And reading the work of my friend A.C. Grayling has immeasurably heightened my understanding and appreciation of the human experience.
而且通过阅读我的朋友A.C. Grayling的著作，使我对人类感受的理解力和鉴赏力有了极大的提高。

“理解力和鉴赏力” 不妥。

What I find common and so stimulating about the philosophical efforts of these intellectual colleagues is the way they thoughtfully reflect on human knowledge, amassed from empirical explorations in areas ranging from science to history, to clarify issues that are relevant to making decisions about how to function more effectively and happily as an individual, and as a member of a society.
我发现这些善于思维的同行在哲学上做出成就的共同点和让人兴奋之处，是深思熟虑地表达人类知识（这些知识来源于从科学到历史的观察探索）的方式，并用这些知识阐明，作为一个个体，同时又是社会的一员，该如何高效而满意地做决策。

后半句译的不对。

I admit that this could primarily reflect of my own philosophical limitations, but I suspect this experience is more common than not among my scientific colleagues.
可以说这些基本表达了我自己的哲学限定，但对于不从事科学的人来说，我怀疑会不会有相同的感受。

译的不对。

Which brings me full circle to the question of nothing, and my own comments regarding the progress ofphilosophy in that regard. When it comes to the real operationalissues that govern our understanding of physical reality, ontologicaldefinitions of classical philosophers are, in my opinion, sterile. Moreover, arguments based on authority, be it Aristotle, or Leibniz, are irrelevant.
用这个方法使我对虚无的问题有了圆满的认识，这是我自己所认为的在这方面的哲学进展。当提到理解物质现实的可操作的问题时，我认为经典哲学家的存在论定义会变得苍白空洞。再有，对于亚里斯多德（Aristotle）和莱布尼茨（Leibniz）谁是学术权威这个问题的争论也是毫无意义的。

full circle，和第二句译的不对。

。。。。。后面还有其它翻译问题。。