约翰‧阿姆斯特朗 (John Armstrong)
1966年生于英国格拉斯哥。曾任伦敦大学美学课程的研究员和主任,现任墨尔本大学哲学系副教授。著有《歌德:爱与生命》、《美的神秘力量》等作品。
哲學一詞,當下已高度簡化為「恩考」,君不見書店豬肉桌上一系列什麼生活哲學、飲食哲學、喝水哲學云云,好像有一點文字,加兩分思考就是哲學。哲學,作為愛智與尋找終極(ultimate)的本質,早被人拋諸腦後。John Armstrong的《愛情的條件》,副題<親密關係的哲學>,卻是眾...
评分教育普及的年代,不认识字的叫文盲;法制社会,不懂法律的叫法盲;21世纪,剩男剩女当道,有的从小学就开始早恋,谈了十几年的恋爱,换了无数了不能长久的对象,却还搞不清楚爱是什么。这样的人,可不可以被称作“爱盲”? 爱是什么?这是我们阅读这本书极想获取的答案。我们...
评分 评分带着一丝的疑惑和求解看了这本书, 其实看了两遍之后我还是看不懂, 至少是不懂 ------ “爱”这么一个感性的话题, 作者凭什么写得这么理性, 这么有条理, 另一方面来说这就是矛盾了! 不过,总体而言,还是比较推荐的~~ 对爱有问题的~
评分111.愛的問題不在於找對人,而在於從自己身上找到關心別人的方法與能力,也就是愛別人的方法與能力。 112.如果你心愛的人真的對你很重要,那麼這個人一定擁有你所沒有的東西,一定能讓你做一些自己做不到的事。 113.孤寂感的產生並不是因為沒有別的人,而是因為與別人的想法...
The worst kind of pseudo-philosophical writing. As a coffee table book, it is hopelessly dry and boring. As a study of the subject in question, its spurious arguments and incoherent verbiage don't even stand a casual examination.
评分The worst kind of pseudo-philosophical writing. As a coffee table book, it is hopelessly dry and boring. As a study of the subject in question, its spurious arguments and incoherent verbiage don't even stand a casual examination.
评分The worst kind of pseudo-philosophical writing. As a coffee table book, it is hopelessly dry and boring. As a study of the subject in question, its spurious arguments and incoherent verbiage don't even stand a casual examination.
评分The worst kind of pseudo-philosophical writing. As a coffee table book, it is hopelessly dry and boring. As a study of the subject in question, its spurious arguments and incoherent verbiage don't even stand a casual examination.
评分The worst kind of pseudo-philosophical writing. As a coffee table book, it is hopelessly dry and boring. As a study of the subject in question, its spurious arguments and incoherent verbiage don't even stand a casual examination.
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美书屋 版权所有