理想國

內(nèi)容概要

《理想國》不同于早期對話之處，在于對話繼續(xù)引向一些確定的結(jié)論。第二卷開始，柏拉圖的哥格勞孔（Glaucon）參加對話，之后的對話主要在他與蘇格拉底之間進(jìn)行，柏拉圖的另一位哥阿德曼圖（Adeimantus）也偶爾插話。他們倆提出，正義的本質(zhì)在靈魂之中，正義的好處或壞處在于對靈魂的影響，因此，不能只討論正義的外在表現(xiàn)－－法律，以及它的表面后果－－受害而不義者常常得利。蘇格拉底說，要認(rèn)清個人靈魂中的正義，首先要從國家的正義談起，正如大字比小字更容易辨認(rèn)一樣。

作者簡介

作者：(希臘)柏拉圖 譯者：John Llewelyn Davies David James
Vaughan
柏拉圖（約前427年－前347年），古希臘偉大的哲學(xué)家，也是全部西方哲學(xué)乃至整個西方文化最偉大的哲學(xué)家和思想家之一，他和老師蘇格拉底，學(xué)生亞里士多德并稱為古希臘三大哲學(xué)家。柏拉圖出身于雅典貴族，青年時從師蘇格拉底。蘇格拉底死后，他游歷四方，曾到埃及、小亞細(xì)亞和意大利南部從事政治活動，企圖實現(xiàn)他的貴族政治理想。公元前387年活動失敗后逃回雅典，在一所稱為阿卡德米（Academy）的體育館附近設(shè)立了一所學(xué)園，此后執(zhí)教40年，直至逝世。他一生著述頗豐，其教學(xué)思想主要集中在《理想國》（The
Republic）和《法律篇》中。

書籍目錄

Book One Book TwoBook ThreeBook FourBook FiveBook SixBook SevenBook EightBook NineBook TenAnalysis of the Republic

章節(jié)摘錄

　　Therefore, whenever anything pulls back a soul that is under the influence of thirst, it will be something in the soul distinct from the principle which thirsts, and which drives it like a beast to drink: for we hold it to be impossible that the same thing should, at the same time, with the same part of itself, in reference to the same object, be doing two opposite things.　　Concerning the gods, then, I continued, such, as it would appear, is the language to be held, and such the language to be forbidden, in the hearing of all,from childhood upwards, who are hereafter to honour thegods and their parents, and to set no small value on mutual friedship.　　Yes, he said; and I think our views are correct.　　To proceed then: if we intend our citizens to be brave, must we not add to this such lessons as are likely to preserve them most effectually from being afraid of death? Or do you think a man can ever become brave who is haunted by the fear of death?　　No, indeed, I do not.　　Well, do youimagine that a believer in Hades and its terrors will be free from all fear of death, and in the day of battle will prefer it to defeat and slavery?　　Certainly not.　　Then apparently we must assume a control over those who undertake to set forth these fables, as well as the others, requesting them not to revile the other world in that unqualified-manner, but rather to speak well of it, because such language is neither true, nor beneficial to men who are intended to be warlike.　　We certainly must.　　It only remains for us, I proceeded, to inquire how the democratical　man is transformed into the tyrannical, and what is the character of the latter after the change, and whether his manner of living is happy or the reverse.　　True, this case is still remnaining, he said.　　Then do you know, I asked, what I am still desiderating?　　What is it?　　I think that the number and nature of the appetites has not been satisfactorily defined: and while this deficiency continues, the inquiry upon which we are　entering will be wrapped in obscurarity.　　It is not too late to supply the deficiency, is it?　　Certainly it is not. Observe the peculiarity which I wish to notice in the case before us. It is this. Some of the unnecessary pleasures and appetites are, if I mistake not, unlawful, and these would appear to form m original part of every man, though in the case of some persons, under the correction of the laws and the higher appetites aided by reason, they either wholly disappear, or only a few weak ones remain, while in the case of others they continue strong and merous. And pray, what are the appetites to which you refer?.　　I refer to those appetites which bestir themselves in sleep; when, during the slumbers of that other part of the soul, which is rational and tamed and master of the former, the wild animal part, sated with meat or drink, becomes rampant, and pushing sleep away endeavours to set out after the gratification of its own proper character. You know that in such moments there is nothing that it dares not do,　　released and delivered as it is from any sense of shame and reflection. It does not shrink from attempting in fancy unholy intercourse with a mother, or with any man or deity or animal whatever; and it does not hesitate to commit the foulest murder, or to indulge itself in the most defiling meats. In one word,there is no limit either to its folly or its audacity.　　Well, I continued, I must say that while I am led by a variety of considerations to believe that we were unquestionably right in our plans for organising the state, I feel this convicfon most strongly when I think of our regulations about poetry.　　What was the nature of them?　　They were to the effect that we ought on no account to admit that branch of poetry which is imitative. And now that the specific parts of file soul have been each separately defined, the conviction that such poetry must be unhesitatingly refused admittance is to my mind even clearer than it was before.　　Explain what you mean.　　I am quite sure that you will not denounce me to the tragedians,and the whole company of imiative poets, and therefore I do not mmd saying to you that all imitative poetry would seem, to be detrimental to the understanding of those hearers who do not possess the antidote in a knowledge of its real nature.　　Pray, what is the purport of yourremarks?　　I must speak my mind, although I confess I am checked by a kind of affectionate respect for Homer, of which I have been conscious since I was a child. For of all those beautiful tragic poets he seems to have been the original master and guide. But it would be wrong to honour a man at the expense of truth, and therefore must, as I said, speak out.　　By all means do so.　　Listen then, or rather reply.　　Put your questions.　　Can you give me any account of the nature of imitation generally? For I assure you I am at a loss myself to understand its real meaning.　　And so you expect me to understand it.　　When I had made these remarks I thought we had done with discussing: whereas it seems it was only a prelude. For Glaucon, withthat eminent courage which he displays on all occasions, would not acquiesce in the retreat of Thrasymachus, and began thus: Socrates,do you wish really to convince us that it is on every, account better to be just than to be unjust, or only to seem to have convinced us?　　If it were in my power, I replied, I should prefer convincing you really.　　Then, he proceeded, you are not doing What you wish. Let me ask you: is there, in your opinion, a class of good things of such a kind that we are glad to possess them, not because we desire their consequences, but simply welcoming them for their own sake? Take for example the feelings of enjoyment and all those pleasures that are harmless, and that are followed by no result in the after time, beyond　　simple enjoyment in their possession.　　Yes, I certainly think there is a class of this description.　　Well, is there another class, do you think, of those which we value both for their own sake and for their results? Such as intelligence, and sight, and health, all of which are welcome, I apprehend, on both accounts.　　Yes.

媒體關(guān)注與評論

　　序言　　趙敦華　　一、柏拉圖的生平和著作　　柏拉圖(公元前427—347年)出生于雅典貴族家庭，母親出身于名門望族。柏拉圖幼年喪父，母親改嫁。繼父是雅典民主派領(lǐng)袖伯利克里的朋友。伯利克里執(zhí)政時期是雅典文明的黃金時代。柏拉圖出生時伯利克里已經(jīng)去世，伯羅奔尼撒戰(zhàn)爭已經(jīng)爆發(fā)。雅典在這場戰(zhàn)爭中最終被斯巴達(dá)所戰(zhàn)敗，雅典的民主制經(jīng)歷了由盛到衰的轉(zhuǎn)折。柏拉圖年青時參加過伯羅奔尼撤戰(zhàn)爭，親眼目睹了雅典民主制的衰敗與無能。　　柏拉圖受過良好的教育。他青少年時期熱愛戲劇詩歌，寫過頌詩和抒情詩，表現(xiàn)出文學(xué)才能。與當(dāng)時貴族子弟一樣，柏拉圖也熱衷于政治活動。當(dāng)時準(zhǔn)備從政的青年都要向智者學(xué)習(xí)論辯術(shù)和修辭。柏拉圖20歲時成為蘇格拉底(Socrates)的學(xué)生，但蘇格拉底與智者不同：智者(Sophist)自詡是“有智慧”的人，但卻不愛智慧，智慧只是他們用以炫耀和賺錢的手段；蘇格拉底自稱是無知的人，但卻熱愛智慧(Philo—sophia)。后來，“哲學(xué)”由此而得名。蘇格拉底是第一個自覺地實踐被他稱作辯證法的哲學(xué)方法、追求被他稱作善的生活目標(biāo)的哲學(xué)家。正是在蘇格拉底的思想和人格力量的影響之下，柏拉圖開始了他為之付出畢生精力的哲學(xué)事業(yè)。據(jù)拉爾修在《名哲生平和學(xué)說》一書中記載，蘇格拉底在與柏拉圖相識之前，夜晚夢見一只小天鵝飛到他膝下，發(fā)出一聲嘹亮鳴叫之后沖向藍(lán)天。蘇格拉底把柏拉圖當(dāng)作是夢見的那只天鵝。柏拉圖果然不負(fù)所望，他把宣揚蘇格拉底的思想與人品作為終生的目標(biāo)。柏拉圖所寫的對話大多以蘇格拉底為主角，他說：“過去和將來都不會有柏拉圖寫作的著作?，F(xiàn)在以他署名的作品全屬于蘇格拉底，被美化與恢復(fù)了本來面目的蘇格拉底?！?《柏拉圖書信集》，314c)這些話固然表現(xiàn)了哲學(xué)家的偉大、謙虛，但也反映出蘇格拉底對他的影響之深，當(dāng)然，這并不意味著柏拉圖的對話只是述而不作，而是說，柏拉圖把自己的思想歸功于蘇格拉底的教誨及其延續(xù)、發(fā)展?！　Π乩瓐D思想乃至生活影響最大的事件莫過于蘇格拉底之死。蘇格拉底自稱是針砭時弊的神圣牛虻，哲學(xué)對于他來說不是個人思辨的樂趣，而是他對城邦所盡的公民義務(wù)，他力圖通過哲學(xué)的論辯來挽救政局的衰敗與人心的墮落。他處在雅典民主制面臨危機的時代，公民各行其是，政客乘機搖唇鼓舌，結(jié)黨營私，煽動民眾，造成社會不公正，削弱了國力。雅典民主制之弊端在伯羅奔尼撒戰(zhàn)爭中充分暴露。公元前406年，雅典海軍在阿吉牛西之役大敗斯巴達(dá)人。政客們卻以陣亡將士尸首未能及時收回為由，對10名海軍將領(lǐng)提出訴訟，并操縱公民大會判處其中9人死刑。蘇格拉底擔(dān)任此次大會的輪執(zhí)主席，他認(rèn)為審判不合法，投了反對票，因而得罪了民主派。公元前404年，戰(zhàn)敗的雅典被迫接受寡頭制。柏拉圖的舅父卡爾米德和表弟克里底亞(他也是蘇格拉底的一個學(xué)生)都是寡頭制“三大僭主”的核心人物。蘇格拉底雖然不贊同民主派的做法，但對寡頭們的暴力統(tǒng)治也深感不滿。有一次，寡頭們命令蘇格拉底去逮捕他們的政敵，蘇格拉底冒著受極刑的危險斷然拒絕執(zhí)行命令。然而，民主派復(fù)辟之后，卻視蘇格拉底為政敵，羅織了“褻瀆神明”和“腐化青年”兩條罪名指控他。蘇格拉底盡管在法庭上發(fā)表了義正辭嚴(yán)的申辯，卻仍然被判處死刑。面臨著死亡，蘇格拉底在獄中依然與以前一樣，和前來探視的人討論哲學(xué)問題，并拒絕了朋友們營救他的努力，最后從容赴死，飲鴆身亡。柏拉圖后來以崇敬的心情，在《申辯篇》、《克力同篇》、《尤息旨羅篇》、《拉刻斯篇》等四篇對話中記錄了蘇格拉底在法庭上和監(jiān)獄里的言論。

編輯推薦

　　《理想國》（英文）是柏拉圖中期思想的總結(jié)，其語言華麗，邏輯縝密，想象豐富，闡述精彩，在歷史上頗具影響力。讓讀者在吸收大師思想精華的同時，提高英語閱讀的水平與能力。

圖書封面

圖書標(biāo)簽Tags

無

評論、評分、閱讀與下載

---

    理想國 PDF格式下載

---