[西方哲学史(英文版)]（英）罗素文字版.doc

《[西方哲学史(英文版)]（英）罗素文字版.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《[西方哲学史(英文版)]（英）罗素文字版.doc（630页珍藏版）》请在淘文阁 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、BERTRAND RUSSELLA HISTORY OF WESTERN PHILOSOPHY And Its Connection with Political and Social Circumstances from the Earliest Times to the Present DaySIMON AND SCHUSTER, NEW YORKALL RIGHTS RESERVED INCLUDING THE RIGHT OF REPRODUCTION IN WHOLE OR IN PART IN ANY FORM COPYRIGHT, 1945 , BY BERTRAND RUSSE

2、LL PUBLISHED BY SIMON AND SCHUSTER, INC. ROCKEFELLER CENTER, 1230 SIXTH AVENUE NEW YORK 20, N. Y.Fourth PrintingMANUFACTURED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY AMERICAN BOOK-STRATFORD PRESS, INC., N. Y.TABLE OF CONTENTSPreface by AuthorixIntroduction xiiiBOOK ONE. ANCIENT PHILOSOPHYPart I. The Pre-S

3、ocratics3Chapter I. The Rise of Greek Civilization3Chapter II. The Milesian School24Chapter III. Pythagoras29Chapter IV. Heraclitus38Chapter V. Parmenides48Chapter VI. Empedocles53Chapter VII. Athens in Relation to Culture58Chapter VIII. Anaxagoras61Chapter IX. The Atomists64Chapter X. Protagoras73P

4、art II. Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle82Chapter XI. Socrates82Chapter XII. The Influence of Sparta94Chapter XIII. The Sources of Platos OpinionsChapter XXIII. Aristotles Physics203Chapter XXIV. Early Greek Mathematics and Astronomy208Part III. Ancient Philosophy after Aristotle218Chapter XXV. The He

5、llenistic World218Chapter XXVI. Cynics and Sceptics228Chapter XXVII. The Epicureans240Chapter XXIX. Stoicism252Chapter XXIX. The Roman Empire in Relation to Culture270Chapter XXX. Plotinus284BOOK TWO. CATHOLIC PHILOSOPHYIntroduction301Part I. The Fathers308Chapter I. The Religious Development of the

6、 Jews 308 Chapter II. Christianity During the First Four Centuries324Chapter III. Three Doctors of the Church334Chapter IV. Saint Augustines Philosophy and Theology352Chapter V. The Fifth and Sixth Centuries366Chapter VI. Saint Benedict and Gregory the Great375Part II. The Schoolmen388Chapter VII. T

7、he Papacy in the Dark Ages388Chapter VIII. John the Scot400Chapter IX. Ecclesiastical Reform in the Eleventh Century407Chapter X. Mohammedan Culture and Philosophy419-vi-Chapter XI. The Twelfth Century428Chapter XII. The Thirteenth Century441Chapter XIII. Saint Thomas Aquinas452Chapter XIV. Francisc

8、an Schoolmen463Chapter XV. The Eclipse of the Papacy476BOOK THREE. MODERN PHILOSOPHYPart I. From the Renaissance to Hume491Chapter I. General Characteristics491Chapter II. The Italian Renaissance495Chapter III. Machiavelli504Chapter IV. Erasmus and More512Chapter V. The Reformation and CounterReform

9、ation522Chapter VI. The Rise of Science525Chapter VII. Francis Bacon541Chapter VIII. Hobbess Leviathan546Chapter IX. Descartes557Chapter X. Spinoza569Chapter XI. Leibniz581Chapter XII. Philosophical Liberalism596Chapter XIII. Lockes Theory of Knowledge604Chapter XIV. Lockes Political PhilosophyChapt

10、er XXIV. Schopenhauer753Chapter XXV. Nietzsche760Chapter XXVI. The Utilitarians773Chapter XXVII. Karl Marx782Chapter XXVIII. Bergson791Chapter XXIX. William James811Chapter XXX. John Dewey819Chapter XXXI. The Philosophy of Logical Analysis828Index837PREFACEMANY histories of philosophy exist, and it

11、has not been my purpose merely to add one to theirnumber. My purpose is to exhibit philosophy as an integral part of social and political life: not as the isolated speculations of remarkable individuals, but as both an effect and a cause of the character of the various communities in which different

12、 systems flourished. This purpose demands more account of general history than is usually given by historians of philosophy. I have found this particularly necessary as regards periods with which the general reader cannot be assumed to be familiar. The great age of the scholastic philosophy was an o

13、utcome of the reforms of the eleventh century, and these, in turn, were a reaction against previous corruption. Without some knowledge of the centuries between the fall of Rome and the rise of the medieval Papacy, the intellectual atmosphere of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries can hardly be unde

14、rstood. In dealing with this period, as with others, I have aimed at giving only so much general history as I thought necessary for the sympathetic comprehension of philosophers in relation to the times that formed them and the times that they helped to form.哲学许多的历史已存在，我的目的不是成为他们中的一个。而是展示社会生活和政治生活的哲

15、学部分。哲学不是显著个人单独思考，而是它One consequence of this point of view is that the importance which it gives to a philosopher is often not that which he deserves on account of his philosophic merit. For my part, for example, I consider Spinoza a greater philosopher than Locke, but he was far less influential; I

16、have therefore treated him much more briefly than Locke. Some men-for example, Rousseau and Byron-though not philosophers at all in the academic sense, have so profoundly affected the prevailing philosophic temper that the development of philosophy cannot be understood if they areignored. Even pure

17、men of action are sometimes of great importance in this respect; very few philosophers have influenced philosophy as much as Alexander the Great, Charlemagne, or Napoleon. Lycurgus, if only be had existed, would have been a still more notable example.In attempting to cover such a vast stretch of tim

18、e, it is necessary to have very drastic principles of selection. I have come to the conclusion, from reading standard histories of philosophy, that very short accounts convey nothing of value to the reader; I have therefore omitted altogether (with few exceptions) men who did not seem to me to deser

19、ve a fairly full treatment. In the case of the men whom I have discussed, I have mentioned what seemed relevant as regards their lives and their social surroundings; I have even sometimes recorded intrinsically unimportant details when I considered them illustrative of a man or of his times.Finally,

20、 I owe a word of explanation and apology to specialists on any part of my enormous subject. It is obviously impossible to know as much about every philosopher as can be known about him by a man whose field is less wide; I have no doubt that every single philosopher whom I have mentioned, with the ex

21、ception of Leibniz, is better known to many men than to me. If, however, this were considered a sufficient reason for respectful silence, it would follow that no man should undertake to treat of more than some narrow strip of history. The influence of Sparta on Rousseau, of Plato on Christian philos

22、ophy until the thirteenth century, of the Nestorians on the Arabs and thence on Aquinas, of Saint Ambrose on liberal political philosophy from the rise of the Lombard cities until the present day, are some among the themes of which only a comprehensive history can treat. On such grounds I ask the in

23、dulgence of those readers who find my knowledge ofthis or that portion of my subject less adequate than it would have been if there bad been no need to remember times winged chariot.This book owes its existence to Dr. Albert C. Barnes, having been originally designed and partly delivered as lectures

24、 at the Barnes Foundation in Pennsylvania.As in most of my work during the last thirteen years, I have been greatly assisted, in research and in many other ways, by my wife, Patricia Russell.BERTRAND RUSSELLINTRODUCTIONTHE conceptions of life and the world which we call philosophical are a product o

25、f two factors: one, inherited religious and ethical conceptions; the other, the sort of investigation which may be called scientific, using this word in its broadest sense. Individual philosophers have differed widely in regard to the proportions in which these two factors entered into their systems

26、, but it is the presence of both, in some degree, that characterizes philosophy.Philosophy is a word which has been used in many ways, some wider, some narrower. I propose to use it in a very wide sense, which I will now try to explain.Philosophy, as I shall understand the word, is something interme

27、diate between theology and science. Like theology, it consists of speculations on matters as to which definite knowledge has, so far, been unascertainable; but like science, it appeals to human reason rather than to authority, whether that of tradition or that of revelation. All definite knowledge-s

28、o I should contend- belongs to science; all dogma as to what surpasses definite knowledge belongs to theology. But between theology and science there is a No Mans Land, exposed to attack from both sides; this No Mans Land is philosophy. Almost all the questions of most interest to speculative minds

29、are such as science cannot answer, and the confident answers of theologians no longer seem so convincing as they did in former centuries. Is the world divided into mind and matter, and, if so, what is mind and what is matter? Is mind subject to matter, or is it possessed of independent powers? Has t

30、he universe any unity or purpose? Is it evolving towards some goal? Are there really laws of nature, or do we believe in them only because of our innate love of order? Is man what he seems to the astronomer, a tiny lump of impure carbon and water impotently crawling on a small and unimportant planet

31、? Or is he what he appears to Hamlet? Is he perhaps both at once? Is there a way of living that is noble and another that is base, or are all ways of living merely futile? If there is a way of living that is noble, in what does it consist, and how shall we achieve it? Must the good be eternal in ord

32、er to deserve to be valued, or is it worth seeking even if the universe is inexorably moving towards death? Is there such a thing as wisdom, or is what seems such merely the ultimate refinement of folly? To such questions no answer can be found in the laboratory. Theologies have professed to give an

33、swers, all too definite; but their very definiteness causes modern minds to view them with suspicion. The studying of these questions, if not the answering of them, is the business of philosophy.Why, then, you may ask, waste time on such insoluble problems? To this one may answer as a historian, or

34、as an individual facing the terror of cosmic loneliness.The answer of the historian, in so far as I am capable of giving it, will appear in the course of this work. Ever since men became capable of free speculation, their actions, in innumerable important respects, have depended upon their theories

35、as to the world and human life, as to what is good and what is evil. This is as true in the present day as at any former time. To understand an age or a nation, we must understand its philosophy, and to understand its philosophy we must ourselves be in some degree philosophers. There is here a recip

36、rocal causation: the circumstances of mens lives do much to determine their philosophy, but, conversely, their philosophy does much to determine their circumstances. This interaction throughout the centuries will be the topic of the following pages.There is also, however, a more personal answer. Sci

37、ence tells us what we can know, but what we can know is little, and if we forget how much we cannot know we become insensitive to many things of very great importance. Theology, on the other hand, induces a dogmatic belief that we have knowledge where in fact we have ignorance, and by doing so gener

38、ates a kind of impertinent insolence towards the universe. Uncertainty, in the presence of vivid hopes and fears, is painful, but must be endured if we wish to live without the support of comforting fairy tales. It is not good either to forget the questions that philosophy asks, or to persuade ourse

39、lves that we have found indubitable answers to them. To teach how to live without certainty, and yet without being paralyzed by hesitation, is perhaps the chief thing that philosophy, in our age, can still do for those who study it.Philosophy, as distinct from theology, began in Greece in the sixth

40、century B.C. After running its course in antiquity, it was again submerged by theology as Christianity rose and Rome fell. Its secondgreat period, from the eleventh to the fourteenth centuries, was dominated by the Catholic Church, except for a few great rebels, such as the Emperor Frederick II ( 11

41、95-1250). This period was brought to an end by the confusions that culminated in the Reformation. The third period, from the seventeenth century to the present day, is dominated, more than either of its predecessors, by science; traditional religious beliefs remain important, but are felt to need ju

42、stification, and are modified wherever science seems to make this imperative. Few of the philosophers of this period are orthodox from a Catholic standpoint, and the secular State is more important in their speculations than the Church.Social cohesion and individual liberty, like religion and scienc

43、e, are in a state of conflict or uneasy compromise throughout the whole period. In Greece, social cohesion was secured by loyalty to the City State; even Aristotle, though in his time Alexander was making the City State obsolete, could see no merit in any other kind of polity. The degree to which th

44、e individuals liberty was curtailed by his duty to the City varied widely. In Sparta he had as little liberty as in modern Germany or Russia; in Athens, in spite of occasional persecutions, citizens had, in the best period, a very extraordinary freedom from restrictions imposed by the State. Greek t

45、hought down to Aristotle is dominated by religious and patriotic devotion to the City; its ethical systems are adapted to the lives of citizens and have a large political element. When the Greeks became subject, first to the Macedonians, and then to the Romans, the conceptions appropriate to their d

46、ays of independence were no longer applicable. This produced, on the one hand, a loss of vigour through the breach with tradition, and, on the other hand, a more individual and less social ethic. The Stoics thought of the virtuous life as a relation of the soul to God, rather than as a relation of t

47、he citizen to the State. They thus prepared the way for Christianity, which, like Stoicism, was originally unpolitical, since, during its first three centuries, its adherents were devoid of influence on government. Social cohesion, during the six and a half centuries from Alexander to Constantine, was secured, not by philosophy and not by ancient loyalties, but by force, first that of armies and then that of civil administration. Roman armies, Roman roads,