Cartea este o culegere de eseuri pe teme de istorie literar?, istoria ideilor ?i probleme generale de estetica artelor, toate acestea fiind abordate dintr-un accentuat unghi filozofic ?i ?tiin?ific deopotriv?.

Apology presents the speech of self-defence given by Socrates in his trial for impiety and corruption specifically against the charges of corrupting the young, and by not believing in the gods in whom the city believes, but in other daimonia that are novel.

After an interval of some months or years, and at Phlius, a town of Peloponnesus, the tale of the last hours of Socrates is narrated to Echecrates and other Phliasians by Phaedo the beloved disciple. The Dialogue necessarily takes the form of a narrative, because Socrates has to be described acting as well as speaking. The minutest particulars of the event are interesting to distant friends, and the narrator has an equal interest in them.

Of all the writings of Plato the Timaeus is the most obscure and repulsive to the modern reader, and has nevertheless had the greatest influence over the ancient and mediaeval world. The obscurity arises in the infancy of physical science, out of the confusion of theological, mathematical, and physiological notions, out of the desire to conceive the whole of nature without any adequate knowledge of the parts, and from a greater perception of similarities which lie on the surface than of differences which are hidden from view.

The Ion is the shortest, or nearly the shortest, of all the writings which bear the name of Plato, and is not authenticated by any early external testimony. The grace and beauty of this little work supply the only, and perhaps a sufficient, proof of its genuineness. The plan is simple; the dramatic interest consists entirely in the contrast between the irony of Socrates and the transparent vanity and childlike enthusiasm of the rhapsode Ion.

《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。

《维摩诘经》是大乘佛教的早期经典之一，因为此经的主人公为维摩诘居士，故而得名。唐玄奘，宋法戒和尚都曾译过此经。宣传在世俗生活中也能修炼成佛。《维摩诘经》[2]运用不可思议的不二法门，消解一切矛盾，影响了禅宗思想、禅悟思维、公案机锋。禅宗将《维摩诘经》作为宗经之一，将不二法门作为处世机的态度与方法，泯灭一切对立，从而获得了生命自由的无限超越。

《圆觉经》是佛为文殊、普贤等十二位菩萨宣说如来圆觉的妙理和观行方法。其中心思想主要在强调一切万法皆含摄与圆觉妙心，有情众生的四圣六凡和无情的山河大地，都是圆觉妙心所变现的。《圆觉经》对中国佛教华严宗、天台宗禅宗、密宗等都有重要的影响，如第七章大威德的出场，就是明显的密宗特征，因此也受到密宗的重视。

本书所集的“净土三经”，就是净土宗所依据的主要经典。这三经即是：一、《无量寿经》：叙说阿弥陀佛因位的愿行和果上的功德。二、《观无量寿经》：向人们显示往生净土的行业，即修持净土的方法。三、《阿弥陀佛》：展现净土的正依报庄严、极乐世界的美妙，及执持阿弥陀佛名号的种种利益和方便。 净土是一个庄严清净的世界，是一个无苦无秽的妙土。西方净土，是“净土三经”及中国净土宗所着力宣扬的一个极乐世界，如何能追寻到一块无苦疾杂染的净土？“净土三经“所涵盖的内容足以答复所有的质疑。

对华严经各品的内容做简洁的介绍与解读。对华严经的真义以及如何修习实践等都有明确讲解。

佛教中三本经书《四十二章经》《八大人觉经》《佛遗教经》原文及白话释译。

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

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.

Lucrarea adun? eseuri filozofice ?i evoc? figuri de marc? ale culturii rom?ne.

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.

S?rmanul Nietzsche, ?bestia blond?“, a avut ?i el parte de crucificare. Multor profe?i ?i m?ntuitori li se ?nt?mpl? asta: eventual ?i ?n timpul vie?ii, ?i dup? moarte. Nietzsche, r?zvr?titul ?mpotriva legilor celor vechi, ?ntemeietorul orgolios al noii sale ?religii“, a trebuit s? suporte ?i el toate e?ecurile ?i r?st?lm?cirile posibile, ba chiar ?i punerea terifiant? ?n practic? a unora dintre ideile lui, care nici nu mai erau ale lui ?i, ?ndeob?te, nu mai erau idei…?Viclenia ra?iunii“, implicit a istoriei, o descrisese Hegel, unul dintre cei mul?i pe care Nietzsche nu-i agrea. Dincoace de istorie ?i chiar dincolo de ea, r?m?n c?r?ile. Omul n-a fost s? fie m?ntuit de Nietzsche. C?r?ile lui vor d?inui printre oameni: pentru oameni.

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?.

„Greu este s? fii bun“. A?a suna verdictul unui filozof presocratic la care m? încruntam abitir pe la 20 de ani. Acum, la 60, dup? ce am înv??at de la aceia?i în?elep?i c? „to?i oamenii sunt r?i“, dar c? „nu trebuie s?-i judeci“, nu m? mai gr?besc cu încruntarea. Doar zâmbesc pu?in ofilit, în dulce resemnare. Cu un astfel de zâmbet – trist, admirativ, îng?duitor ?i comp?timitor totodat? – trebuie întâmpinat (?i f?r? îndoial? iertat) Tomas H., personajul axial din romanul Cameliei Cavadia. Destinat fericirii, dar e?uat lamentabil. Vinovat inocent ?i egofil culpabil. ?i totu?i înseninat, dureros de triumf?tor în final, dup? ce altruismul învinge mizantropia, iar d?ruirea de sine absolv? vinov??ia. În fond, ce ar fi vina f?r? isp??ire? Un roman despre povara fericirii (chiar a?a!) ?i chinul permanent al demonicului de a surpa – prin patologia patimii oarbe – iubirea curat?, armonia conjugal?, farmecul divin al copil?riei ?i nobila condi?ie de p?rinte. Un debut surprinz?tor prin precizia arhitecturii narative ?i siguran?a rotirii caruselului cu multe ?i subtile rela?ii psihologice. În plus, îmbucur?tor prin op?iunea preponderent moral?, într-o vreme dominat? de anarhie, relativism ?i etic? în r?sp?r. – Dan C. Mih?ilescu ?„De când m? ?tiu am vrut s? devin scriitoare. PR de meserie, am scris pove?tile altora, dar mi-am dat seama c? am în?untrul meu propriile pove?ti care a?teapt? s? le dau via??. Tot ceea ce am f?cut pîn? acum a roit în jurul cuvintelor. Prin prisma meseriei mele, am scris sute de comunicate, am luat zeci de interviuri, m-am trezit cu zeci de fraze construite-n cap ?i am adormit cu altele bâzâindu-mi în ureche. Am hot?rât ca e timpul s?-mi urmez visul ?i s? devin ceea ce m-am sim?it mereu.“ – Camelia Cavadia

Dac? Riscul g?ndirii nu s-a bucurat de aten?ia meritat?, probabil din cauza exploziei nea?teptate de produc?ii culturale – ?i mai ales pseudoculturale – care s-a petrecut dup? decembrie 1989, noua lucrare a celor doi g?nditori, scris? dup? aproape dou? decenii, ar trebui s? aib? toate premisele pentru a fi receptat? cum se cuvine.Sub forma ?n?el?toare a dialogului ?ntre cinci personaje caracterizate – fiecare – de un stil de g?ndire bine determinat cei doi ascund nenum?rate giuvaere ale g?ndirii originale, penetrante ?i vizionare. Cititorul obi?nuit s? caute pe copert? elementele care s?-i permit? m?car printr-un exerci?iu deductiv descifrarea ingredientelor discursului celor doi autori va fi surprins la fiecare pagin?.Dac? ?cele 5 lucruri esen?iale pe care trebuie s? le ?tii despre via??“ reprezint? de cele mai multe ori o simpl? etichet?, sub care compozi?ia eterogen? a con?inutului, superficialitatea ?i caracterul facil al expunerii mul?umesc ?i conving doar pe termen scurt, ?n cazul lucr?rii celor doi filosofi rom?ni lucrurile stau exact pe dos. ?n cele cinci capitole care analizeaz? avatarurile g?ndirii sunt ascunse nenum?rate modele de ?n?elepciune ?i de disciplin? a logosului, f?r? a fi anun?ate, explicate cu toate determina?iile conexe sau accentuate ?n vreun fel. Acesta este probabil cel mai elegant mod de a r?spl?ti cititorii: spun?ndu-le cum f?r? a-i avertiza c?.Pentru cine ??i dore?te totu?i o etichet? care s? u?ureze clasificarea acestui volum, cea mai concis? ?i mai potrivit? este oferit? de un binecunoscut dicton latin: Sapienti sat. ?ntr-un ocean de solu?ii, Sorin Vieru ?i Terente Robert construiesc o insul? de probleme a c?rei tr?inicie este alarmant? ?i, ?n acela?i timp, reconfortant?.

Istoriile excentricit??ii din Logica elefan?ilor adopt? tonul comentariului pe dou? voci, simul?nd (?i stimul?nd) un canon care dubleaz?, prin reluare, recuperarea detaliului ca fiind princip(i)al. Fiziologiile devin ilustre, consecven?a ??i expune abera?ia, apetitul pentru trecut este inevitabil patologic, iar neao?ismele curente rezoneaz?, fire?te, cu globalizarea. ?ntr-o logic? elefantin?, inteligen?a are a se v?di, chiar gigantesc, ?n nimicnicia ?faptului divers“. Supraabunden?a concentr?rii miniaturale exacerbeaz? efectele ?ngurgit?rii unei mu?te ori ale studierii timpului liber al felinelor de cas?. Lenjeria intim? necesit? un tratament aristocratic, iar ?njur?tura ?i b?taia se sacralizeaz? ?ntr-un univers ?n care guvernarea p?r?se?te modelul pastoral pentru recursul la structuri galinacee. Textele lui Ciprian V?lcan ?i ale Danei Percec (sur)prind acest nesa? cu care lumea ?ns??i pare a-?i exprimenta limitele, n?ucit? parc? de proliferarea propriilor excese.