What do you think?
Rate this book
Over de liefde : een filosofie voor de eenentwintigste eeuw
Dit boek is een pleidooi voor een nieuwe levensfilosofie gebaseerd op het begrip liefde. Het moderne gezin, en daarmee ook onze huidige maatschappij, is niet langer gebaseerd op het gearrangeerde huwelijk maar op een huwelijk uit liefde. Niet alleen privé, maar ook in de maatschappelijke onderwerpen zou liefde een veel grotere rol kunnen spelen: de mens zet zich in voor zijn geliefden in plaats van voor een abstract hoge doel. Ferry gaat na in hoeverre het begrip liefde kan werken als een ordenend principe dat vorm geeft aan de wijze waarop mensen samenleven.
- GenresPhilosophyNonfiction
245 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2010
23 people are currently reading
204 people want to read
About the author
Luc Ferry
282 books267 followersLuc Ferry (born January 1, 1951) is a French philosopher and a notable proponent of Secular Humanism. He is a former member of the Saint-Simon Foundation think-tank.
He received an Agrégation de philosophie (1975), a Doctorat d’Etat en science politique (1981), and an Agrégation de science politique (1982). As a Professor of political science and political philosophy, Luc Ferry taught at the Institut d'études politiques de Lyon (1982–1988) — during which time he also taught and directed graduate research at the Pantheon-Sorbonne University —, at Caen University (1989–96). He was a professor at Paris Diderot University (since 1996) but did not teach there.
From 2002 and until 2004 he served as the Minister of Education on the cabinet led by the conservative Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin. During his tenure, he was the minister in charge of the implementation of the French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools. He received the award of Docteur honoris causa from the Université de Sherbrooke (Canada). He is the 2013 Telesio Galilei Academy of science Laureate for Philosophy. He was enthroned to Chevalier De La Dive Bouteille De Gaillac on the 20 march 2012 together with Max Karoubi and Francesco Fucilla.
Source: Wikipedia
He received an Agrégation de philosophie (1975), a Doctorat d’Etat en science politique (1981), and an Agrégation de science politique (1982). As a Professor of political science and political philosophy, Luc Ferry taught at the Institut d'études politiques de Lyon (1982–1988) — during which time he also taught and directed graduate research at the Pantheon-Sorbonne University —, at Caen University (1989–96). He was a professor at Paris Diderot University (since 1996) but did not teach there.
From 2002 and until 2004 he served as the Minister of Education on the cabinet led by the conservative Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin. During his tenure, he was the minister in charge of the implementation of the French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools. He received the award of Docteur honoris causa from the Université de Sherbrooke (Canada). He is the 2013 Telesio Galilei Academy of science Laureate for Philosophy. He was enthroned to Chevalier De La Dive Bouteille De Gaillac on the 20 march 2012 together with Max Karoubi and Francesco Fucilla.
Source: Wikipedia
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
June 1, 2021
برای من کتابِ آموزندهای بود.
اول که سراغش رفتم، انتظارِ مواجههای فلسفی با عشق را داشتم. اما بعد از چند صفحه متوجه شدم که موضوع کتاب، تا حد زیادی با چیزی که فکرش را میکردم فرق دارد.
کتاب در قالب یک گفتگو با یک فرد دیگر نوشته شده و اصلِ تلاشِ نویسنده تاکید بر نقش کلیدی و تعیینکننده عشق بر معنای زندگی، سیاست، هنر و آموزش است و در این بین، به طیف گستردهای از مسائل مرتبط میپردازد. خیلی از جاها نویسنده نظرات شخصیش در باب مسائل مختلف را مطرح میکرد که چندان مورد پسندم نبود. با خیلی از حرفهایش اصلا موافق نبودم و دفاعیاتش از بعضی مسائل ابدا قانعکننده نبود. مثلا به نظرم منطقِ نظریههای رقیبِ سیاسیای که نویسنده ادعای پیشیگرفتنشان از لیبرالیسم/سوسیالیسم را دارد چندان قوی نیست.
با این حال، بحثهای مربوط به موضاعات غیرسیاسی به مراتب دلنشینتر بود. کتاب با تعریف فلسفه به عنوان "جستوجوی سکولارِ زندگیِ خوب" شروع و سپس اشارهی دقیقی بر 4 اصل بزرگ معنا در تاریخ میشود: اصل کیهانشناختی، الهیاتی، اومانیستی و سرانجام واسازی. سپس نویسنده به دفاع از "عشق" به عنوان پنجمین اصل معنا در تاریخ میپردازد. ( که باز به نظرم منطقی استوار، آنرا حمایت نمیکند!)
با توجه به اینکه نویسنده کتاب، لوک فری، چند سال وزیر آموزش در فرانسه بوده، بحثهای جذابی را درباره مسئله آموزش پیش میکشد. در ادامه هم ارتباط هنر مدرن با عشق، کمی بررسی میشود.
یکی از مشکلاتی که در حین خواندنش دااشتم این بود که با اینکه به شدت مجذوبِ حرفها بودم، نمیتوانستم ارتباط آن موضوع خاص را به "عشق" پیدا کنم. به نظرم کلِ کتاب خیلی شبیه یکی دو جلسه سخنرانی بود، که سخنران جذاب حرف میزند اما گاهی از محور بحثهایش دور میشود. با این حال دوستش داشتم و بیش از انتظارم آموختم.
ترجمه کتاب هم به نظرم خوب و دقیق بود. یکی دو جا، غلطهای ویرایشی بدجور توی ذوقم زد.
پ.ن.: نویسنده در این کتاب مدام به کتاب دیگرش، la revolution de l’amour اشاره میکند. در گودریدز این کتاب که اسمش de l’amour است، به نظرم به اشتباه با آن یکی مرج شده. دوست داشتم آنرا هم میخواندم.
اول که سراغش رفتم، انتظارِ مواجههای فلسفی با عشق را داشتم. اما بعد از چند صفحه متوجه شدم که موضوع کتاب، تا حد زیادی با چیزی که فکرش را میکردم فرق دارد.
کتاب در قالب یک گفتگو با یک فرد دیگر نوشته شده و اصلِ تلاشِ نویسنده تاکید بر نقش کلیدی و تعیینکننده عشق بر معنای زندگی، سیاست، هنر و آموزش است و در این بین، به طیف گستردهای از مسائل مرتبط میپردازد. خیلی از جاها نویسنده نظرات شخصیش در باب مسائل مختلف را مطرح میکرد که چندان مورد پسندم نبود. با خیلی از حرفهایش اصلا موافق نبودم و دفاعیاتش از بعضی مسائل ابدا قانعکننده نبود. مثلا به نظرم منطقِ نظریههای رقیبِ سیاسیای که نویسنده ادعای پیشیگرفتنشان از لیبرالیسم/سوسیالیسم را دارد چندان قوی نیست.
با این حال، بحثهای مربوط به موضاعات غیرسیاسی به مراتب دلنشینتر بود. کتاب با تعریف فلسفه به عنوان "جستوجوی سکولارِ زندگیِ خوب" شروع و سپس اشارهی دقیقی بر 4 اصل بزرگ معنا در تاریخ میشود: اصل کیهانشناختی، الهیاتی، اومانیستی و سرانجام واسازی. سپس نویسنده به دفاع از "عشق" به عنوان پنجمین اصل معنا در تاریخ میپردازد. ( که باز به نظرم منطقی استوار، آنرا حمایت نمیکند!)
با توجه به اینکه نویسنده کتاب، لوک فری، چند سال وزیر آموزش در فرانسه بوده، بحثهای جذابی را درباره مسئله آموزش پیش میکشد. در ادامه هم ارتباط هنر مدرن با عشق، کمی بررسی میشود.
یکی از مشکلاتی که در حین خواندنش دااشتم این بود که با اینکه به شدت مجذوبِ حرفها بودم، نمیتوانستم ارتباط آن موضوع خاص را به "عشق" پیدا کنم. به نظرم کلِ کتاب خیلی شبیه یکی دو جلسه سخنرانی بود، که سخنران جذاب حرف میزند اما گاهی از محور بحثهایش دور میشود. با این حال دوستش داشتم و بیش از انتظارم آموختم.
ترجمه کتاب هم به نظرم خوب و دقیق بود. یکی دو جا، غلطهای ویرایشی بدجور توی ذوقم زد.
پ.ن.: نویسنده در این کتاب مدام به کتاب دیگرش، la revolution de l’amour اشاره میکند. در گودریدز این کتاب که اسمش de l’amour است، به نظرم به اشتباه با آن یکی مرج شده. دوست داشتم آنرا هم میخواندم.
August 21, 2025
A Humanism Of Love
The French philosopher Luc Ferry (b. 1951) served as French Minister of Education from 2002 -- 2004 under Prime Minister Jean Pierre Raffarin. The author of many books, Ferry is known for his development of a philosophy based on secular humanism. My first reading of Ferry was of his new book, "On Love: A Philosophy for the Twenty-First Century" (2013). It is a highly ambitious, suggestive work in which Ferry outlines a philosophical approach of secular humanism based upon love rather than upon reason and law. Ferry suggests that reason and law formed the basis of secular humanism during the Enlightenment. The book is largely in the form of an essay and a conversation. As such it is informal and tends to ramble. At times, Ferry engages in discussion with another French philosopher, Claude Capelier, who also wrote a Preface to the book. The discussion portions of the book are usually insightful but occasionally distracting. Andrew Brown translated the book from the French. The book is lively and reads well while conveying complex ideas.
This short but dense book begins with a provocative introduction,"A Brief History of the Meaning of Life." Ferry faults much contemporary philosophy for avoiding fundamental questions. The first goal of his book is to establish philosophy as a secular discipline which provides for "a non-religious quest for the good life." At the outset, then, Ferry pits philosophy as an alternative to revealed religion as a source for finding meaning in one's life. Meaning is developed from the inside, so to speak, by a person recognizing what is valuable, rather than imposed transcendentally by God.
The second of Ferry's two major goals is to establish love as the main source by which people today find meaning in their lives. Ferry's claim straddles between description -- people in fact find love as the source of meaning -- and prescription -- or what Ferry believes people should do. The "love" to which Ferry refers is, in essence, romantic love, the love between a man and a woman or, indeed, one person for another person. Love is the basis for a meaningful life, for Ferry.
Most of the book develops this claim through a variety of frequently extraordinary (some are less so) philosophical, historical, and anthropological analyses. Ferry sees broadly five competing philosophical positions beginning with the ancient Greeks, in which human happiness was based on conformity to the physical universe, proceeding through Christianity, which replaced the universe with the will of God, through the Enlightenment and secular humanism. The fourth stage, Nietzsche and continuing through Heidegger and beyond "deconstructed" the metaphysics of the Enlightenment and of religion. The fifth stage, which Ferry announces, is based on a philosophy of love of a person without metaphysical trappings.
Ferry supports his philosophical account with a fairly straightforward account of the nature of romantic love. The key moment came from when marriages moved from arrangements, based on religion, family, and economics, to romantic choice, the feeling of one person for another. (Ferry identifies this shift as the source of the movement for same sex marriage, but he does not dwell on the point.) The shift to marriage based on love and choice was part of a change to a culture of personal autonomy.
In a long discussion in the book, Ferry tries to show, with mixed success, how a philosophy based on the primary character of romantic love gets reflected in political institutions. His analysis shifts quickly from one's romantic partner to the children of the union. Modern couples are fanatically devoted to their offspring, Ferry argues with a good deal of force. Then he argues somewhat less convincingly for a projection from the personal to the political sphere -- making the world a better place for one's children and, by extension, for the children of others.
Romantic love, in the person of one's beloved and one's children supersede for Perry abstractions for which too many people in the past were willing to die. These abstractions include primarily patriotism on the right and revolution on the left. Commitments of people have moved over time from the abstract and metaphysical, such as nature or God, to the intimately personal, a change Ferry endorses.
As a former Minister of Education, Ferry is at his best in discussing his claim that people have become child-centered as it relates to education. His discussion becomes textured, drawing on elements of the prior philosophical stages he identified to combat certain excesses of child-centeredness. In a final section, Ferry discusses how some of the best modern art and literature rise past the prevailing philosophy of relativism and deconstruction to support what he sees as a love-centered humanism. This discussion tends to become arid, but I was pleased to learn that Ferry shares my admiration for the American novelist Philip Roth. Ferry says that in Roth, "we're no longer in the first humanism of reason and law, nor in pure deconstruction, but in what is a much wider and deeper approach to human being."
The book manages to be engaging, polemical, and learned. It offers challenging claims that might help readers understand themselves differently than they did before reading the book. I was glad to get to know Ferry's work through the Amazon Vine program.
Robin Friedman
The French philosopher Luc Ferry (b. 1951) served as French Minister of Education from 2002 -- 2004 under Prime Minister Jean Pierre Raffarin. The author of many books, Ferry is known for his development of a philosophy based on secular humanism. My first reading of Ferry was of his new book, "On Love: A Philosophy for the Twenty-First Century" (2013). It is a highly ambitious, suggestive work in which Ferry outlines a philosophical approach of secular humanism based upon love rather than upon reason and law. Ferry suggests that reason and law formed the basis of secular humanism during the Enlightenment. The book is largely in the form of an essay and a conversation. As such it is informal and tends to ramble. At times, Ferry engages in discussion with another French philosopher, Claude Capelier, who also wrote a Preface to the book. The discussion portions of the book are usually insightful but occasionally distracting. Andrew Brown translated the book from the French. The book is lively and reads well while conveying complex ideas.
This short but dense book begins with a provocative introduction,"A Brief History of the Meaning of Life." Ferry faults much contemporary philosophy for avoiding fundamental questions. The first goal of his book is to establish philosophy as a secular discipline which provides for "a non-religious quest for the good life." At the outset, then, Ferry pits philosophy as an alternative to revealed religion as a source for finding meaning in one's life. Meaning is developed from the inside, so to speak, by a person recognizing what is valuable, rather than imposed transcendentally by God.
The second of Ferry's two major goals is to establish love as the main source by which people today find meaning in their lives. Ferry's claim straddles between description -- people in fact find love as the source of meaning -- and prescription -- or what Ferry believes people should do. The "love" to which Ferry refers is, in essence, romantic love, the love between a man and a woman or, indeed, one person for another person. Love is the basis for a meaningful life, for Ferry.
Most of the book develops this claim through a variety of frequently extraordinary (some are less so) philosophical, historical, and anthropological analyses. Ferry sees broadly five competing philosophical positions beginning with the ancient Greeks, in which human happiness was based on conformity to the physical universe, proceeding through Christianity, which replaced the universe with the will of God, through the Enlightenment and secular humanism. The fourth stage, Nietzsche and continuing through Heidegger and beyond "deconstructed" the metaphysics of the Enlightenment and of religion. The fifth stage, which Ferry announces, is based on a philosophy of love of a person without metaphysical trappings.
Ferry supports his philosophical account with a fairly straightforward account of the nature of romantic love. The key moment came from when marriages moved from arrangements, based on religion, family, and economics, to romantic choice, the feeling of one person for another. (Ferry identifies this shift as the source of the movement for same sex marriage, but he does not dwell on the point.) The shift to marriage based on love and choice was part of a change to a culture of personal autonomy.
In a long discussion in the book, Ferry tries to show, with mixed success, how a philosophy based on the primary character of romantic love gets reflected in political institutions. His analysis shifts quickly from one's romantic partner to the children of the union. Modern couples are fanatically devoted to their offspring, Ferry argues with a good deal of force. Then he argues somewhat less convincingly for a projection from the personal to the political sphere -- making the world a better place for one's children and, by extension, for the children of others.
Romantic love, in the person of one's beloved and one's children supersede for Perry abstractions for which too many people in the past were willing to die. These abstractions include primarily patriotism on the right and revolution on the left. Commitments of people have moved over time from the abstract and metaphysical, such as nature or God, to the intimately personal, a change Ferry endorses.
As a former Minister of Education, Ferry is at his best in discussing his claim that people have become child-centered as it relates to education. His discussion becomes textured, drawing on elements of the prior philosophical stages he identified to combat certain excesses of child-centeredness. In a final section, Ferry discusses how some of the best modern art and literature rise past the prevailing philosophy of relativism and deconstruction to support what he sees as a love-centered humanism. This discussion tends to become arid, but I was pleased to learn that Ferry shares my admiration for the American novelist Philip Roth. Ferry says that in Roth, "we're no longer in the first humanism of reason and law, nor in pure deconstruction, but in what is a much wider and deeper approach to human being."
The book manages to be engaging, polemical, and learned. It offers challenging claims that might help readers understand themselves differently than they did before reading the book. I was glad to get to know Ferry's work through the Amazon Vine program.
Robin Friedman
April 10, 2024
“A philosophy for the 21st century” is definitely the right subtitle, though probably not in the way Ferry hopes. There are moments of genial insight here and there but little by way of actual philosophy (in fact, most of what he has to say about the philosophic tradition is largely critical, Nietzsche for the milquetoast European liberal), and unsurprisingly Ferry loses himself amidst an argument that wants to push forward to a brave new politic of love, while also maintaining an odd streak of conservatism that belies his shrugging dismissal of religion and classical thought. Enjoyed working through this with a reading group, who largely found it as feeble and irrelevant as I did. Plato’s Symposium next, hallelujah.
Read
November 5, 2023فعلا نیمه کاره رها میکنم. حس خوندنش نیست.
July 14, 2021
Mettre la chanson :
-Aznavour : " La bohème"
-Stravinsky : " Le sacre et l'oiseau de feu"
" Dans la demeure obscure d'où ne ressortent jamais ceux qui sont entrés, par le chemin de l'aller sans retour" (extrait d'un poème sur le séjour des enfers dans l'épopée de Gilgamesh lorsqu'il perd son ami Enkidu)
" Avec l'amour, la peur devient angoisse"
" La mort est bien liée à l'entrée dans la condition humaine... la beauté de la vie à laquelle seuls les hommes accèdent caut bien qu'on meure pour elle. Du reste est est inséparable de la mort. "
" Au moment de mourir, il (Enkidu) comprends que le sens de la vie n'est pas dans la survie, mais dans l'humanisation de soi, dans le passage de l'état animal initial à l'état humain, dans la conquête d'une vie bonne, c'est à dire humaine et civilisée, une vie dans laquelle on a la chance merveilleuse de rencontrer l'amour et l'amitié, une vie qui se termine par des rites funèbres que les animaux ne connaissent pas, une vie qui se passe à tenter désespérément de conquérir l'idéal absurde et insensé de l'immortalité. "
"La vérité de ce monde réside dans le changement, dans le fait que tout passe, que rien de ce qui relève de la vie des humains n'est immortel. Sage sera donc d'abord et avant tout celui qui parvient à ne s'attache à rien ni à personne. Il peut sans doute pratiquer la compassion, ne pas être indifférent aux autres, mais l'attachement jamais. "
"...Gilgamesh est... convaincu que le simple fait d'exister n'est pas un malheur, mais une joie... il, tient que l'existence est une grâce... apprendre à vivre au présent, ne pas se laisser tyranniser par le passé et le futur, voilà la clef, le moyen de parvenir à habiter le réel, de se réconcilier avec lui quand il le permet, voire à l'aimer autant qu'il est possible. "
" Les 3 termes grecs qui définissent l'amour selon Comte-Sponville : éros (amour qui prend et qui consomme = amour qui prend), philia (traduit par l'amitié : joie gratuite, désintéressée que nous éprouvons à la simple existence de l'autre = amour qui partage), agapé (l'amour chrétien celui qui pousse le désintéressement et la gratuité à l'extrême = amour qui donne)"
-Aznavour : " La bohème"
-Stravinsky : " Le sacre et l'oiseau de feu"
" Dans la demeure obscure d'où ne ressortent jamais ceux qui sont entrés, par le chemin de l'aller sans retour" (extrait d'un poème sur le séjour des enfers dans l'épopée de Gilgamesh lorsqu'il perd son ami Enkidu)
" Avec l'amour, la peur devient angoisse"
" La mort est bien liée à l'entrée dans la condition humaine... la beauté de la vie à laquelle seuls les hommes accèdent caut bien qu'on meure pour elle. Du reste est est inséparable de la mort. "
" Au moment de mourir, il (Enkidu) comprends que le sens de la vie n'est pas dans la survie, mais dans l'humanisation de soi, dans le passage de l'état animal initial à l'état humain, dans la conquête d'une vie bonne, c'est à dire humaine et civilisée, une vie dans laquelle on a la chance merveilleuse de rencontrer l'amour et l'amitié, une vie qui se termine par des rites funèbres que les animaux ne connaissent pas, une vie qui se passe à tenter désespérément de conquérir l'idéal absurde et insensé de l'immortalité. "
"La vérité de ce monde réside dans le changement, dans le fait que tout passe, que rien de ce qui relève de la vie des humains n'est immortel. Sage sera donc d'abord et avant tout celui qui parvient à ne s'attache à rien ni à personne. Il peut sans doute pratiquer la compassion, ne pas être indifférent aux autres, mais l'attachement jamais. "
"...Gilgamesh est... convaincu que le simple fait d'exister n'est pas un malheur, mais une joie... il, tient que l'existence est une grâce... apprendre à vivre au présent, ne pas se laisser tyranniser par le passé et le futur, voilà la clef, le moyen de parvenir à habiter le réel, de se réconcilier avec lui quand il le permet, voire à l'aimer autant qu'il est possible. "
" Les 3 termes grecs qui définissent l'amour selon Comte-Sponville : éros (amour qui prend et qui consomme = amour qui prend), philia (traduit par l'amitié : joie gratuite, désintéressée que nous éprouvons à la simple existence de l'autre = amour qui partage), agapé (l'amour chrétien celui qui pousse le désintéressement et la gratuité à l'extrême = amour qui donne)"
February 27, 2023
Like most philosophy readings that last longer than a page, *On Love* wasn't the most interesting and felt very meandering, but it did raise some interesting ideas. I also learned a lot about historical reasons for why our current generations are so different from the ones before.
If I hadn’t taken Philosophy 101 last semester, I would’ve gone running for the hills of my normal fiction reads as soon as I’d slogged through the Introduction. Luckily, I went into this date knowing I’d at least have SOMETHING in common with this modern French philosopher.
Many people consider political and religious talk a first date no-no, but I appreciate knowing people’s core values right away instead of being blind-sided by extremist views after proposing marriage.
I’d assumed the author’s philosophy would mostly touch on romantic love. Instead, I read entire chapters about why French children are struggling in schools and why the author hates modern art (it’s because snobs call it “beautiful” when the artists only meant for it to be subversive and ugly). The passages themselves weren’t uninteresting, but I kept thinking, “Huh, I wasn’t expecting to read this on Valentine’s Day.”
I doubt I ever would’ve picked this book up on my own accord, so I’m glad my school's library chose it for me. I could pat myself on the back every time I understood what he meant by “Kantian ethics,” and if I’m not falling in love this February, I might as well remind myself how great I am at memorizing random trivia.
If I hadn’t taken Philosophy 101 last semester, I would’ve gone running for the hills of my normal fiction reads as soon as I’d slogged through the Introduction. Luckily, I went into this date knowing I’d at least have SOMETHING in common with this modern French philosopher.
Many people consider political and religious talk a first date no-no, but I appreciate knowing people’s core values right away instead of being blind-sided by extremist views after proposing marriage.
I’d assumed the author’s philosophy would mostly touch on romantic love. Instead, I read entire chapters about why French children are struggling in schools and why the author hates modern art (it’s because snobs call it “beautiful” when the artists only meant for it to be subversive and ugly). The passages themselves weren’t uninteresting, but I kept thinking, “Huh, I wasn’t expecting to read this on Valentine’s Day.”
I doubt I ever would’ve picked this book up on my own accord, so I’m glad my school's library chose it for me. I could pat myself on the back every time I understood what he meant by “Kantian ethics,” and if I’m not falling in love this February, I might as well remind myself how great I am at memorizing random trivia.
June 9, 2023
بالاخره تموم شد
لوک فری فیلسوف عجیبیه و نظرات متفاوت با منطق شخصیی داره که من بعضی هاشو قبول داشتم بعضی هاشم قبول نداشتم و بعضی هاشم متوجه نشدم منظور و مقصودش رو به علت اینکه توضیحاتش نکامل نبود اما جدا از این ها ترجمه خانم نرگس حسن لی نشربان اصلا خوب نبود و شاید باعث این شد که مطلب قابل فهم نباشه و کسل کننده باشه و ترجمه بیشتر کلمه کلمه بود تا انتقال مفهومی!
لوک فری فیلسوف عجیبیه و نظرات متفاوت با منطق شخصیی داره که من بعضی هاشو قبول داشتم بعضی هاشم قبول نداشتم و بعضی هاشم متوجه نشدم منظور و مقصودش رو به علت اینکه توضیحاتش نکامل نبود اما جدا از این ها ترجمه خانم نرگس حسن لی نشربان اصلا خوب نبود و شاید باعث این شد که مطلب قابل فهم نباشه و کسل کننده باشه و ترجمه بیشتر کلمه کلمه بود تا انتقال مفهومی!
September 24, 2025
2,5🌟 mi primera vez leyendo filosofía y se me hizo bastante pesado, en si el libro esta bueno, pero al no ser mi tipo de lectura habitual llegaba el momento que me aburría bastante, pero eso no quiere decir que no me haya gustado! porque si lo hizoo
October 16, 2019
What a boring book. Que des sophismes. Ennui.Je vais le revendre si je trouve preneur!
February 5, 2020
Como tudo do Luc Ferry, este também é muito bom.
March 29, 2016
Another excellent work by one of the most inspiring philosophers living today. Minister Ferry (he was at one time Minister of education in France) makes the case that we have entered a new age – one that defines what it means to live well the concept of love. The book is compact (less than 200 pages), articulate and thought provoking. He has attempted a structure in which an interlocutor poses questions and/or comments on the topics discussed. This second voice in the book is his friend and collaborator Claude Capelier. The device is an interesting attempt to bring the reader into a debate that tests the soundness of Ferry’s arguments. It’s at times clumsy and doesn’t often cerate the intention that would exist in a verbal discussion but I applaud the attempt.
The book’s introduction is terrific. It generally describes what philosophy is and the discipline’s historic quest to define what it means to live well – to have a good life. Of particular interest was his descriptions of the various philosophical periods through which thinking humans have evolved. These were periods, or as Ferry describes them – principals - in different ways gave meaning to life; the cosmological principal, the theological principal, the humanist principal and the principal of deconstruction. Ferry argues that a new and better principal of life exists and that is one of love. Love motivates us to sacrifice for others, it motivates us to create through public policy a better world.
While I rate the book highly and strongly recommend it I do have a few criticisms. One particular dissatisfaction was his discussion of public education. Too often this section of the book went down the road of how to best parent children and it too often failed to make a compelling case for specifically how love changes our approach to educating children. It felt like he was using the opportunity of the book to vent frustrations incurred during his time of public service.
I am, I am sure, a closet optimist. I believe Ferry is right that love can reorder our human society. It can be the basis for how we live as individuals and how we treat others, not just neighbors but those whose faces we never see half a world-away.
There is always something exciting to be found in Ferry’s writings and On Love is no exception.
The book’s introduction is terrific. It generally describes what philosophy is and the discipline’s historic quest to define what it means to live well – to have a good life. Of particular interest was his descriptions of the various philosophical periods through which thinking humans have evolved. These were periods, or as Ferry describes them – principals - in different ways gave meaning to life; the cosmological principal, the theological principal, the humanist principal and the principal of deconstruction. Ferry argues that a new and better principal of life exists and that is one of love. Love motivates us to sacrifice for others, it motivates us to create through public policy a better world.
While I rate the book highly and strongly recommend it I do have a few criticisms. One particular dissatisfaction was his discussion of public education. Too often this section of the book went down the road of how to best parent children and it too often failed to make a compelling case for specifically how love changes our approach to educating children. It felt like he was using the opportunity of the book to vent frustrations incurred during his time of public service.
I am, I am sure, a closet optimist. I believe Ferry is right that love can reorder our human society. It can be the basis for how we live as individuals and how we treat others, not just neighbors but those whose faces we never see half a world-away.
There is always something exciting to be found in Ferry’s writings and On Love is no exception.
Read
April 23, 2013De ceux qui liront ceci, je suis persuader qu' aucun ne lira ce livre. Et je les comprend.
J' y suis arrive a bout, mais non sans mal. C' est simplement une thèse philosophique.
Les bons points: beaucoup d' idées très intéressantes. Ecrit dans un langage moderne et accessible.
Les mauvais: c' est long. Tres long. bâti comme une dissertation (thèse, antithèse, synthèse) qui n' en est pas une. Pour commencer, la deuxième partie est a éviter (si tout de même l' envie vous prenait de le lire). Pour finir, la fin quoique très intéressante ne suit plus du tout a mon sens, la trajectoire de l' idée développé au cours du livre. Ou si peu.
Je suis content de l' avoir lu et content d'en avoir finis avec....
J' y suis arrive a bout, mais non sans mal. C' est simplement une thèse philosophique.
Les bons points: beaucoup d' idées très intéressantes. Ecrit dans un langage moderne et accessible.
Les mauvais: c' est long. Tres long. bâti comme une dissertation (thèse, antithèse, synthèse) qui n' en est pas une. Pour commencer, la deuxième partie est a éviter (si tout de même l' envie vous prenait de le lire). Pour finir, la fin quoique très intéressante ne suit plus du tout a mon sens, la trajectoire de l' idée développé au cours du livre. Ou si peu.
Je suis content de l' avoir lu et content d'en avoir finis avec....
January 23, 2016
Today we have a unique opportunity in the history of mankind: to be married and live with a partner for love .... Most but we waste it, but it is available.
But this was not easy. It took thousands of years for the domination of men over women, then equality between sexes today culminates in freedom of choice both for couples.
A small but excellent book to learn how this happened.
At the the end of the book, the author is completely lost, but the first 2/3 of the book is excellent and made me think that this opportunity must not be wasted, our parents didn't have the opportunity like us, and our grandparents and before couldn't even imagine this revolution of love.
Do you know how started this revolution?
But this was not easy. It took thousands of years for the domination of men over women, then equality between sexes today culminates in freedom of choice both for couples.
A small but excellent book to learn how this happened.
At the the end of the book, the author is completely lost, but the first 2/3 of the book is excellent and made me think that this opportunity must not be wasted, our parents didn't have the opportunity like us, and our grandparents and before couldn't even imagine this revolution of love.
Do you know how started this revolution?
May 29, 2016
"Vivemos a revolução do amor, e essa é a melhor notícia do milênio"
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews