, Socrates very quickly finds a fatal flaw (6d ff.). At the end of the dialogue, Euthyphro is forced to admit that each definition has been a failure, but rather than correct it, he makes the excuse that it is time for him to go, and Socrates ends the dialogue with a classic example of Socratic irony: since Euthyphro has been unable to come up with a definition that will stand on its own two feet, Euthyphro has failed to teach Socrates anything at all about piety, and so he has received no aid for his own defense at his own trial (15c ff.).

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.

Within our Society (the International Society for Krishna Consciousness), guru has been taken to be synonymous with diksa-guru, but what about those great souls who have introduced us to Krsna consciousness? What relationship do we have with these Vaisnavas, and what are our obligations toward them, as well as toward parents, teachers, sannyasis, and other superiors who help guide us back to Godhead? Not much has been said by the Society on these topics, and hardly any appreciation is shown for those souls who labor to elevate us day by day.The scriptures, however, glorify as guru all Vaisnavas who guide a conditioned soul back to Godhead — be they instructors or initiators — advocating a culture of honor and respect. ISKCON needs to reflect upon these principles further, and the purpose of this book is to act as a catalyst toward such an end.

本书是一部系统探究马克思政治哲学思想的著作。作者以问题为主线考察马克思政治哲学的内在逻辑、思维方式与价值诉求，对马克思的人类解放理论、共同体理论、正义论、自由-平等观与政治经济学批判，以及马克思政治哲学的思想资源与中国语境进行了较为完整的阐释。在澄清马克思政治哲学内在生成机制的同时，力求规范建构和综合创新。作者运用文本解读与当代审视内在融通等研究方法，兼顾微观解读与宏观阐释，在“导言”中彰显马克思政治哲学的总体框架和问题域，呈现马克思政治哲学的当代视界，为探究新时代马克思主义政治哲学的实践逻辑提供了一种独特的学术视域。

《周易玩辞集解》十卷，清查慎行撰。查慎行，字悔余，浙江海宁人，晚筑初白庵以居，号初白老人。康熙癸未进士，官翰林院编修。此为查慎行数十年究心《周易》之结晶，参酌群言，归于至当。四库馆臣云：“其言皆明白笃实，足破外学附会之疑。”征引前人达三百八十余家，凡五易其稿，于雍正二年成书，及门弟子沈廷芳于乾隆十七年左右刻印。本书所据国家图书馆藏丰府藏书本，即为沈氏所刻，前有沈廷芳、黄叔琳、陈世倌、沈起元序，后有成城跋。卷首有《河图说》等《易》学专论十一篇。以《四库全书》本为参校本。卷首十一篇专论，稿本《查悔余文集》、《敬业堂文集》均收录，世楷堂本《昭代丛书》单列，以《易说》行世，文字略有异同，出校说明。另需说明的是，查慎行“不惑于图书”，“谓变卦为朱子之《易》”，这与学宗伊川的项安世《周易玩辞》大异其趣。

针对现代人沉重的压力和疲困的心灵，特别是各种精神心理疾病，《儒家修身九讲（典藏版）》认为，中国古代的修身传统有无比强大的现实意义。《儒家修身九讲（典藏版）》探讨了如何在现代条件下激活古代修身传统，并在实际教学中摸索出一套具体的修身方法。 作者将儒家几千年来特别是从孔孟到宋明时期所发展起来的修身智慧，分成守静、存养、自省、定性、治心、慎独、主敬、慎言、致诚等九个范畴，对它们的基本含义及其现实意义行了深浅出的阐释。书后附录集多家经典，可用于反复阅读、朗读乃至抄写，帮助修身实践。 希望《儒家修身九讲（典藏版）》能对当下浮躁的世风有镇静作用，同时也对关心国学复兴之路的人有所启迪。

本书通过解读章太炎在清末撰写的几篇重要的政治文献，深分析他的思想特征。既涉及对于章氏《明独》《代议然否论》《秦政记》《五朝法律索引》《思乡原》等文章的阐释，也有对于章学的其他议题，如章氏对阳明心学的认识和阐释、章氏对民初政局的批评、章氏的辛亥记忆等的探讨。

《厚黑学》一书的内容涉及到文学、哲学、政治、经济学、心理学、社会学等诸多研究领域，在文学界和思想界产生过轰动效应和重大影响，而且他的著作历七八十年之久，至今仍畅销不衰。 《厚黑学》内容宏博，见解深邃，启迪心智，文笔流畅轻松，语言幽默隽永，既让人增长见识，深受教益，又让人从中获得一种非常特殊的阅读快感与审美享受。

如果要问，读者（包括一般读者以及对尼采有特殊兴趣的读者）在阅读尼采发表的本著作时，能够得到什么益处，简短的答案将是：这是一本非常吸引人的书，它简明扼要地将19世纪思想的方方面面呈现在读者面前。此书不仅为尼采其他的作品做了铺垫，也为19世纪后发生的文化及思想运动奠定了基础。因此，在第1章和第2章，我们将论述对尼采影响*的几个事件，其他的影响会在本书主体章节（第3章）陆续提到。在第4章，我们会介绍《悲剧的诞生》一书发表后的反响，被读者受的情况，以及它的长远影响。

　　汉译四部《阿含经》——《杂阿含经》、《中阿含经》、《长阿含经》与《增一阿含经》，是由佛陀的圣弟子于佛陀般涅槃的当年夏安居时结集出来的，忠实地汇集了佛陀自成佛以来至般涅槃前所宣讲的教法，由此说明了《阿含经》的原始性、根本性与权威性。在汉传佛教的三藏典籍中，《阿含经》就代表着原始佛教，也是印度部派佛教时期所公认的“根本佛法”。 　　为便于广大信徒与学者更好地了解、学修原始佛教，本书校注者以高丽藏为底本，尽量保持原本整体风貌，将四部阿含经文转为简体字，加上现代标及分段。并在前人研究成果的基础上，参考《南传大藏经》、《碛砂藏》、《大正新修大藏经》、《正仓院圣语藏本》等不同藏经，纠正原经文部分错漏之处，就经中出现的地名、人名、法相名词、艰涩文句及其它译本的不同翻译作出注释，方便读者更为精准地把握根本教义与修行原理。本书有较高的学术、实用、版本和收藏价值，是广大佛教信徒与佛学研究者难得的学习、研究参考书。

《尼采四书》套装包含德国哲学家尼采*重要的四部作品：一是《悲剧的诞生》，二是《快乐的科学》，三是《查拉图斯特拉如是说》，四是《权力意志》。 一、《悲剧的诞生》是青年尼采在巴塞尔大学当教授时的作品，讨论主题是作为*文艺种类的希腊悲剧。 二、《快乐的科学》是尼采中期的代表作，科利版编者甚至认为它在尼采哲学中具有“中心地位”，主要是因为它有承上启下的意义。该书主体部分由五部箴言/格言组成，共有383节；头部分是德语韵律短诗，标题取自诗人歌德的同名小歌剧《戏谑、诡计与复仇》；结尾部分（附录）则是尼采作于西西里岛的一组诗，立题为“自由鸟王子之歌”。从这本书始，尼采作为哲学家越来越走向孤独，越来越偏离严格学术的方法理想。尼采此时已经形成了成熟的箴言体哲学写作风格，它超越科学和艺术，又将两者合一，构成一种“快乐的科学”。 三、《查拉图斯特拉如是说》可能是尼采著作中*有名的一本，更可以说是尼采著作中*可读、也*不好懂的一本。此书一头就提出了骇人听闻的判词“上帝死了”，尼采成熟时期关于“超人”、“权力意志”和“永恒轮回”的核心思想，均在其中得到了传达。 四、《权力意志》是尼采晚期笔记，是一本未竟之作，这些笔记是为他所谓的“哲学主楼”准备的。尼采雄心勃勃的大书计划（形而上学计划）虽未既，但已有相当成熟的构思。

本书是美国比较文学学会前会长、著名汉学家苏源熙教授关于比较文学的名著。作者通过讨论中国的《诗经》注释史，从而广泛地探讨了存在于其中的比较诗学的课题。本书采用解构主义的修辞阅读方法，重构了中国儒家对于《诗经》诗歌的注释方式，将其视为一种“讽寓性”的古典美学模式；又以同样的修辞阅读法，重新解读了17—18世纪欧洲传教士关于中国哲学问题的争论和黑格尔对中国历史的哲学论述，并将这两者与儒家注经者并置，把他们的工作视为可资比较的、以美学模式建构中国历史的创造。另一方面，此书在《诗经》研究上也颇多新见，具体分析了《诗经》从“诗言志”到“诗以言志”中得到“讽寓性”意义的过程，指出《国风》讽寓意义的获得与汉儒将注释《雅》《颂》的传统施加到《国风》上有关，又分析了《诗大序》及其理论来源《礼记·乐记》两者差异中表现出的意义，而在对《诗经》具体文本的细读中也能发现重大的理论问题。

《尼采四书》套装包含德国哲学家尼采重要的四部作品：一是《悲剧的诞生》，二是《快乐的科学》，三是《查拉图斯特拉如是说》，四是《权力意志》。 一、《悲剧的诞生》是青年尼采在巴塞尔大学当教授时的作品，讨论主题是作为*文艺种类的希腊悲剧。 二、《快乐的科学》是尼采中期的代表作，科利版编者甚至认为它在尼采哲学中具有“中心地位”，主要是因为它有承上启下的意义。该书主体部分由五部箴言/格言组成，共有383节；开头部分是德语韵律短诗，标题取自诗人歌德的同名小歌剧《戏谑、诡计与复仇》；结尾部分（附录）则是尼采作于西西里岛的一组诗，立题为“自由鸟王子之歌”。从这本书开始，尼采作为哲学家越来越走向孤独，越来越偏离严格学术的方法理想。尼采此时已经形成了成熟的箴言体哲学写作风格，它超越科学和艺术，又将两者合一，构成一种“快乐的科学”。 三、《查拉图斯特拉如是说》可能是尼采著作中有名的一本，更可以说是尼采著作中可读、也不好懂的一本。此书一开头就提出了骇人听闻的判词“上帝死了”，尼采成熟时期关于“超人”、“权力意志”和“永恒轮回”的核心思想，均在其中得到了传达。 四、《权力意志》是尼采晚期笔记，是一本未竟之作，这些笔记是为他所谓的“哲学主楼”准备的。尼采雄心勃勃的大书计划（形而上学计划）虽未既，但已有相当成熟的构思。