What do you think?
Rate this book
A History of Philosophy #9
از مندوبيران تا سارتر
Conceived originally as a serious presentation of the development of philosophy for Catholic seminary students, Frederick Copleston's nine-volume A History Of Philosophy has journeyed far beyond the modest purpose of its author to universal acclaim as the best history of philosophy in English.
567 pages
First published January 1, 1975
About the author
Frederick Charles Copleston
306 books267 followersFrederick (Freddie) Charles Copleston was raised an Anglican and educated at Marlborough College from 1920 to 1925. Shortly after his eighteenth birthday he converted to Catholicism, and his father subsequently almost disowned him. After the initial shock, however, his father saw fit to help Copleston through his education and he attended St. John’s in Oxford in 1925, only managing a disappointing third in classical moderations. He redeemed himself somewhat with a good second at Greats in 1929.
In 1930 Copleston became a Jesuit, and, after two years at the Jesuit novitiate in Roehampton, he moved to Heythrop. He was ordained a Jesuit priest at Heythrop College in 1937 and soon after went to Germany (1938) to complete his training. Fortunately he made it back to Britain before the outbreak of war in 1939. The war made it impossible for him to study for his doctorate, as once intended, at the Gregorian University in Rome, and instead Copleston was invited to return to Heythrop to teach the history of philosophy to the few remaining Jesuits there.
While in Heythrop Copleston had time and interest to begin the work he is most famous for, his "A History of Philosophy" - a textbook that originally set out to deliver a clear account of ancient, medieval and modern philosophy in three volumes, which was instead completed in nine volumes (1975). To this day Copleston’s history remains a monumental achievement and stays true to the authors it discusses, being very much a work in exposition.
Copleston adopted a number of honorary roles throughout the remainder of his career. He was appointed Visiting Professor at Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, spending half of each year lecturing there from 1952 to 1968. He was made Fellow of the British Academy (FBA) in 1970, given a personal professorship from his own university (Heythrop, now re-established in the University of London) in 1972 and made an Honorary Fellow of St. John’s College, Oxford, in 1975. He was Visiting Professor at the University of Santa Clara between 1974 and 1982, and he delivered the Gifford Lectures at the University of Aberdeen between 1979 and 1981. His lectures were published under the title Religion and the One, and were largely a metaphysical tract attempting to express themes perennial in his thinking and more personal than in his history. Gerard J. Hughes notes Copleston as remarking "large doses of metaphysics like that certainly don’t boost one’s sales".
He received honorary doctorates from a number of institutions, notably, Santa Clara University, California, University of Uppsala and the University of St. Andrews (D.Litt) in later years. He was selected for membership in the Royal Institute of Philosophy and in the Aristotelian Society, and in 1993 he was made CBE.
Copleston’s personality saw him engage in the many responsibilities bestowed upon him with generous commitment and good humour.
In 1930 Copleston became a Jesuit, and, after two years at the Jesuit novitiate in Roehampton, he moved to Heythrop. He was ordained a Jesuit priest at Heythrop College in 1937 and soon after went to Germany (1938) to complete his training. Fortunately he made it back to Britain before the outbreak of war in 1939. The war made it impossible for him to study for his doctorate, as once intended, at the Gregorian University in Rome, and instead Copleston was invited to return to Heythrop to teach the history of philosophy to the few remaining Jesuits there.
While in Heythrop Copleston had time and interest to begin the work he is most famous for, his "A History of Philosophy" - a textbook that originally set out to deliver a clear account of ancient, medieval and modern philosophy in three volumes, which was instead completed in nine volumes (1975). To this day Copleston’s history remains a monumental achievement and stays true to the authors it discusses, being very much a work in exposition.
Copleston adopted a number of honorary roles throughout the remainder of his career. He was appointed Visiting Professor at Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, spending half of each year lecturing there from 1952 to 1968. He was made Fellow of the British Academy (FBA) in 1970, given a personal professorship from his own university (Heythrop, now re-established in the University of London) in 1972 and made an Honorary Fellow of St. John’s College, Oxford, in 1975. He was Visiting Professor at the University of Santa Clara between 1974 and 1982, and he delivered the Gifford Lectures at the University of Aberdeen between 1979 and 1981. His lectures were published under the title Religion and the One, and were largely a metaphysical tract attempting to express themes perennial in his thinking and more personal than in his history. Gerard J. Hughes notes Copleston as remarking "large doses of metaphysics like that certainly don’t boost one’s sales".
He received honorary doctorates from a number of institutions, notably, Santa Clara University, California, University of Uppsala and the University of St. Andrews (D.Litt) in later years. He was selected for membership in the Royal Institute of Philosophy and in the Aristotelian Society, and in 1993 he was made CBE.
Copleston’s personality saw him engage in the many responsibilities bestowed upon him with generous commitment and good humour.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
July 12, 2021
A History of Philosophy 9: Modern Philosophy (A History of Philosophy #9), Frederick Charles Copleston
Volume 9: Maine de Biran to Sartre:
From the French Revolution to Auguste Comte (including Maine de Biran),
From Auguste Comte to Henri Bergson,
From Henri Bergson to Jean-Paul Sartre (including Maurice Merleau-Ponty.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز بیست و سوم ماه جولای سال 2009میلادی
عنوان: تاريخ فلسفه - از مندوبيران تا سارتر؛ جلد نهم؛ نویسنده: فردریک کاپلستون؛ مترجم: عبدالحسین آذرنگ؛ محمود یوسف ثانی؛ تهران، علمی فرهنگی، سروش صدا و سیما، 1384؛ در 567ص؛ شابک 9789644457056؛ چاپ دیگر 1392؛ موضوع: تاریخ فلسفه از نویسندگان بریتانیا - سده 20م
سری کتابهای تاریخ فلسفه، توسط گروهی از مترجمان، از جمله جنابان آقایان: «سید جلالالدین مجتبوی»، «عبدالحسین آذرنگ»، «اسماعیل سعادت»، «داریوش آشوری»، «غلامرضا اعوانی»، «ابراهیم دادجو»، «بهاء الدین خرمشاهی» و «امیر جلالالدین اعلم»؛ به فارسی برگردان شده اند
جلد نخست: (یونان و روم، مترجم: سید جلال الدّین مجتبوی)، جلد دوم: (تاریخ فلسفه سده های میانی - آگوستینوس تا اسکوتوس، مترجم: محمد ابراهیم دادجو)، جلد سوم: (تاریخ فلسفه سده های میانی - اکام تا سوآرز، مترجم: محمد ابراهیم دادجو)، جلد چهارم: (از دکارت تا لایب نیتس، مترجم: غلامرضا اعوانی)، جلد پنجم: (فیلسوفان انگلیسی از هابز تا هیوم، مترجم: امیر جلال الدین اعلم)، جلد ششم: (از ولف تا کانت، مترجم: اسماعیل سعادت، و منوچهر بزرگمهر)، جلد هفتم: (از فیشته تا نیچه، مترجم: داریوش آشوری)، جلد هشتم: (از بنتام تا راسل، مترجم: بهاء الدین خرمشاهی) و جلد نهم: (از من دوبیران تا سارتر، مترجم: عبدالحسین آذرنگ و سیدمحمود یوسف ثانی)
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 20/04/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
Volume 9: Maine de Biran to Sartre:
From the French Revolution to Auguste Comte (including Maine de Biran),
From Auguste Comte to Henri Bergson,
From Henri Bergson to Jean-Paul Sartre (including Maurice Merleau-Ponty.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز بیست و سوم ماه جولای سال 2009میلادی
عنوان: تاريخ فلسفه - از مندوبيران تا سارتر؛ جلد نهم؛ نویسنده: فردریک کاپلستون؛ مترجم: عبدالحسین آذرنگ؛ محمود یوسف ثانی؛ تهران، علمی فرهنگی، سروش صدا و سیما، 1384؛ در 567ص؛ شابک 9789644457056؛ چاپ دیگر 1392؛ موضوع: تاریخ فلسفه از نویسندگان بریتانیا - سده 20م
سری کتابهای تاریخ فلسفه، توسط گروهی از مترجمان، از جمله جنابان آقایان: «سید جلالالدین مجتبوی»، «عبدالحسین آذرنگ»، «اسماعیل سعادت»، «داریوش آشوری»، «غلامرضا اعوانی»، «ابراهیم دادجو»، «بهاء الدین خرمشاهی» و «امیر جلالالدین اعلم»؛ به فارسی برگردان شده اند
جلد نخست: (یونان و روم، مترجم: سید جلال الدّین مجتبوی)، جلد دوم: (تاریخ فلسفه سده های میانی - آگوستینوس تا اسکوتوس، مترجم: محمد ابراهیم دادجو)، جلد سوم: (تاریخ فلسفه سده های میانی - اکام تا سوآرز، مترجم: محمد ابراهیم دادجو)، جلد چهارم: (از دکارت تا لایب نیتس، مترجم: غلامرضا اعوانی)، جلد پنجم: (فیلسوفان انگلیسی از هابز تا هیوم، مترجم: امیر جلال الدین اعلم)، جلد ششم: (از ولف تا کانت، مترجم: اسماعیل سعادت، و منوچهر بزرگمهر)، جلد هفتم: (از فیشته تا نیچه، مترجم: داریوش آشوری)، جلد هشتم: (از بنتام تا راسل، مترجم: بهاء الدین خرمشاهی) و جلد نهم: (از من دوبیران تا سارتر، مترجم: عبدالحسین آذرنگ و سیدمحمود یوسف ثانی)
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 20/04/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
August 21, 2018
Finally finished after three and a half years! (Or forty three, if you count the first time I started it in college.) This was the ninth and last volume. He mentions a projected tenth volume in the preface, but apparently never wrote it; the tenth volume included in one reprint edition is an unrelated collection of his essays. Like the eighth volume, this one is a real falling off from the level of the first seven; as he explains himself in the preface, faced with the large number of nineteenth and early twentieth century philosophers, and with administrative responsibilities taking up much of his time, he decided to concentrate on the thinkers he was already familiar with, which obviously meant a concentration on Catholic or religious philosophers and writers who are not the authors I would consider to be representative of the British (v. 8) or French (v. 9) philosophy of the time. I hadn't even heard of many of the authors he treats of in these two volumes, despite having been a philosophy major in college. Moreover, many of the writers he discusses are not generally considered as "philosophers" at all, but as literary, religious, scientific or political figures; and where the earlier volumes concentrate on a few major figures, with more general chapters in between, in this one, apart from Comte, Bergson and Sartre no one gets their own chapter and there are many figures who are treated in a few paragraphs.
The book begins well in the first part, "From the Revolution to Auguste Comte", with the aftermath of the French revolution, the "Traditionalists" and the "Ideologues", and then moves on to Maine de Biran; there is a chapter on the "Eclectics" (Royer-Collard, Cousins, and Jouffroy), one on "Social Philosopy" (i.e. the "utopian socialists", Fourier, Proudhon, and the most space given to St. Simon, who however, is still not covered adequately) and a chapter on Comte. The second part, "From Auguste Comte to Henri Bergson", and the beginning of the third part, "From Bergson to Sartre", or more than a third of the book, however, is given mainly to the "spiritualist" tradition, "Philosophy and Christian Apologetics" and "Thomism in France"; apart from Bergson and Maritain these chapters were all about writers I hadn't heard of and despite Copleston (in his element here) trying to differentiate their minute differences about God and theology and determine how close they are to Catholic orthodoxy, they all seemed pretty much to be saying the same things, trying to use Maine de Biran and/or German Idealism to reconcile God and Christian metaphysics with a positivist conception of science. There is then a fairly interesting chapter on "Philosophy of Science" including Poincaré, Duhem, Meyerson and Bachelard, followed by two more chapters on basically Catholic writers (including Teilhard de Chardin and Gabriel Marcel); he ends up with two chapters on Sartre and a last chapter on Camus and Merleau-Ponty, with a few concluding paragraphs on Levi-Strauss and structuralism.
In addition to the question of his choice of subjects, this book also was less objective than the others in its treatment. Although Copleston never pretended to be "objective" in the sense of hiding his Catholic perspective, and I preferred that, in that a known and admitted bias is easier to correct for than a hidden one, which is what is found with most "objective" accounts in a subject as controversial as philosophy, he did try to understand everyone he discussed and present them fairly, and then criticize them in a respectful way. In this book he lets his opinions overrule this, especially with Sartre whom he obviously has a great dislike for. To begin with, Sartre here seems out of place, to come from out of nowhere, because Copleston has excluded most secular philosophers after the classical positivists and the Marxist tradition entirely (he considers Marxism to be a nineteenth century philosophy which would be forgotten if it hadn't been articially adopted by the Communist parties as an official "line" -- rather ironic for a Thomist, who supports a thirteenth century philosophy artifically kept alive by having been adopted as the official "line" of the Catholic Church. I would guess there are far more Marxists outside the Communist parties than Thomists outside the Catholic Church). He refers to Sartre's dialectical arguments frequently with expressions such as "tiresome jargon" -- I might use the same expression for the jargon of "the Transcendental Absolute" and so forth in the writers he discusses earlier.
Now that I have finished, to sum up the whole history -- the first volume was fairly weak, and I would recommend another history for Greek philosophy (e.g. Guthrie's); the second through seventh volumes, and especially those on the Middle Ages, are probably the best general history in English, if you correct for the Catholic bias (not extremely apparent, except in the choice of whom to focus on) and the fact that they are roughly a half-century old; the eighth and ninth volumes are as described in this review, and I would recommend other books for the twentieth century (actually I'm not sure a general history is the best way to approach contemporary thought anyway.)
The book begins well in the first part, "From the Revolution to Auguste Comte", with the aftermath of the French revolution, the "Traditionalists" and the "Ideologues", and then moves on to Maine de Biran; there is a chapter on the "Eclectics" (Royer-Collard, Cousins, and Jouffroy), one on "Social Philosopy" (i.e. the "utopian socialists", Fourier, Proudhon, and the most space given to St. Simon, who however, is still not covered adequately) and a chapter on Comte. The second part, "From Auguste Comte to Henri Bergson", and the beginning of the third part, "From Bergson to Sartre", or more than a third of the book, however, is given mainly to the "spiritualist" tradition, "Philosophy and Christian Apologetics" and "Thomism in France"; apart from Bergson and Maritain these chapters were all about writers I hadn't heard of and despite Copleston (in his element here) trying to differentiate their minute differences about God and theology and determine how close they are to Catholic orthodoxy, they all seemed pretty much to be saying the same things, trying to use Maine de Biran and/or German Idealism to reconcile God and Christian metaphysics with a positivist conception of science. There is then a fairly interesting chapter on "Philosophy of Science" including Poincaré, Duhem, Meyerson and Bachelard, followed by two more chapters on basically Catholic writers (including Teilhard de Chardin and Gabriel Marcel); he ends up with two chapters on Sartre and a last chapter on Camus and Merleau-Ponty, with a few concluding paragraphs on Levi-Strauss and structuralism.
In addition to the question of his choice of subjects, this book also was less objective than the others in its treatment. Although Copleston never pretended to be "objective" in the sense of hiding his Catholic perspective, and I preferred that, in that a known and admitted bias is easier to correct for than a hidden one, which is what is found with most "objective" accounts in a subject as controversial as philosophy, he did try to understand everyone he discussed and present them fairly, and then criticize them in a respectful way. In this book he lets his opinions overrule this, especially with Sartre whom he obviously has a great dislike for. To begin with, Sartre here seems out of place, to come from out of nowhere, because Copleston has excluded most secular philosophers after the classical positivists and the Marxist tradition entirely (he considers Marxism to be a nineteenth century philosophy which would be forgotten if it hadn't been articially adopted by the Communist parties as an official "line" -- rather ironic for a Thomist, who supports a thirteenth century philosophy artifically kept alive by having been adopted as the official "line" of the Catholic Church. I would guess there are far more Marxists outside the Communist parties than Thomists outside the Catholic Church). He refers to Sartre's dialectical arguments frequently with expressions such as "tiresome jargon" -- I might use the same expression for the jargon of "the Transcendental Absolute" and so forth in the writers he discusses earlier.
Now that I have finished, to sum up the whole history -- the first volume was fairly weak, and I would recommend another history for Greek philosophy (e.g. Guthrie's); the second through seventh volumes, and especially those on the Middle Ages, are probably the best general history in English, if you correct for the Catholic bias (not extremely apparent, except in the choice of whom to focus on) and the fact that they are roughly a half-century old; the eighth and ninth volumes are as described in this review, and I would recommend other books for the twentieth century (actually I'm not sure a general history is the best way to approach contemporary thought anyway.)
October 13, 2021
مفصل ترین کتاب تاریخ فلسفه در زبان فارسی به احتمال زیاد تاریخ فلسفه نوشته فردریک کاپلستون است که مرجع درسی دانشجویان فلسفه، و هم مرجع تدریس بسیاری از اساتید آنها، از دوره لیسانس تا دکترا است. دوره نه جلدی تاریخ فلسفه، به قلم چارلز کاپلستون، که به همت عده ای از مترجمان زبده به فارسی ترجمه شده است. مجموعه ای در دسترس خوانندگان فارسی زبان قرار می دهد که تا حد زیادی می توانند آنان را از متن های دیگر بی نیاز سازد، زیرا هدف نگارنده این بوده است که سیر تحول فلسفه را از آغاز تا اواخر قرن بیستم با زبانی ساده و روان برای خواننده تحصیل کرده معمولی بیان کند.
February 29, 2016
Finally done; all nine volumes highly recommended. Now, back to Thomas...
October 1, 2014
A very compendious, but very efficient historical narrative.
November 8, 2022
第一章关于法国大革命后的传统主义者。他��大多是基督徒，都反对法国大革命，赞成君主制，有的赞成政教分离，提倡神的启示和攻击理性/启蒙运动（视为大革命的诱因）。
跟传统主义者对立的是理论家（ideologists，启蒙精神的继承者）。其中一位Maine de Biran受卢梭影响，但不赞同卢梭人性本善的看法，他认为没有与身俱来的内在是非观（innate ideas of right and wrong，good and bad），伦理是通过经验基础上的理性反思（且不必依靠宗教）。他一开始认为自己是理论主义的一员，后来觉得跟理论家们（自我仅存在于意志中）分道扬镳。
19世纪法国的折衷主义试图从不同的哲学体系中博采众长，代表人物也活跃在政治领域。比如Victor Cousin（1792-1867），他认为折衷主义把独立的教会和对物质主义和无神论的摒弃相结合，是19世纪哲学所需要的。换言之，19世纪需要的是一种折衷精神：超越18世纪的感观哲学，而又避免堕入神学教条的深渊。心理学揭示了人的三种机能：感性，意志，和理性。而哲学问题有三大类：关于美，善，和真。
19世纪上半叶还有一派社会哲学思想，试图延续法国大革命精神。Fourier（1772-1837）认为文明社会充满了自私，不安和纷争。而罪恶的根源在于（文明）对激情的压抑。解决办法是由各类人组成的“方阵”，各司其职，可以自由释放激情。乌托邦式的世界让人觉得奇怪。
Auguste Comte（1798-1857）实证主义哲学的创始人。认为哲学的任务是综合所有的科学。他把欧洲历史分成三个阶段：神学，形而上学，和实证。并认定此历史发展定律为不可更改的（类似物理定律）。他跟柏拉图类似主张精英统治的社会。精英/知识阶层负责教化民众以及管理国家。他用Humanity代替了上帝，信仰上帝的宗教变成了信仰人性（抽象概念，不能被简化为世界上生生不息的人）的宗教。他并没有直接说没有上帝，而是说上帝的概念成为了不可验证的假设。
Taine认为英国人擅长发现事实，德国人建立理论，而理论和事实应被法国人结合起来，如有可能由他来担此大任🫢。
Henri Bergson（1859-1941）得过诺贝尔文学奖，哲学上的造诣稍逊一筹（逻辑概念分析家们认为他的思想缺乏某种精确性）。他把科学的研究对象划分为物质，而把形而上学的研究对象划分为精神（心理学对他来说仍然是从物质层面来研究意识）。所以对他来说哲学并非具体科学的综合。哲学和科学不仅研究对象不同，方法也不同，科学依靠的是智力和分析，而哲学是基于直觉。在Bergson看来现实世界是运动的，所以只有哲学才能揭示现实（因为只有意识可以直接感受到生命实际的运动）。
Bergson并不想建立一套完整的哲学体系，而是想解决一系列具体的哲学问题（他认为前人的很多问题是伪命题）。他认为自由无法被定义（因为定义本身就把时间和空间联系在了一起），一旦被定义就意味着宿命论（人的选择是由动机或者说人的品性character决定的）的胜利。他也不认为人的所有行动都是自由的。人有两个自我，一个是社会层面上的表面的自我（外在的存在于空间中）另一个是内在的深层次的自我（完整个体）。人的大半生命都是迫于（社会）压力被动的，所以人很少能自由选择。（康德的体系里同一行为从某种角度来看是注定的，但从另一角度来看又是自由的）。
Bergson的道德观：并不赞同康德的观点道德观源于实际需求，也没有把责任（obligation）放在伦理的中心。他所关注的在于责任源于何处？答案是来自社会，也就是社会压力。这是封闭社会的道德（infra-rational origin）。另外还有开放的道德：supra-rational origin超越了人与人之间的社会（本能）压力，源于道德理想/先知和生命创造力的结合，与上帝的神秘结合，表现在普世之爱。两种不同类型的道德并不仅仅在于程度不同，而是本质的不同。
Jules Poincare(1854-1912)科学哲学家中的一员。他认为科学并不能告诉我们事物的本质，“all that it can give us is a rough image.”.通过科学获得的知识是关于事物之间联系（relations）（在我们看来或者在感观之间）的知识。
Pierre Durem（1861-1916）理论物理学家，哲学家和科学历史学家。他的主要目标之一就是把物理和形而上学划分出清晰的理论界限。在他看来，形而上是为了解释being（撕去表象的面纱看清赤裸的现实），而物理只关心现象（或感观表象）。与实验吻合是衡量物理定律是否成立的唯一标准。物理理论并不能解释定律，只是把它们系统化。
Emile Meyerson(1859-1933)很有影响力的思想家。他认为科学的主要目的并不是预测（和控制现象），而是让我们理解自然界（现实是可知的，意识的求知欲是所有科学探索的基础）。所以他认为科学不光是描述性的，也是解释性的。
Raymond Polin(1910-19) 价值的基础是什么？真理不是价值。他其实关注的是价值产生的过程，而不是价值本身。他坚持人才能自由地创造价值（这一点跟尼采很像），通过估值的过程和行动人创造了自身（这一点跟萨特很像）。关于道德观的社会属性，他也同意行为本质上，目的上，条件上是社会性的，没有他人的存在行为不可思议。
两位有影响力的法国宗教思想家（基督徒）。Teilhard de Chardin(1881-1955)和Gabriel Marcel(1889-1973）。前者注重不断演化的宇宙，没有任何事物是完全无生命的，物质充满了生命和精神，精神诞生了人，同时也向超人的意识（hyper-personal consciousness)发展。整个过程是有目的的，朝着Omega Point发展，世界的终点所有人类在宇宙基督中结合起来。现代科技不过是为这一终极目标铺路。简言之他的世界观是乐观向上的。
后者承认人在世界中的地位，但不断变换的物质世界不是他关注的焦点。对他来说超越在于跟其他人以及上帝的结合，而不是从生物界到noosphere再到omega point。我们的世界对Marcel来说是“essentially broken”，现代文明导致人的异化。破碎的世界在他看来是一个功能化的世界。个体呈现给自身及他人的是无数功能的组合。生命功能，社会功能（消费者，生产者，公民，退休公职人员等等）。人被碎片化，医学上也像个机器一样不断被检修，直到死亡时被作为完全的损失一笔勾销。他对物质文明指向精神文明表示怀疑。对人类前途没那么乐观。
Jean-Paul Sartre（1905-1980）存在主义哲学的代表人物（他把存在主义分为天主教和无神论两派，但他列举的哲学家并不认可这样的标签），晚年说马克思主义哲学是现代社会仅存的哲学，试图融合存在主义和马克思主义。他同时也是小说家，戏剧作家和政治家。存在主义曾经在法国风靡一时后来衰落了。
萨特曾说过三百年来法国人一直遵循笛卡尔式的自由。他的哲学受到笛卡尔，黑格尔，Husserl和Heidegger的影响较大，而少有英国经验主义或唯物主义的痕迹。
他认为意识（consciousness）使得存在（being）呈现出某种形态（不同）。为什么会有存在（being）这个问题没有意义。他的著作《Being and Nothingness》里两个��键概念“(being) the in-itself”和“the for-itself”(consciousness).萨特感兴趣的对象是人的现实。他坚持人的自由（哲学核心），而他的自由理论基于对“the for-itself”的分析。Being本身是厚重的，绝不是空无。意识本身不是being，意识活动对萨特来说是一个虚无化的过程。当我意识到这张纸时，我把自己和纸分开了，否认我是纸，通过否认纸是其他东西，通过把其他现象虚无化，我使得纸从背景中凸显出来。“Man is the being through whom nothingness comes into the world.”
Being是不自由的，而意识基本上是自由的。自由对萨特来说不是人的本质或本性。它属于意识体的结构。“Human freedom precedes the essence of man and makes it possible.”所有存在主义者都认为存在先于本性。”Man is the not-already-made. He makes himself, not of course in the sense that he creates himself out of nothing but in the sense that what he becomes depends on himself, on his own choice.”人完全绝对自由的观点显然跟我们通常的想法和说法背道而驰。对此萨特的回应是the for-itself是向往于理想状态，在此映射过程中会遇到某些障碍，但这些障碍最终是垫脚石还是无法逾越的障碍完全取决于“我”的选择。一个人的实际理想体现在他的行动当中。我们不能选择自由，我们只要有意识就是自由的。但我们可以选择欺骗自己。The for-itself渴望神性，但又无可避免地坍塌进虚无，终点是死亡。所以萨特悲观地说“man is a useless striving”.
后期萨特试图在马克思主义里融入存在主义。他认为自然界本身是没有稀缺的，稀缺（scarcity）是针对人的需求而言。稀缺一旦在物质环境中出现，把自然变成人类生活的威胁，也会反弹到人身上，把其他人变成个体的威胁。这一情形可能导致冲突，暴力和剥削以及特定群体的形成。
May 18, 2023
جلد نهم دربرگیرنده تاریخ فلسفه فرانسه از اوایل قرن نوزدهم تا اواسط قرن بیستم می باشد.
August 26, 2013
Just dipping, mostly for French traditionalist and Catholic renaissance material (de Maistre, Maritain, et al.)
Everything I read (4 of 18 chapters) was very clear, even Bergson, who has always seemed opaque to me. If I had more time I'd read the whole series, slowly, starting with the pre-Socratics. I'll browse the other volumes in any case.
Everything I read (4 of 18 chapters) was very clear, even Bergson, who has always seemed opaque to me. If I had more time I'd read the whole series, slowly, starting with the pre-Socratics. I'll browse the other volumes in any case.
March 13, 2016
Perfect
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews