本書嘗試闡釋經濟學在生活上的廣泛思考應用，特別注重經濟學和法學之間的關聯。自1991年起，「法律經濟學」這個項目，即列於美國經濟學會出版的《經濟文獻期刊》索引，可見其在經濟學的領域中，已具有眾議僉同的 地位。 對臺灣而言，在自由化、國際化的過程中，「法律經濟學」的重要性亦不容忽視。作者汲取多位知名經濟學者的精闢觀點，如諾貝爾經濟學獎得主寇斯、英國政府首席經濟學者凱克斯爵士、香港經濟學家張五常等，藉此剖析日常 生活中常見的種種法律問題，用深入淺出的方式具體呈現了法律經濟學的多元面向。 作者在書中以詰問的方式，言簡意賅地揭露經濟學者的思辨歷程，不僅可為深層思索判斷的參考座標，同時指引了一條進入法律經濟學的最佳途徑。 本書特色 1. 華語散文界「巨俠」熊秉元教授最新作品 2. 言簡意賅地揭露經濟學者的思辨歷程 3. 以深入淺出的經濟思惟，剖析日常生活中常見的種種法律問題.

犯罪判罰，天經地義 而在這眾人習以為常的「天經地義」之外 我們是不是忽略了法何以為法 以及其他與「人」更緊密的關聯？ 以自己權益／利益為先的人，應該受到指責嗎？ 被迫殺人的人，和教唆殺人的人，誰該負的責任比較大？ 當法律與宗教衝突時，孰先孰後？ 司法判決除了讓犯錯的人得到懲罰之外，對其他人有什麼意義？ 已經不合時宜的法條，為什麼還要繼續使用它？ 一九六○年由美國芝加哥大學發軔的「法經濟學」（或「法律的經濟分析」），對法學提出截然不同的解釋，於法學「重新發明輪子」（reinventing the wheel），如今，「法經濟學」在各級法院和最高法院裡，已然高居廳堂之上。 於兩岸三地享有高知名度之經濟學者熊秉元，在本書中以日常的提問為引，深入淺出地利用經濟分析的基本架構處理各種法學問題，包括闡釋最抽象、層次最高的核心――「正義」的概念，且書中諸多理論皆奠基於真實世界，明 確提出「實證法學」（apositive the ory of law）的概念，並和傳統「規範法學」（anormative the ory of law）相對照，在現行類似之法經濟學分析方法上甚有新意。.

?法律追求公平正義；經濟尋找成本效益 法律強調除弊；經濟旨在興利 透過這場法律與經濟的對話，把效率的概念引進法學， 除有助於思辨論述，也將使正義的概念更有操作性 相對於法學，經濟學是一門年輕的學科，因性質使然，已對傳統法學帶來巨大衝擊。經濟分析為法學的工具箱裡添增了新的工具，也逐漸改變法學的根本性質。 知名經濟學者熊秉元致力於架構經濟學與法律學的橋樑，對於法律經濟學在兩岸三地生根和發展，作出了卓越的貢獻。? 法律經濟學或法律經濟分析，於六○年代興起於美國，成為當代顯學。熊秉元教授扼要說明法律經濟學的旨趣，回顧其發展歷史，並且引用不少英美法上的著名案例，說明如何以經濟上的效率來處理法律上正義的內涵，深具啟示 性。 熊秉元教授試著於以平實、精確、有趣、深入淺出的文字，闡釋經濟行為、成本、物權、債權等概念的關係，建構一套嚴謹的經濟分析架構，用於討論正義、權利義務、債權物權等法律問題。這些問題的提出和處理方式，顯示經 濟學上的效率和司法學上的正義確有密切的關聯，及互相啟發之處。 【名家推薦】 王澤鑑（台大法律系名譽教授） 林輝煌（法務部政務次長） 潘維大（東吳大學校長）? 蘇永欽（司法院副院長） 出版社 商周出版(城邦).

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Ideas 63.1 (2002) 1-17 [Access article in PDF] What if the Father Commits a Crime? Rui Zhu Apparently, Socrates and Confucius respond similarly to the question if a son should turn in his father in the case of the father's misdemeanor. When Euthyphro, flaring his pride of his moral impartiality, tells Socrates that he is on his way to report his father because he (...) has thrown one of the household slaves into a ditch and left him bound there until he was dead, Socrates says, "Good Heaven! Certainly, Euthyphro, most men would not know how they could do this and be right. It is not the part of anyone to do this, but of one who is far advanced in wisdom." 1According to Socrates, only a man of high wisdom knows how to prosecute his father righteously, but Euthyphro does not appear to have this wisdom. When his interlocutor observes that an upright man in his state would bear witness against his father if he misappropriates a sheep, Confucius contradicts the interlocutor's understanding of uprightness by speaking in a matter-of-fact tone: "In my country the upright men are of quite another sort. A father will cover up for his son, and a son his father—which incidentally does involve a sort of up—rightness." 2Confucius stands on the same line with Socrates but seems the more radical of the two. Socrates does not directly refute Euthyphro and only suggests that he make sure he understands what he is doing before going any further. Socrates is not only typically Socratic—indirect and suggestive—but also sounds so reasonable that Euthyphro appears in contrast to be a reckless youth who harbors [End Page 1] only a faint understanding of morality. Confucius's response is more rigid, for he categorically dismisses an act of the Euthyphroian kind. He demands that father and son cover up for each other in the case of either one's guilt. Compared to Socrates, Confucius advocates the position that seems a little too strong and leaves no room for justice, while Socrates does not have that problem with justice. This is how we feel about Socrates and Confucius on our first impression. The prima facie observations that we make from the remarks of Socrates and Confucius seem both plain and unproblematic.By embedding these remarks into their respective social or philosophical cultures, this paper will show that our previous observations are not quite accurate. The apparent affinity of the Socratic and Confucian stances belies different underlying moral philosophies. We want to use their comments as bridges to explore the early Greek and Confucian ethics and show how different a picture we see after things are examined within their traditions.The issue of a possible father-son conflict may be treated as a case study of the early Greek (the Heroic era until the age of Socrates) and early Confucian (Confucius and Mencius) morals. There is a strong theme in the early Greek morals that allows, or sometimes demands, a son such as Euthyphro to prosecute his father for the sake of justice, because justice, instead of love (philein) or filial piety, is the governing principle in the early Greek ethics. Confucian ethics is founded on love (human-heartedness), which in turn is extended from the love between father and son. All moral principles including justice are derived from this extension of love. The mutual love of father and son then becomes the governing principle in the case of Confucianism. A Guilty Father: The Greek Motif The question, "What if the father commits a crime?" has a certain realistic aroma to a boy coming of age in the Hesiodic Greek world. That father has to be overcome by son before some relief from strife becomes possible is a familiar theme in Greek literature. In Hesiod's Theogony, Uranus (the sky) incurs hatred from all his newborn children since he hides them in their mother Gaia's womb and does not let them return to the light, for no reason... (shrink)

Technology has a pervasive and profound effect on the contemporary world, and engineers play a central role in all aspects of technological development. In order to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public, engineers must be morally committed and equipped to grapple with ethical dilemmas they confront.

本书通过比较研究揭示出,在生存主义哲学和道家思想对人之生存结构的理解方面,存在着深层的共识,这是二者之间展开深度对话的"客观基础".本书分为两大部分,第一部分,包括本研究的第一章和第二章,分别对海德格 尔存在与时间和萨特存在与虚无中的生存主义思想加以呈现,诠释,以期读者能够对生存主义哲学的"标本式"理论有所了解,并为后文的比较研究提供一定的理论铺垫.第三到八章,对道家思想与生存主义思想展开多维比较. 主要围绕"无"在生存结构中的地位和作用来展开,并努力揭示出,生存主义哲学和道家思想在人的"带无生存"这一点上,有着极为醒目的相通之处.然而,在此基础上产生的价值导向,却表现出同样醒目的分梳.通过分析道 家与生存主义哲学思想上重叠性与互补性,可能为融合东西方智慧,尤其是吸收中国传统道家智慧的现代生存哲学理论体系的建立提供一定的思想素材和理论参考.

Zhu Xi is the most important of the twelfth-century neo-Confucianists. Some consider him second only to Confucius himself in his importance to Chinese philosophy as a whole, since it is his interpretation of Confucius that has been canonical since his lifetime. This short book, modeled after the Burton Watson "Basic Writings" volumes for Zhuangzi, Xunzi, and Han Feizi, is an accessible, one-volume introduction to Zhu Xi's influential philosophical system designed especially for course use. In "classifying" Zhu Xi's conversations in the (...) Classified Conversations of Master Zhu, Li Jingde dedicated the first thirteen chapters to conversations explaining his general philosophical system. Readers are introduced to his metaphysics of principle (li), psychophysical stuff (qi), spiritual beings (guishen), human nature (xing), mind-heart (xin), and emotions (qing); and to his program of self-cultivation-that is, the curriculum that Confucians should follow to attain moral perfection. Gardner argues that these chapters constitute the best overview of Zhu Xi's basic philosophical teachings, and selections from them form the basis of his volume. Occasionally, they are supplemented with passages from the Collected Literary Writings of Master Zhu and from Zhu's commentaries on the Classics. (shrink)

In nontheistic moral traditions, there is a typical ethical conundrum concerning the relation between cosmic order and human agency. Within those traditions, it is generally recognized that the universe has its own order and history that are independent of human will. A moral discourse has to find space to accommodate human agency in the midst of the iron grid of cosmic law. Both Confucius and Aurelius use the concept of timeliness (kairos) to resolve the difficult issue. But their philosophies take (...) on divergent paths. By studying their resolutions of the issue, we will be able to appreciate the distinctive nature of their nontheistic moral narratives. (shrink)

¿̆Ơ£̃Œđ̇¿¿̇¿¿̄ʻ¿̆ƯÞ̇ðð̃¿ı̃Ư¿̄ư‌ ̇ʻ¿̃Đ¿̆¿Ư̄Œ¿̄¿¿̆¿¿̄¿¿̈¿ữ¿ı̃Ư¿̆ʻ ð̃ð¿̆¿ı̃¿£̃ ¿̇¿¿̄ð¿̆Ơ¿̈¿¿̇þ, ʻ̄¿¿̈¿ı̌¿¿̌Ư¿̌¿¿̈ðʻ̄¿¿̄ʺơ̄¿¿̇¿¿̈ ¿¿̃Đð̃ð¿̆¿ʹ̈¿¿̄æ¿̃Æ¿̄¿¿̆ʻ¿̄¿Ư̄Œð ̃ð¿̆¿ı̃¿£̃ ð̇đ¿̄Æ¿̆ʻð̃ð¿̆¿ı̃¿£̃ ¿̇¿¿̃ʺ¿̄ơʹ̈¿¿̌‌¿̈¿Ł̈¿ʼ̄Łʹ̈¿ı̃‌¿ ̈¿®̌¿, ¿̃‌¿̈¿¿̈¿ı̃ðʹ̇¿Ư̄Œ¿̄ʻʼ̄¿̆¿ð̃¿¿ ̄£¿̆ʻð̃ð¿̆¿ı̃¿£̃ı̃Ư¿̄ưư̄ł¿̈£¿̇¿ ‌̄¿¿̄ø¿̆¿¿̆Ł. ¿̆Ơ£̃Œ¿̆ƯÞ̇ðð̃¿¿̆ʻð̃ð¿̆¿ı̃¿£̃ ¿̇ ¿¿̇¿ʼ̈ð ̇£¿̄¿¿̆¿¿̆¿¿̄æ¿̇¿¿̆ʹ, ¿̇łƯ̆Þ¿̄ð¿̄¿̄Þ¿̆Ưı̃Ư¿̄ư¿̆ʻð̃ð¿̆ ¿ı̃¿£̃¿̇¿¿̆¿¿̆đ¿̄¿œ̆æ, ̄Þ ̄±¿̆ʻ¿̆ʹð̃ð¿̆¿ı̃¿£̃¿̇¿‌̄¿ ̄¿ ̄¿Ư̆ʹ.

As one of the three systems of China's traditional culture, Daoism has an important place in the history of Chinese philosophy. Based on the ideas of inaction performing all, the Way modeling spontaneity, and the dialectic of you [having, being] and wu [lacking, nonbeing], this article is a systematic exploration of Laozi's philosophy of denial, spontaneity, and atheism, as well as of the deep and lasting influence of his metaphysical principles on all schools of traditional Chinese philosophy.

Abstract In ?On Making an Effort? E. J. Coffman develops what he takes to be a fairly serious problem for Robert Kane's positive theory of free choice, where the concept of efforts of will is pivotal.1 Coffman argues that the plausibility of Kane's libertarian account of free choice ?is inversely proportional to the plausibility of a certain principle of agency? (p. 12). And since the latter is quite plausible, the former is therefore ?at best fairly implausible? (p. 12). In what (...) follows I will show that Coffman's objection is in fact misplaced. Kanean libertarianism not only is in accordance with the essence of the principles of personal responsibility that Coffman advocates, it also affords a more plausible and intelligible account of the sources of personal responsibility superior to the proposed principles. (shrink)

本书第一章介绍王船山的生平及其著述。第二章概述王船山研究情况。第三章至第八章依次介绍清代、民国与中华人民共和国成立后的王船山研究论文与著作情况。第九章介绍香港、台湾地区的王船山研究著作。.

"先秦诸子思想研究"汇聚了二十九篇论文, 二十三篇是已发表过的, 六篇为新作.一生中的粗文可能会扩张读者视野, 如"论孔子逻辑思想在先秦逻辑史上的地位"等.

本书共分为"异峰突起,细数儒学大师""儒家万千滋味,且待一一品尝""比肩而立,儒与众家何处异"上中下三篇,包括"天不生仲尼,万古长如夜""孟子取义,浩然为生""儒学之流贯千年""人之为人在于'仁'"等 14章内容.

黃宗羲（1610～1695），字太沖，號梨洲，是明末清初著名的思想家，與顧炎武、王夫之同稱清初三大儒，有「中國思想啟蒙之父」盛譽。 本書以黃宗羲的儒學思想作為研究主軸，界定黃宗羲的思想為內在超越的元氣一本論，並考察了黃宗羲與其師劉宗周的思想關聯，梳理了黃宗羲品評宋明儒學的義理綱維，審定了黃宗羲與呂留良、潘平格、陳乾初的學術爭論，辨 析了黃宗羲針對佛老與天主教的學理批判，闡釋了黃宗羲《明夷待訪錄》的天下情懷。.