我非常推荐约翰·戈特利布·费希特的《全部知识学的基础》（Foundations of the Science of Knowledge）。读起来很晦涩，但对意识的洞见却非常有趣。https://antilogicalism.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/scienc...
I would very much recommend Johann Gottlieb Fichte’s “Foundations of the Science of Knowledge”. It’s a dense read, nevertheless an interesting insight on consciousness. https://antilogicalism.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/scienc...
我建议先从《论人的使命》（The Vocation of Man）读起，那本篇幅短而且写得很明白。如果你想继续读《知识学》（The Science of Knowledge），建议先去补补康德，可能还要读点谢林：我读了两本谢林的短册子之后，发现费希特读起来就没那么云里雾里了。我读它已经有一阵子了，但似乎……
I would suggest starting with The Vocation of Man, which is short and clearly written. If you wish to go on to The Science of Knowledge, I'd suggest reading up on Kant, and perhaps some Schelling: I found Fichte a lot less opaque after reading a couple of short volumes of Schelling. It has been a while since I read it, but it seems to…
哎，得了吧。比费希特和谢林还糟糕？黑格尔确实很难啃，但我觉得读《知识学》（The Science of Knowledge）简直就像是用叉勺去铲压实了的积雪。
Oh, come now. Worse than Fichte and Schelling? Hegel is pretty tough going, but I found The Science of Knowledge to be something like trying to shovel packed snow with a spork.
费希特的《知识学》（Science of Knowledge）在我22岁时把我打得落花流水，到了50多岁又让我败下阵来一次。我弃读过的书有很多，大多早就不记得了。但唯独费希特让我念念不忘——因为实在是太特么晦涩难懂了。也许我还会再去挑战一次。
Fichte's Science of Knowledge defeated me at 22, and again in my 50s. There are plenty of books that I have left unfinished, and hardly recall. But Fichte sticks with me for utter incomprehensibility. Maybe I'll give him another shot.
……谢林的《人类知识原理：早期论文四篇》。谢林是德国唯心主义哲学家中我从没尝试读过的一位（好吧，十年前有一本我完全读不下去）。费希特的《知识学》，这本在过去四十五年里断断续续挑战过我却屡战屡败的书。约翰·罗尔斯的《正义论》（A Concept of Justice）。大家都在谈论它，但我还没读过。我确实得读读它了……
…Human Knowledge: Four Early Essays by Schelling. Schelling was one of the German Idealist that I had never tried to read (well, there was one volume that I couldn't make headway in ten years ago). The Science of Knowledge by Fichte, which had always defeated me in intermittent attempts to read it over forty-five years. A Concept of Justice by John Rawls. Everyone talked about it, I hadn't read it. I do need to read it…
我非常推荐约翰·戈特利布·费希特的《全部知识学的基础》（Foundations of the Science of Knowledge）。读起来很晦涩，但对意识的洞见却非常有趣。https://antilogicalism.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/scienc...
I would very much recommend Johann Gottlieb Fichte’s “Foundations of the Science of Knowledge”. It’s a dense read, nevertheless an interesting insight on consciousness. https://antilogicalism.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/scienc...
我建议先从《论人的使命》（The Vocation of Man）读起，那本篇幅短而且写得很明白。如果你想继续读《知识学》（The Science of Knowledge），建议先去补补康德，可能还要读点谢林：我读了两本谢林的短册子之后，发现费希特读起来就没那么云里雾里了。我读它已经有一阵子了，但似乎……
I would suggest starting with The Vocation of Man, which is short and clearly written. If you wish to go on to The Science of Knowledge, I'd suggest reading up on Kant, and perhaps some Schelling: I found Fichte a lot less opaque after reading a couple of short volumes of Schelling. It has been a while since I read it, but it seems to…
哎，得了吧。比费希特和谢林还糟糕？黑格尔确实很难啃，但我觉得读《知识学》（The Science of Knowledge）简直就像是用叉勺去铲压实了的积雪。
Oh, come now. Worse than Fichte and Schelling? Hegel is pretty tough going, but I found The Science of Knowledge to be something like trying to shovel packed snow with a spork.
费希特的《知识学》（Science of Knowledge）在我22岁时把我打得落花流水，到了50多岁又让我败下阵来一次。我弃读过的书有很多，大多早就不记得了。但唯独费希特让我念念不忘——因为实在是太特么晦涩难懂了。也许我还会再去挑战一次。
Fichte's Science of Knowledge defeated me at 22, and again in my 50s. There are plenty of books that I have left unfinished, and hardly recall. But Fichte sticks with me for utter incomprehensibility. Maybe I'll give him another shot.
……谢林的《人类知识原理：早期论文四篇》。谢林是德国唯心主义哲学家中我从没尝试读过的一位（好吧，十年前有一本我完全读不下去）。费希特的《知识学》，这本在过去四十五年里断断续续挑战过我却屡战屡败的书。约翰·罗尔斯的《正义论》（A Concept of Justice）。大家都在谈论它，但我还没读过。我确实得读读它了……
…Human Knowledge: Four Early Essays by Schelling. Schelling was one of the German Idealist that I had never tried to read (well, there was one volume that I couldn't make headway in ten years ago). The Science of Knowledge by Fichte, which had always defeated me in intermittent attempts to read it over forty-five years. A Concept of Justice by John Rawls. Everyone talked about it, I hadn't read it. I do need to read it…