2,093 books
—
1,943 voters
to-read
(1639)
currently-reading (24)
read (188)
on-hold (33)
abandoned (6)
contemporary-philosophy (228)
economics-and-finance (154)
philosophy (147)
critical-theory (137)
history (121)
polisci-law (108)
biographies (102)
currently-reading (24)
read (188)
on-hold (33)
abandoned (6)
contemporary-philosophy (228)
economics-and-finance (154)
philosophy (147)
critical-theory (137)
history (121)
polisci-law (108)
biographies (102)
psychology-self-help
(85)
religion-theology (85)
history-ideas (83)
math-and-logic (68)
linguistics-philoflang (66)
man-g-hw-a-comics (64)
novels (60)
natural-science (56)
marxism (49)
history-europe (48)
political-philosophy (42)
race (41)
religion-theology (85)
history-ideas (83)
math-and-logic (68)
linguistics-philoflang (66)
man-g-hw-a-comics (64)
novels (60)
natural-science (56)
marxism (49)
history-europe (48)
political-philosophy (42)
race (41)
“The political men of Greece who lived under popular government recognized no other force to sustain it than virtue. Those of today speak to us only of manufacturing, commerce, finance, wealth, and even luxury.”
― The Spirit of the Laws
― The Spirit of the Laws
“Anyone thus forced to react continually to precepts that are not the expressions of his impulses lives, psychologically speaking, above his means, and may be objectively described as a hypocrite, whether he is clearly conscious of this difference or not. It is undeniable that our contemporary civilization favors this sort of hypocrisy to an extraordinary extent. One might even venture to assert that it is built upon such a hypocrisy and would have to undergo extensive changes if man were to undertake to live according to the psychological truth. There are therefore more civilized hypocrites than truly cultured persons”
― Reflections on War and Death
― Reflections on War and Death
“The reciprocal relationship of epistemology and science is of noteworthy kind. They are dependent upon each other. Epistemology without contact with science becomes an empty scheme. Science without epistemology is—insofar as it is thinkable at all—primitive and muddled. However, no sooner has the epistemologist, who is seeking a clear system, fought his way through to such a system, than he is inclined to interpret the thought-content of science in the sense of his system and to reject whatever does not fit into his system. The scientist, however, cannot afford to carry his striving for epistemological systematic that far. He accepts gratefully the epistemological conceptual analysis; but the external conditions, which are set for him by the facts of experience, do not permit him to let himself be too much restricted in the construction of his conceptual world by the adherence to an epistemological system. He therefore must appear to the systematic epistemologist as a type of unscrupulous opportunist: he appears as realist insofar as he seeks to describe a world independent of the acts of perception; as idealist insofar as he looks upon the concepts and theories as free inventions of the human spirit (not logically derivable from what is empirically given); as positivist insofar as he considers his concepts and theories justified only to the extent to which they furnish a logical representation of relations among sensory experiences. He may even appear as Platonist or Pythagorean insofar as he considers the viewpoint of logical simplicity as an indispensable and effective tool of his research. (Einstein 1949, 683–684)”
― Autobiographical Notes
― Autobiographical Notes
“L'instabilité des choses a pour corrélat l'impuissance de l'homme.”
― The Normal and the Pathological
― The Normal and the Pathological
“Without sensibility no object would be given to us, without understanding no object would be thought. Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind. It is, therefore, just as necessary to make our concepts sensible, that is, to add the object to them in intuition, as to make our intuitions intelligible, that is, to bring them under concepts. These two powers or capacities cannot exchange their functions. The understanding can intuit nothing, the senses can think nothing. Only through their union can knowledge arise. But that is no reason for confounding the contribution of either with that of the other; rather is it a strong reason for carefully separating and distinguishing the one from the other. We therefore distinguish the science of the rules of sensibility in general, that is, aesthetic, from the science of the rules of the understanding in general, that is, logic.”
― Critique of Pure Reason
― Critique of Pure Reason
Venezuela lee
— 647 members
— last activity Jun 25, 2025 03:49PM
El venezolano sigue leyendo, a pesar de la dificultad de encontrar libros de autores extranjeros, los costos de los existentes y la pérdida de algunas ...more
International Information Syndicate
— 24 members
— last activity Jan 01, 2019 05:55PM
The Official GoodReads group of the International Information Syndicate, AKA /r/Chomsky and /r/breadtube.
José’s 2024 Year in Books
Take a look at José’s Year in Books, including some fun facts about their reading.
More friends…
Favorite Genres
Polls voted on by José
Lists liked by José


























































