Zou Rong received a classical education but, uninterested in an official career and frustrated by the irrelevance of his schooling to the day's issues, traveled to Japan in 1901 to further his studies. There he wrote The Revolutionary Army, which was published in Shanghai after his return to China in 1903. The Revolutionary Army, which was scathingly critical of the Manchu rulers of China, enraged government authorities who sought his immediate arrest. Zou was protected by authorities of the International (...) Settlement in Shanghai, and eventually sentenced to only two years in jail. Be this as it may, Zou contracted an illness in prison and died in April of 1905. The Revolutionary Army is far more than an anti-Manchu racist tract. It advocates political and social revolution, and Zou's account of the justification for and goals of these revolutions rests in no small part on natural rights and independence, as discussed in the two chapters from the work that we translate here. (shrink)
Augustine's "Confessions" in the "question time" by later philosophers and spoke highly of the attention, but the emphasis is often placed where "mind stretching" of this dimension, to the neglect of God's creation of this dimension, ignoring the eternal the dimension. In fact, God's creation and the spiritual dimensions of these two inseparable extension, the former provides the latter, to clarify the origin of time; the latter reflects the former, indicating the existence and nature of time. The latter by the (...) former constraints. In other words, there is a limit stretch the mind, is insurmountable. When Windelband stressed Augustine's metaphysics is the "inner experience, metaphysics," he confirmed the view of Augustine's spiritual dimension of time; when Gilson called the "conversion of metaphysics," when it is stressed that "stretch the boundaries of the mind "that is the eternal God's creation. "The question of time" in Augustine's Confessions was extensive concerned and highly remarked by later philosophers. However, they always just paid attention to "Extension of Mind" and ignored the Creation of God and its relationship to Eternity. In fact the two dimensions, ie, the creation of God and the extension of mind, cannot be separated. The former decides the latter, expounding the origin of time; the latter reflects the former, expressing the existence and essence of time. Generally the latter is limited by the former. In other words,, there is a boundary line between them and it can't be surmounted. When W. Windelband emphasized Augustine's metaphysics is "Metaphysics of immanent experience", what he confirmed is the psychological dimension Augustine's time theory; When E. Gilson called it "the converted metaphysics", what he emphasized is "the limit of the mind's extension", namely eternal God's creation. (shrink)
The first problem we confront in the study and research of the philosophical thought of Mao Zedong is the relationship between Mao Zedong Philosophical Thought and Mao Zedong Thought. Clarification of the relationship between the two can assist our understanding of the status and function of Mao Zedong Philosophical Thought in Mao Zedong Thought, and thereby promote our understanding of why it is necessary to study and research Mao Zedong Philosophical Thought.
ABSTRACT The focus of this essay is Kant's argument in the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals III that regarding oneself as rational implies regarding oneself as free. After setting out an interpretation of how the argument is meant to go, I argue that Kant fails to show that regarding oneself as free is incompatible with accepting universal causal determinism. However, I suggest that the argument succeeds in showing that regarding oneself as rational is inconsistent with accepting universal causal determinism (...) if one accepts a certain, plausible view of the explanation of events. RESUMEN El ensayo se enfoca en el argumento de Kant en la Fundamentación de la metafísica de las costumbres III según el cual considerarse racional implica verse a uno mismo como libre. Se interpreta la forma en que debe entenderse el argumento y se afirma que Kant no logra demostrar que considerarse libre es incompatible con la aceptación del determinismo casual universal. No obstante, se sugiere que el argumento sí logra demostrar que considerarse a uno mismo como racional es incompatible con la aceptación del determinismo casual universal, si se acepta una cierta versión plausible de la explicación de los eventos. (shrink)