Aceasta este prima lucrare scris? ?n limba rom?n? care se concentreaz? asupra operei lui Thomas Kuhn, probabil cel mai influent filosof al ?tiin?ei din ultima jum?tate a secolului trecut. ?n particular, lucrarea analizeaz? ?n detaliu, ?ntr-o manier? original?, o idee foarte provocatoare a filosofului american, teza incomensurabilit??ii conceptuale, conform c?reia, ?n dezvoltarea cunoa?terii ?tiin?ifice, teoriile noi utilizeaz? un limbaj ireductibil la cel al teoriilor anterioare. Totodat?, lucrarea se apleac? ?ntr-o manier? sistematic? asupra conceptului de paradigm?, introdus de Kuhn, care avea s? fie utilizat ulterior pe scar? larg? ?n filosofie ?i ?tiin?ele sociale.

Volumul de fa?? cuprinde trei eseuri ale autorului francez despre ,,r?sul provocat ?n mod special de c?tre comic“. Acestea au la baz? ideile urm?toare: comicul este uman, r?sul are nevoie de o deta?are emo?ional? fa?? de obiectul/subiectul vizat, r?sul are o func?ie social?. Autorul exploreaz? diferite ipostaze ale comicului ?n art? sau ?n via?a de zi cu zi ?n func?ie de cauza care a produs efectul respectiv. Un om care se ?mpiedic? ?i cade poate st?rni r?sul trec?torilor. ?n aceast? situa?ie comicul survine ca urmare a rigidit??ii mecanice a personajului care a c?zut pentru nu a putut evita un obstacol. ?i o diformitate poate st?rni r?sul, ?nsa una care poate fi imitat? de o persoan? care nu are acea diformitate. Exist? ?i un comic al mi?c?rilor, de exemplu, gesturile unui orator. ?n cel de-al doilea capitol, autorul analizeaz? alt? dou? categorii: comicul de situa?ie ?i pe cel de limbaj. ?n fine, al treilea capitol este consacrat comicului de caracter. Anexa de la sf?r?itul lucr?rii curprinde o scurt? discu?ie despre defini?iile comicului, dar ?i despre metoda utilizat? de autor ?n cele trei capitole. Comicul ?ine de aceast? dimensiune a persoanei prin care se seam?n? cu un lucru, acest aspect al evenimentelor umane care imit? prin rigiditatea sa de un fel cu totul spe-cial, mecanismul pur ?i simplu, automatismul, de fapt mi?carea f?r? via??. El exprim?, a?adar, o imperfec?iune individual? sau colectiv? care necesit? o corec?ie imediat?. R?sul este ?ns??i aceast? corec?ie. R?sul este un anumit tip de gest social care subliniaz? ?i reprim? o distragere special? a oamenilor ?i evenimentelor.

Publicat? ini?ial, ?n trei articole, ?n 1861, o lucrare fundamental?, cu o influen?? de necontestat ?n domeniul ?tiin?elor sociale, Utilitarismul lui J.S.Mill cuprinde o serie de discu?ii despre principiile care stau la baza doctrinei filosofice a utilitarismului. Structura lucr?rii, cu cinci capitole clare ?i concise (Considera?ii generale, Ce este utilitarismul, Despre sanc?iunea fundamental? a principiului utilit??ii, De ce fel de demonstra?ie este susceptibil principiul utilit??ii, Despre leg?tura dintre dreptate ?i utilitate), este elegant? ?i faciliteaz? ?n?elegerea ideilor aprofundate de g?nditorul englez. ?ntr-un sens, Utilitarismul reprezint? o rafinare a ideilor lui Jeremy Bentham despre ceea ce ar trebui s? constituie m?sura binelui ?i a r?ului: exigen?a de a ob?ine cea mai mare fericire pentru un num?r c?t mai mare de oameni. ?ntr-un alt sens, mai larg ?i mai important, cartea de fa?? formuleaz? ?i analizeaz? ?n profunzime toate implica?iile, pentru moral?, ale principiului utilit??ii. John Stuart Mill aduce etica ?n vecin?tatea economiei (maximizarea fericirii, ierarhizarea pl?cerilor ?n func?ie de profit, decizia bazat? pe calcularea utilit??ii alternativelor etc.) ?i ?ncearc? s? rezolve toate dificult??ile rezultate din acest mod de a trata problema drept??ii. Mill ofer? r?spunsuri la c?teva ?ntreb?ri esen?iale precum: ,,?n ce const? fericirea?“, ,,Ce urm?rim, de fapt, atunci c?nd alegem o anumit? conduit??“, ,,Ce pl?ceri sunt preferabile?“, ,,Cum trebuie s? arate legile (?i sanc?iunile inerente) dac? morala se ?ntemeieaz? pe utilitate?“, ,,De ce este preferabil principiul utilit??ii, at?t din perspectiva binelui personal, c?t ?i din aceea a binelui public?“

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.

Antropologie ?i antroposofie ? Max Dessoir despre antroposofie ? Franz BrentanoAlc?tuind cuprinsul acestei lucr?ri, Rudolf Steiner reveleaz? ?c?teva din firele ?tiin?ifice care trebuie trasate pornind de la antropozofie la filozofie, la psihologie ?i la fiziologie“. Cunoa?terea omului va trebui atunci s? fie extins? ?in?nd cont de enigmaticele aspecte ale vie?ii sale interioare, privite din perspective multiple. ?n aceast? carte, Rudolf Steiner prezint? ?n scris aspectele semnificative ale configur?rii ?ntreite a fiin?ei omene?ti: corpul fizic, organismul sufletesc ?i configura?ia spiritual?.

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.

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

Das Werk, das aus einer Vorrede und drei ?Abhandlungen“ besteht, geh?rt zu den einflussreichsten Schriften Nietzsches. Er legte hier keine Aphorismen vor wie in den meisten anderen seiner Werke, sondern l?ngere, systematische Texte mit durchaus wissenschaftlichem Anspruch: Er stellt darin soziologische, historische und psychologische Thesen auf. Nietzsche wollte anders als klassische Moralphilosophen keine Moral herleiten oder begründen, sondern die geschichtliche Entwicklung und die psychischen Voraussetzungen bestimmter moralischer Wertvorstellungen nachvollziehen. Er fragt also nicht, wie die Menschen handeln sollten, sondern warum Menschen (Einzelne oder Gruppen) glauben, sie sollten auf bestimmte Weise handeln, oder andere dazu bringen wollen, so oder so zu handeln.

We have already discussed the first causes of nature, and all natural motion, also the stars ordered in the motion of the heavens, and the physical element-enumerating and specifying them and showing how they change into one another-and becoming and perishing in general. There remains for consideration a part of this inquiry which all our predecessors called meteorology. It is concerned with events that are natural, though their order is less perfect than that of the first of the elements of bodies. They take place in the region nearest to the motion of the stars. Such are the milky way, and comets, and the movements of meteors.

Elsewhere we have investigated in detail the movement of animals after their various kinds, the differences between them, and the reasons for their particular characters (for some animals fly, some swim, some walk, others move in various other ways); there remains an investigation of the common ground of any sort of animal movement whatsoever.

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.

La acest ?nceput de secol XXI, ?n ?ntreaga lume se intensific? studierea problemelor fundamentale, eterne, ca via?a ?i moartea, rostul vie?ii, originile ?i destina?iile noastre ultime, c?t ?i ?ntrebarea cu privire la existen?a de dup? moarte. Cartea examineaz? filosofia de via?? a budismului Nichiren ?n lumina ideilor de ultim? or? despre via?? ?i moarte, de?i cuprinderea exhaustiv? ?ntr?un singur volum a unei probleme at?t de vaste este imposibil?. Budismul Nichiren ofer? oamenilor mijloacele de a??i transforma destinele prin ?nf?ptuirea propriei revolu?ii umane individuale ?i dezv?luie calea spre pace ?i fericire.

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.

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.'

Kitab?n ba?l?ca vasf? olarak, Antik Yunan polisinden günümüze uzanan yolda, ?ocuk ve gen? yeti?tirmenin kamusal ve insan? ?nemini ortaya koyarken, fizik?, ahl?k? ve kültürel y?nleriyle bir bütün olarak e?itim felsefesi üzerine kaleme al?nm?? en temel eserlerden biri olmas? g?sterilebilir… ?Bu noktada, Rousseau’nun, “Tüm yazd?klar?m i?inde en iyi eserim” diye takdim etti?i?Emile’in 1762’de yay?nland???nda lanetlenip, 30 y?l sonra, Frans?z Devrimi’nin ?ncüleri i?in Frans?z milli e?itiminin ilham kayna?? addedildi?i dikkate al?nd???nda, Kant’?n e?itim üzerine sarf etti?i s?zlerin tarihsel ve toplumsal ba?lam? da ortaya ??kar. 18.yüzy?l?n ortalar?ndan 19.yüzy?l?n ba?lar?na dek ge?en bir ?mürlük sürede k?ta Avrupas? büyük bir do?umun sanc?lar?yla sars?lmaktad?r. ?ncesi ve sonras? diye tarihi ikiye ay?ran ?ifte Devrim (Sanayi ve Frans?z Devrimi) büyük bir zihinsel d?nü?üme yol a?mak üzeredir. Kant’? büyüten, ya da büyüklü?üne ayr?ca de?er katan bir unsur da, onun i?te bu ?a??n insan? olmas?d?r. ?Kant, 1806’daki Jena Sava??n? ve Napoleon i?galinin Alman milleti üzerinde yaratt??? ?ok ve deh?eti g?remeden vefat etse de, Wilhelm von Humboldt gibi e?itim reformcular? arac?l???yla Prusya (genel itibar?yla da Alman) e?itim sistemi i?in ne denli ?nemli bir yol a?t???n? tüm kitap boyunca seziyor gibidir. Bununla birlikte Kant’?nE?itim ?zerine’si, milli dilde ibadet edip, okumay? yazmay? te?vik eden Luhterci gelene?in Pietizmle kendini yenilemi? ve Büyük Frederich taraf?ndan te?vik edilmi? olan e?itim anlay???n?n olgunla?ma ?a??n?n da bir ürünüdür. Bu sebeple, kitab?n tamam?na h?kim olan motif, Ayd?nlanmac? bir “i?sel ?zgürle?im” ve “ruhan? terbiye” aras?nda kurulmas? gereken büyük dengedir. ? ? ?Bu arka plan? dikkate alarak, ?imdi kitaba biraz daha yak?ndan bakabiliriz… E?itim ?zerine, memleketin sayg?n ?evirmenlerinden biri olan Ahmet Aydo?an’?n sunu? ve ?ns?züyle ba?l?yor. ?stü kapal? fakat sitem dolu bir de?erlendirme yaz?s? olan “’Sapere Aude!’ Diye ??kt?k Yola”, Kant’a s?zü teslim etmeden evvel, 30 sayfada, Kant’?n dü?ünce dünyas?ndan ne denli uzakta kald???m?z?n ele?tirisini yap?yor. Bu arada, kitab?n ortaya ??k?? ?yküsüne de 22.sayfada a??klay?c? bir notla yer veriliyor. K?ningsberg ?niversitesi’nde muhtelif zamanlarda verilen dersler i?in haz?rlanan notlardan derlendi?i anla??lan?E?itim ?zerine, modern Türk?e’nin bir felsefe dili olamamas?n?n da etkisiyle, ?e?itli dipnotlar arac?l???yla kavramlar?n ve kelimelerin daha anla??l?r k?l?nd??? bir h?lde okura sunuluyor. ? “?nsan E?itilmesi Gereken Bir Varl?kt?r”: ? ?Kant, dü?üncelerini temellendirdi?i giri? sayfalar?nda insan?n e?itime muhta? ten varl?k oldu?u ger?e?inden hareket ediyor ve insan?n ancak e?itimle insan olabilece?ini dile getiriyor. (s.35) E?itime y?nelik bu yakla??m, Kant’?n idealizm felsefesinin ger?ekle?mesine giden yolu a?an anahtarlardan biri say?labilir.? ? ???NDEK?LER: ? KANT'IN YA?AMI…KANT'A G?RE AYDINLANMA NED?R?AHLAKIN METAF?Z???…KANT VE E??T?M ?ZER?NE….KANT VE TANRIKANT IN ELE?T?REL FELSEFES?KANT’IN ELE?T?REL FELSEFES?NE PLATON VE PARMEN?DES?N KATKILARI Kritisizm Nedir? KANT FELSEFES?N?N TEMEL KAVRAMLARIKANT’IN KURAMSAL METAF?Z?K ELE?T?R?S? HAKKINDAK? D???NCELER?..I. KANT'IN LE?BN?Z- WOLFF VE HUME'UN FELSEFELER?NE Y?NEL?K ELE?T?R?S?II. KANT'TA METAF?Z?K B?LG?N?N OLANA?I: METAF?Z?K OLANAKLI MIDIR?SONU?LARKANT’IN D?NYA YURTTA?LI?I AMACINA Y?NEL?K GENEL B?R TAR?H D???NCES?KANT’?I EBED? BARI?” D???NCES?S?YAS? HAKLARDA TEOR? VE PRAT?K ?L??K?S? ?ZER?NEK?RESELLE?EN SORUNLAR KAR?ISINDA KANT ET???UNUTULMAZ KANT S?ZLER?…..

A compreens?o de Contos d’Escárnio n?o poderia restringir-se à constru??o do horizonte no qual nasce, o século XX. A inten??o de escrever lixo e bestagem, anunciada pelo narrador, aos poucos, revela um grotesco vindo de um longínquo, de um aquém. Por isto, faz-se necessário também compreender o fluxo histórico-estético que encontra acolhida na imagina??o de Hilda Hilst, cujo amparo conceitual buscou-se à estética da recep??o e do efeito. Na Teoria Estética, o feio insurge como fen?meno da realidade artística contempor?nea; refúgio de sobrevivência da arte e dos belos escritos, deixa livre à plasticidade do presente a tarefa da denúncia da realidade. Em protesto, o dissonante reivindica cidadania e se mantém como possibilidade da arte. Neste sentido, tem lugar em Hilda Hilst a atualidade do grotesco.

《大众哲学》是艾思奇在20世纪30年代为通俗宣传马克思主义哲学而写的著作。 全书从什么是哲学，唯心论、二元论和唯物论，辩证唯物论的认识论，唯物辩证法的基本规律及唯物辩证法的范畴五个方面对哲学思想行了全面而系统地介绍和阐释。该书自出版以来，一版再版，书中的观不仅在当时成为人们学习马克思主义哲学的启蒙，而且至今仍然具有其理论和现实的意义。 本书*特色就是将深刻的哲学观寓于浅显生动的事例之中，读者可以透过这些事例，发现看似高高在上的哲学思想，其实在人们的日常生活中随处可见。其内容的通俗易懂通俗哲学写作之一代风气。

Ce este adev?rul? De unde ?tiu cine sunt? De ce ar trebui s? fim buni? Exist? multe c?r?i despre filosofie. Cu toate acestea, Cine sunt eu? difer? fa?? de celelalte lucr?ri de introducere ?n filosofie. Nimeni nu a reu?it p?n? acum s? pun? cititorul fa??-n fa?? cu marile ?ntreb?ri ale omenirii ?ntr-o manier? at?t de documentat?, de competent? ?i, ?n acela?i timp, cu umor ?i cu elegan??. Prezenta lucrare reprezint? o c?l?torie unic? prin noianul de cuno?tin?e pe care le avem despre om. Precht ne prezint? tot ceea ce este mai nou ?n neuro?tiin??, ?n psihologie ?i ?n filosofie. Fie c? pleac? ?n cercetarea sensului vie?ii pornind de la analiza unui episod din Star Trek sau de la melodia Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds a celor de la Beatles, cartea ne pune ?n fa?a unui traseu captivant, ?n care vom descoperi cele mai surprinz?toare lucruri despre noi ?n?ine.

《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。

《悦心语(南怀瑾先生*述佳句选摘)(精)》是南怀瑾先生语录集，以笔记形式呈现。取材自南先生《论语别裁》、《孟子旁通》、《老子他说》、《禅宗与道家》等*作。编者“断章取义”，稍加整理。本书内容博大精深，文字简短，通俗易懂，便于现代读者阅读。 《悦心语》是南怀瑾先生的语录集，从《论语别裁》《孟子旁通》等南怀瑾先生代表作中精选经典章句而成，浓缩南师智慧精华。 南怀瑾先生是海内外享有盛誉的儒释道大师，将中华文化各种思想融会贯通，带领国人重读中国古代儒、释、道典籍，引导人们关注人的内心，关注人伦世界，关注人文教化。 南师*作不是象牙塔里不食人间烟火的精密考校疏证，处处体现着对现实世界的深切关怀，和芸芸众生的生活与命运紧密相连。南怀瑾先生认为，人生的*高境界是：佛为心，道为骨，儒为表，大度看世界；技在手，能在身，思在脑，从容过生活。这正是夫子自道。 谨以《悦心语》一书，深切缅怀敬爱的南怀瑾先生。  

《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。