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

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

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

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

Human reason, in one sphere of its cognition, is called upon to consider questions, which it cannot decline, as they are presented by its own nature, but which it cannot answer, as they transcend every faculty of the mind. It falls into this difficulty without any fault of its own. It begins with principles, which cannot be dispensed with in the field of experience, and the truth and sufficiency of which are, at the same time, insured by experience. With these principles it rises, in obedience to the laws of its own nature, to ever higher and more remote conditions. But it quickly discovers that, in this way, its labours must remain ever incomplete, because new questions never cease to present themselves; and thus it finds itself compelled to have recourse to principles which transcend the region of experience, while they are regarded by common sense without distrust. It thus falls into confusion and contradictions, from which it conjectures the presence of latent errors, which, however, it is unable to discover, because the principles it employs, transcending the limits of experience, cannot be tested by that criterion. The arena of these endless contests is called Metaphysic.Time was, when she was the queen of all the sciences; and, if we take the will for the deed, she certainly deserves, so far as regards the high importance of her object-matter, this title of honour. Now, it is the fashion of the time to heap contempt and scorn upon her; and the matron mourns, forlorn and forsaken, like Hecuba: At first, her gover Modo maxima rerum, Tot generis, natisque potens... Nunc trahor exul, inops. —Ovid, Metamorphoses. xiii under the administration of the dogmatists, was an absolute despotism. But, as the legislative continued to show traces of the ancient barbaric rule, her empire gradually broke up, and intestine wars introduced the reign of anarchy; while the sceptics, like nomadic tribes, who hate a permanent habitation and settled mode of living, attacked from time to time those who had organized themselves into civil communities. But their number was, very happily, small; and thus they could not entirely put a stop to the exertions of those who persisted in raising new edifices, although on no settled or uniform plan. In recent times the hope dawned upon us of seeing those disputes settled, and the legitimacy of her claims established by a kind of physiology of the human understanding—that of the celebrated Locke. But it was found that—although it was affirmed that this so-called queen could not refer her descent to any higher source than that of common experience, a circumstance which necessarily brought suspicion on her claims—as this genealogy was incorrect, she persisted in the advancement of her claims to sovereignty. Thus metaphysics necessarily fell back into the antiquated and rotten constitution of dogmatism, and again became obnoxious to the contempt from which efforts had been made to save it. At present, as all methods, according to the general persuasion, have been tried in vain, there reigns nought but weariness and complete indifferentism—the mother of chaos and night in the scientific world, but at the same time the source of, or at least the prelude to, the re-creation and reinstallation of a science, when it has fallen into confusion, obscurity, and disuse from ill directed effort. I do not mean by this a criticism of books and systems, but a critical inquiry into the faculty of reason, with reference to the cognitions to which it strives to attain without the aid of experience; in other words, the solution of the question regarding the possibility or impossibility of metaphysics, and the determination of the origin, as well as of the extent and limits of this science. All this must be done on the basis of principles. ABOUT AUTHOR: That all our knowledge begins with experience there can be no doubt. For how is it possible that the faculty of cognition should be awakened into exercise otherwise than by means of objects which affect our senses, and partly of themselves produce representations, partly rouse our powers of understanding into activity, to compare to connect, or to separate these, and so to convert the raw material of our sensuous impressions into a knowledge of objects, which is called experience? In respect of time, therefore, no knowledge of ours is antecedent to experience, but begins with it. But, though all our knowledge begins with experience, it by no means follows that all arises out of experience. For, on the contrary, it is quite possible that our empirical knowledge is a compound of that which we receive through impressions, and that which the faculty of cognition supplies from itself (sensuous impressions giving merely the occasion), an addition which we cannot distinguish from the original element given by sense, till long practice has made us attentive to, and skilful in separating it. It is, therefore, a question which requires close investigation, and not to b

In The philosophy of mathematics, mathematics employee classification efforts to understand the philosophy is the branch.?The main question is related to the source of the object that is the subject of mathematics and mathematics. In particular examine the characteris-tics of a true proposition:??? What are the sources of mathematical subject matter??? What is about the meaning of a mathematical object??? What is the nature of a mathematical proposition??? What is the relationship between logic and mathematics??? What is the role of mathematics hermeneutic??? Mathematics played a role in the investigation which type?? What is the subject of mathematical investigations??? What is the human traits behind mathematics??? What is mathematical beauty??? What is the nature and source of mathematical truth???What is the relationship between mathematics and abstract material universe with the world???Another important issue is the reality of a mathematical the-ory. Mathematics (from the Natural Sciences as different) experimentally is sought reasons to find real specific mathematical theory can not be tested (see. Epistemology). Luitz that Brouwer 's laid the foundation for intuitionist mathematics of the representatives knew of this view. The logical mathematics is the approach of Bertrand Russell and Gottlob Frege was defended by David Hilbert, formalism is considered the repre-sentative of the current. Traditionalism logician the empiricist's (Rudolf Carnap, A. J. Ayer, Carl Hempel) were represented by one of the key issues in the philosophy of mathematics is also important to regard the certainty problem. Austrian logician Kurt G?del's also work Mathema-tics and mathematics.

《马克斯·韦伯作品集（套装9册）》包括《学术与政治》《新教伦理与资本主义精神》《社会学的基本概念；经济行动与社会团体》《支配社会学》《中国的宗教：儒教与道教》《印度的宗教：印度教与佛教》《宗教社会学 宗教与世界》《经济与历史 支配的类型》《法律社会学 非正当性的支配》。1.《学术与政治》一百年前的韦伯命题，今日知识人的共同困境。 2.《新教伦理与资本主义精神》韦伯代表性作品，探讨“资本主义”的根本性著作。 3.《社会学的基本概念；经济行动与社会团体》一本不可或缺的社会学入门书，深入了解韦伯学术的基础和核心概念，系统地展现了韦伯本人，对“理解社会学”研究典范的全盘性设计。 4.《支配社会学》对“权力与支配”的社会学研究，韦伯社会学“功力纯熟与精致的部分”，通过研究宗教与政治的交互影响，进一步探讨其与近代民主政治的关系。 5.《中国的宗教：儒教与道教》专注于探索中国社会与西欧不同的地方，以此突显西方基督教文明的特色，并且提出了一个问题：为什么资本主义没有在中国发展呢 6.《印度的宗教：印度教与佛教》对亚洲而言，举凡超越现实利益的思想，很少能不将其根源追溯到印度的，尤其是印度的救赎宗教，在整个亚洲地区扮演了类似于基督教的角色。 7.《宗教社会学 宗教与世界》研究宗教行为对于伦理与经济的影响及对于政治与教育的影响。宗教社会学是韦伯晚年研究核心所在，在比较宗教社会学中的地位举世公认。 8.《经济与历史 支配的类型》将韦伯作为历史学家的一面展现的淋漓尽致，通过韦伯对支配类型的研究使其与宗教、法律与经济史的研究贯串成一个完整的体系。 9.《法律社会学 非正当性的支配》法律到底是怎么来的？法律的演讲过程如何？深入浅出探讨了“法”的缘起与变化，阐明了法律与人的关系。

哲学究竟给我们上了怎样的一课？面对浩如烟海的哲学作品，我们似乎很难找到答案。威尔·杜兰特直面哲学中的教训，从逻辑学与认识论、形而上学、伦理学、美学、历史、政治、宗教等方面，梳理了不同哲学流派对哲学基本问题的论述，对这些问题行了解读，并提出了切实可行的解决方案。 哲学作为一个辉煌的领域，在曲折中不断发展，成就与教训相伴而生。杜兰特给我们提供了一个新颖的角度，他让不同哲学流派的思想互相碰撞，我们在字里行间就能得到启示：在认识论和神学领域，哲学是一个受害者；而科学与哲学互相依靠，哲学是“对经验的一种整体性研究”。 本书体现了杜兰特丰富的哲学理论和深厚的思想底蕴，书中蕴含的哲学道理，经过历史的锤炼，即使在今天，也仍能启发人们客观、理性、全面地思考未来。

      《道德经》由形而上的“道”，谈及圣人之道以及修养之道，可以指导我们为人处世，让我们做到与自然和谐相处。《道德经》仅五干余言 , 但文约意丰、博大精深 , 涵盖哲学、伦理学、政治学、军事学等诸多学科，不仅对中国古老的哲学、科学、政治、宗教等产生了深刻的影响 , 而且对中华民族的性格铸成、政治的统一与稳定 , 都起着不可估量的作用。

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

中华民族在漫长的文明程中创造出许多优秀的神话。创世神话不仅是众多神话类型的主体，而且内容丰富，形式多样，往往蕴含着一种积极向上、奋发有为、敢于创新的民族精神。 《中华创世神话选注》将中华创世神话划分为综合型创世、神的起源、世界万物起源、人类起源、动植物起源、自然现象起源等六大类型，共选录各类创世神话3000余篇。本书选录的是综合型创世神话。每篇神话除尽可能呈现文本的原来面貌之外，还增添了相应的阅读提示、基本母题等信息，并对原文本出版信息作出必要的补充和规范，使用者能够据此对每篇神话文本的出处、流传情况、叙事主题、文化内涵、关键情节、基本母题等有所把握。

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

本套装包括《荀学探微》、《范仲淹与宋学精神》、《一个当代的、大众的儒学——当代新荀学论纲》、《新四书与新儒学》、《走下神坛的牟宗三》

本书主要收集了弘一法师一生示佛徒的讲稿，和其晚年整理、辑录的处事格言。忠实地体现出弘一法师的佛学思想体系：以华严为境，四分律为行，导归净土为果。他平生重践履，讲谈要言不烦，而其慈悲的心怀则处处溢于言表。梁实秋曾称誉其讲稿“一字千金，值得所有人慢慢阅读、慢慢体味、用一生的时间静静领悟”，堪称能启悟世人的大德讲谈录。

本套装包括《逻辑思考的100个关键》《超级大脑的七个习惯》《脑力赋能》《魔力大脑》。

以绝为基础，以统一为主体，以相对为支体，所形成的具有系统性的法则。把与相对、有限与无限、基础与发展统一起来，就会形成具有方向、方法、路线的法则。三元素组成了它的基本框架，圆丶原子是它的载体。这就是哲学的根本法则，哲学和道法、自然法则、宇宙大法是“同出而异名″。

中华民族在漫长的文明程中创造出许多优秀的神话。创世神话不仅是众多神话类型的主体，而且内容丰富，形式多样，往往蕴含着一种积极向上、奋发有为、敢于创新的民族精神。 《中华创世神话选注》将中华创世神话划分为综合型创世、神的起源、世界万物起源、人类起源、动植物起源、自然现象起源等六大类型，共选录各类创世神话3000余篇。本书选录的是神的起源神话。每篇神话除尽可能呈现文本的原来面貌之外，还增添了相应的阅读提示、基本母题等信息，并对原文本出版信息作出必要的补充和规范，使用者能够据此对每篇神话文本的出处、流传情况、叙事主题、文化内涵、关键情节、基本母题等有所把握。

中华民族在漫长的文明程中创造出许多优秀的神话。创世神话不仅是众多神话类型的主体，而且内容丰富，形式多样，往往蕴含着一种积极向上、奋发有为、敢于创新的民族精神。 ? ? 《中华创世神话选注》将中华创世神话划分为综合型创世、神的起源、世界万物起源、人类起源、动植物起源、自然现象起源等六大类型，共选录各类创世神话3000余篇。本书选录的是世界万物起源神话。每篇神话除尽可能呈现文本的原来面貌之外，还增添了相应的阅读提示、基本母题等信息，并对原文本出版信息作出必要的补充和规范，使用者能够据此对每篇神话文本的出处、流传情况、叙事主题、文化内涵、关键情节、基本母题等有所把握。

提升科学逻辑能力的主要途径在于改思维方法，本书针对高中学生的特，从科学逻辑的实用角度来编写。全书分为演绎逻辑和归纳逻辑两大部分，不仅详细介绍了科学演绎和科学归纳的逻辑原理，而且结合丰富的科学案例来阐明如何发现问题、分析问题和解决问题，以此论述科学的逻辑方法，从而启发高中生的科学思维并提升其科学逻辑技能。

“人是自己命运的主宰。”——观念，推动历史改辙18世纪，是启蒙的世纪。从爱丁堡到那不勒斯，从巴黎到柏林，从波士顿到费城，“自由”是这个时代的纲领，它让人倍感欣喜：光荣的独立前景和大展宏图的无限机会向所有人敞了。人类有史以来首次将自信建立在现实基础上，各个阶层的人们自信满满，始相信理性和行动的力量。启蒙哲人们着手设计了各种改造秩序的方案——社会、伦理、科学、艺术、政治、教育……就此，挥别古老的过去，今日世界在他们手中诞生。历史如何在自由观念的冲下改头换面？个人如何在启蒙精神的照耀下主宰命运？现代史学巨擘彼得·盖伊，为我们娓娓道来。

全书分四编。编考察儒、道对政治义务的看法。“政治义务”是西方政治哲学使用的概念，主要追问“人可否独立于国家之外？”这样的问题，在儒家那里，体现为所谓“君臣之义”。儒家为政治义务行辩护，而道家不认为存在政治义务这样的东西。第二编讨论孝道难题。儒家认为成年子女对父母负有不可推卸的义务（亦即“孝”），而道家不承认有这样的义务，道家还对儒家的道德至上主义整体持一种消极评价。第三编介绍儒、道关于女性的看法。儒家以阴阳模式说明两性关系，阴（女）与阳（男）既有互补的一面，同时，阴（女）对阳（男）又有服从的一面。道家同样用阴阳模式理解男女关系，但更推崇阴（女性）的力量。第四编介绍儒、道对动物的态度。虽然儒家与道家都诉诸“自然论证”，却得出相反的结论，前者认为自然赋予了人类使用动物的合理性，后者却反对人类使用动物。