A re-issue of Gregory Bateson's classic work. It summarizes Bateson's thinking on the subject of the patterns that connect living beings to each other and to their environment.

L'espace lisse, ou Nomos : sa différence avec l'espace strié.
- Ce qui remplit l'espace lisse : le corps, sa différence avec l'organisme. - Ce qui se distribue dans cet espace : rhizome, meutes et multiplicités. - Ce qui se passe : les devenirs et les intensités. - Les coordonnées tracées : territoires, terre et déterritorialisations, Cosmos. - Les signes correspondants, le langage et la musique (Les ritournelles). - Agencement des espaces-temps : machine de guerre et appareil d'Etat.
Chaque thème est censé constituer un " plateau ", c'est-à-dire une région continue d'intensités. Le raccordement des régions se fait à la fois de proche en proche et à distance, suivant les lignes de rhizome, qui concernent les éléments de l'art, de la science et de la politique.

孟德斯鳩在本書中倡議實施行政、立法、司法三權分立，彼此制衡，以免造成專制。他把古今中外所有政體分為五大類,並把國家的權利區分為三種，分析了三權分立的原則：
1 立法權力
2 有關國際法事項得執行權力-行政權力
3 有關民事法律的執行權-司法權力
《孟德斯鳩法意》一書中，重要的論述是法律，而非政治，但因三權分立論過於創新，且皆合民主自由，而為大多數國家採用。孟德斯鳩是處於君主專制和民主政治的轉淚點，故他的著眼點皆為當代最佳政治典範─英國。孟德斯鳩在書中對於三種權力的機關以及所組成的份子做了詳盡的分析，並提出互相制衡的方法。
本書特色
★嚴復翻譯經典重現！

本书庋集吴氏法学著述二十五篇，概分为三大部分。吴氏与霍姆斯大法官的部分通信和著名的《吴氏宪草》，作为附录，一并收刊，裨供研究吴公身世与心迹。通观全书，既有关于法的基本概念和法律精神的抽象阐释，亦有对于具体法制的比较观察，而平章人物、梳理思想谱系，更是作者的功力所在；或探研民事立法与宪政进路，或钩沉法意、叙说心曲，无不将人生与人心一并道来，使法意与法制交相释证，尽付于诗意文笔。由此，作者提供的不仅是一桩思想个案样本，同时，并记载了二十世纪汉语法学的曲折心史。
本书适合法学研究者和法科学生阅读，同时对于关心法学的其他学科人士亦有参考价值。

The Law of Peoples John Rawls This book consists of two parts: the essay "The Idea of Public Reason Revisited," first published in 1997, and "The Law of Peoples," a major reworking of a much shorter article by the same name published in 1993. Taken together, they are the culmination of more than fifty years of reflection on liberalism and on some of the most pressing problems of our times by John Rawls. "The Idea of Public Reason Revisited" explains why the constraints of public reason, a concept first discussed in Political Liberalism (1993), are ones that holders of both religious and non-religious comprehensive views can reasonably endorse. It is Rawls's most detailed account of how a modern constitutional democracy, based on a liberal political conception, could and would be viewed as legitimate by reasonable citizens who on religious, philosophical, or moral grounds do not themselves accept a liberal comprehensive doctrine--such as that of Kant, or Mill, or Rawls's own "Justice as Fairness," presented in A Theory of Justice (1971). The Law of Peoples extends the idea of a social contract to the Society of Peoples and lays out the general principles that can and should be accepted by both liberal and non-liberal societies as the standard for regulating their behavior toward one another. In particular, it draws a crucial distinction between basic human rights and the rights of each citizen of a liberal constitutional democracy. It explores the terms under which such a society may appropriately wage war against an "outlaw society," and discusses the moral grounds for rendering assistance to non-liberal societies burdened by unfavorable political and economic conditions. John Rawls is James Bryant Conant University Professor, Emeritus, Harvard University, and the author of A Theory of Justice, Revised Edition (see catalog page 32) and Collected Papers (Harvard). 51Z2 x 81Z4 256 pp.

With the incisiveness and lucid style for which he is renowned, Ronald Dworkin has written a masterful explanation of how the Anglo-American legal system works and on what principles it is grounded. Law's Empire is a full-length presentation of his theory of law that will be studied and debated--by scholars and theorists, by lawyers and judges, by students and political activists--for years to come. </p>
Dworkin begins with the question that is at the heart of the whole legal system: in difficult cases how do (and how should) judges decide what the law is? He shows that judges must decide hard cases by interpreting rather than simply applying past legal decisions, and he produces a general theory of what interpretation is--in literature as well as in law--and of when one interpretation is better than others. Every legal interpretation reflects an underlying theory about the general character of law: Dworkin assesses three such theories. One, which has been very influential, takes the law of a community to be only what the established conventions of that community say it is. Another, currently in vogue, assumes that legal practice is best understood as an instrument of society to achieve its goals. Dworkin argues forcefully and persuasively against both these views: he insists that the most fundamental point of law is not to report consensus or provide efficient means to social goals, but to answer the requirement that a political community act in a coherent and principled manner toward all its members. He discusses, in the light of that view, cases at common law, cases arising under statutes, and great constitutional cases in the Supreme Court, and he systematically demonstrates that his concept of political and legal integrity is the key to Anglo-American legal theory and practice. </p>

In the wake of the Scientific Revolution, the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries saw the complete demolition of traditional structures of authority, scientific thought, and belief by the new philosophy and the philosophers, including Voltaire, Diderot, and Rousseau. The Radical Enlightenment played a part in this revolutionary process, which effectively overthrew all justification for monarchy, aristocracy, and ecclesiastical power, as well as man's dominance over woman, theological dominance of education, and slavery. Despite the present day interest in the revolutions of the eighteenth century, the origins and rise of the Radical Enlightenment have received limited scholarly attention. The greatest obstacle to the movement finding its proper place in modern historical writing is its international scope: the Radical Enlightenment was not French, British, German, Italian, Jewish or Dutch, but all of these at the same time.

In this wide-ranging volume, Jonathan Israel offers a novel interpretation of the Radical Enlightenment down to La Mettie and Diderot, two of its key exponents. Particular emphasis is placed on the pivotal role of Spinoza and the widespread underground international philosophical movement known before 1750 as Spinozism.

What is economics fundamentally about? Some say 'money'. But that only applies, at a stretch, to macroeconomics. Others say 'incentivised choices'. Through a review of the history and methodology of economics, with special concentration on the past 60 years, the book shows why the second answer is more accurate. But this leads straight into another problem: psychologists study choices too. So how is economics different from psychology? The book explains this, by showing how economics is really about groups or populations of people. In clearly distinguishing economics from psychology, the book criticizes the current popular wave of behavioural economics, showing how many studies under that label confuse economics with psychology. But if economics is about structures of group response, then how is it different from sociology? The book shows how and why economics and sociology are currently converging, perhaps ultimately to form a single unified discipline fed by two distinct historical tributaries.