……《心之概念》（The Concept of Mind） 威拉德·范奥曼·蒯因：《从逻辑的观点看》（From a Logical Point of View） J. L. 麦基：《伦理学：发明对与错》（Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong） 托马斯·内格尔：《致命问题》（Mortal Questions，短篇随笔集，文笔极佳，通俗易懂） 伯纳德·威廉斯：《伦理学与哲学的限度》（Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy） 迈克尔·史密斯：《道德问题》（The Moral Problem） 偏专业、技术性、冷门一点的：迈克尔·比尼编的《弗雷格读本》（The Frege Reader，适合了解现代逻辑和当代哲学的开端……
…The Concept of Mind Willard Van Orman Quine: From a Logical Point of View J. L. Mackie: Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong Thomas Nagel: Mortal Questions (short essays, well-written, very accessible) Bernard Williams: Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy Michael Smith: The Moral Problem Specialist, technical, odd: The Frege Reader by Michael Beaney (for modern logic and the beginnings of contemporary philosophy…
……信奉对该问题的这一表述，但纵观历史上决定论的所有表述，在我看来唯独这一个值得探讨一番。我是通过读伯纳德·威廉斯（Bernard Williams）的两篇文献了解到的，而且我认为尽管他本人从未这么自称过，但这一表述的命名权理应归他。第一篇文献是他的著作《伦理学与哲学的限度》（Ethics and the limits of philosophy），第二篇则是那篇随笔……
…believe in this formulation of the problem but among all formulations of determinism throughout history this one is in my opinion the only one worth arguing about. I learned about it by reading two texts by Bernard Williams and I would say that he should be named the author of this formulation even though he never used such name. The first text is his book "Ethics and the limits of philosophy" and the second is the essay…
Hume wrote morality is better felt than reasoned. There is a large tradition in virtue ethics following Hume (eg Bernard Williams) who defend our moral intuitions, our prioritization of family, etc.
…Singularity relative to ancient Grecians, inasmuch as they couldn't understand our world at all... and I think it's true in the opposite direction, too. This reminded me immediately of a line of thought from Bernard Williams[1]. He's discussing relativism, and he argues that there is some truth to it (roughly: relativism, understood in a very specific way makes sense for ethics, but not for science). In order to make this…
……《心之概念》（The Concept of Mind） 威拉德·范奥曼·蒯因：《从逻辑的观点看》（From a Logical Point of View） J. L. 麦基：《伦理学：发明对与错》（Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong） 托马斯·内格尔：《致命问题》（Mortal Questions，短篇随笔集，文笔极佳，通俗易懂） 伯纳德·威廉斯：《伦理学与哲学的限度》（Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy） 迈克尔·史密斯：《道德问题》（The Moral Problem） 偏专业、技术性、冷门一点的：迈克尔·比尼编的《弗雷格读本》（The Frege Reader，适合了解现代逻辑和当代哲学的开端……
…The Concept of Mind Willard Van Orman Quine: From a Logical Point of View J. L. Mackie: Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong Thomas Nagel: Mortal Questions (short essays, well-written, very accessible) Bernard Williams: Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy Michael Smith: The Moral Problem Specialist, technical, odd: The Frege Reader by Michael Beaney (for modern logic and the beginnings of contemporary philosophy…
是时候读点伯纳德·威廉斯（Bernard Williams）了：http://books.google.com/books?id=J0w3ER2fWv4C&pg=PA93 http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~cjreg/ethicsModule4.htm
Time to read some Bernard Williams: http://books.google.com/books?id=J0w3ER2fWv4C&pg=PA93 http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~cjreg/ethicsModule4.htm
……信奉对该问题的这一表述，但纵观历史上决定论的所有表述，在我看来唯独这一个值得探讨一番。我是通过读伯纳德·威廉斯（Bernard Williams）的两篇文献了解到的，而且我认为尽管他本人从未这么自称过，但这一表述的命名权理应归他。第一篇文献是他的著作《伦理学与哲学的限度》（Ethics and the limits of philosophy），第二篇则是那篇随笔……
…believe in this formulation of the problem but among all formulations of determinism throughout history this one is in my opinion the only one worth arguing about. I learned about it by reading two texts by Bernard Williams and I would say that he should be named the author of this formulation even though he never used such name. The first text is his book "Ethics and the limits of philosophy" and the second is the essay…
休谟写过，道德更多是靠感受而非推理。在美德伦理学中有一个继承休谟观点的庞大传统（比如伯纳德·威廉斯/Bernard Williams），他们为我们的道德直觉、我们对家庭的优先考量等进行辩护。
Hume wrote morality is better felt than reasoned. There is a large tradition in virtue ethics following Hume (eg Bernard Williams) who defend our moral intuitions, our prioritization of family, etc.
……相对于古希腊人而言就像奇点（Singularity）一样，因为他们根本无法理解我们的世界……而且我觉得反过来也是如此。这立刻让我想起伯纳德·威廉斯（Bernard Williams）[1] 的一条思考脉络。他在讨论相对主义，并认为相对主义确实有其合理之处（大致是说：在一种非常特定的理解下，相对主义适用于伦理学，但不适用于科学）。为了阐明这一点……
…Singularity relative to ancient Grecians, inasmuch as they couldn't understand our world at all... and I think it's true in the opposite direction, too. This reminded me immediately of a line of thought from Bernard Williams[1]. He's discussing relativism, and he argues that there is some truth to it (roughly: relativism, understood in a very specific way makes sense for ethics, but not for science). In order to make this…