Philosophy Books

Professor Daniel C. Dennett is an international philosopher worthy of His Holiness, Benedict XVI dictum, "the philosopher was someone who knew how to teach the essential art: the art of being authentically human---the art of living and dying." [Encyclical Letter, SPE SALVI facti sumus ("In Hope we were saved", St. Paul, Romans 8:24)]

Previous reviewers have drawn attention to Professor Dennett's intentions, scope and achievements, what I want to do is start the process of treating 'religion' as an ideational or notional idea (forgive the impregnated tautology as rhetorical-psychological emphasis). It has a written history!

Since I am an ancient language scholar of Oriental (mainly Semitic) and Indo-European languages, I have a secure foundation in the development of religious sacred learning or 'scientific theology.' Here competence in Babylonian cuneiform, Egyptian Hieroglyphics, Old and Middle Persian, Classical Hebrew and Classical Greek are required. What does one learn when (s)he puts the dry philological details of these various grammatical systems, with their supporting legal, administrative and religious textual documents, in his head?

He learns religious learning is self-deception and communal hypocrisy! It is a cover for those human maniacs who inflict the gravest of wrongs upon their fellow man. It was a retreat by human monsters to the inner sanctuaries and temples of learning and instruction to find solace for their moral-legal crimes. Its by-product was useful information about calendars, planting seasons, growth of husbandry and crops, and physical & mental hygiene. But it also producted pernicious by-products such as divination, theurgy, mircle-mongering, begging priests, book-burning, etc.

The books of religion as a natural phenomenon have been written; they merely must be read! Start with Sir James Frazer, "The Golden Bough" (12 volumes)! Mankind evoluted in 'science' or knowledge [What the Latin term 'scientia' means] from animism > magic > religion > science > cosmic self-consciousness (modern cosmology-astronomy). This should serve as the great paradigm or archetype model.

You will discover along this path that there is much 'word magic' in religious writings. An example is modern authors using learned technical Babylonian terms, or Egyptian terms, or Graeco-Latin terms with no 'real' understanding of what these terms delimited or concretely meant. There is a great spiritual dryness and aridity to religious learning. Metaphor and Analogy add an appropriate amount of eager 'wetness' to these mundane discussions (no pun intended).

Presently, Oxford University, Oxford, England just received a $13 Million Dollar grant to study the origin of deity in global human ancient, historical culture. I have just laid out what must be its preamble or harenga. The Oxonian Senior Researchers will learn that any and all religions oscillate between repressive tolerance or intolerance & aggressiveness. Its purpose is to keep the majority mentally ignorant, so they live miserable lives---while teaching them there is a wonderful 'abode of bliss' waiting for them on the otherside of the curtain of Death!

See my Review on Dr. Sam Harris' book, "End of Faith" about the role of "cabbage heads" to maintain the absurdities of religion under the dupery of revelations, creeds and doctrinal nonsense.

It should be remembered that the French people were the first city-state, the Parisian community, to throw religion out of their society, and declare an Atheistical State in A.D. 1789-1792. It was the military butcher, the monster Napoleon, who brought the mental sickness of religion back into French society.

Lastly, having seen Professor Dennett several times on C-Span, I intensely like this humane, philosophical mind!


Respectfully,


John E.D.P. Malin,
Chairman of the Board & Chief Executive Officer
Informatica Corporation
Executive Division
P.O. Drawer 460
Cecilia, Louisiana 70521-0460

Contact Information: InformaticaMalin@gmail.com

--

You don't have to be an atheist, an agnostic, or any type of believer to engage this book. That's the whole point, in fact. No matter what your belief (and they are all related to belief), subjecting it to scientific scrutiny can be fascinating and revealing, and especially so with this type of academic yet extremely accessible writing.

A beautiful combination of serious purpose and playful joy in the arguments comes through here, and it's infectious. What does NOT come through is any kind of anti-religious agenda, which is easy enough to come by elsewhere and does nothing to advance anyone's cause.

I read most books once or twice, and so I get them from the library instead of purchasing them, but this is a book to own. Dennett provides plenty of food for further thought here, and you will come back to his ideas again and again for just that purpose.

This is a fantastic book, which really grapples with belief and why people believe what they do. Of the four major works on atheism out there (Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens) this was the most thought provoking and nuanced (although Dawkins was the most forceful and clearest.) Dennett's chapter on the strength of the belief that "a belief in God" is a good thing and therefore people choose to believe in God even if it makes no sense to them is just a magnificent insight, and useful in reading other books that argue for the existence of God. So many arguments are actually arguments about "Why it would be great if God did exist" rather than whether he actually does.

The text can get just a little dense at times, but generally it's pretty easy going for a book as philosophical and thoughtful as this.

In the God Delusion, Dawkins makes an argument against religion and articulates what he believes to be scientific theories that prove god does not exist. In God Isn't Great, Hitchens gives what reads more like an indictment of organized religion throughout history and spends less time trying to disprove the existence of god (at least as scientifically as Dawkins).

In Breaking the Spell, Dennett spends most of his time articulating arguments that would explain the existence of religion. He does not really attempt to prove or disprove anything, including the existence of god. Rather he states repeatedly that his purpose is to "break the spell" of holding religion on a different level and keeping it immune from rational, scientific inquiry. As Mr. Woolard states before me, Mr. Dennett's central idea is that religion is a very important topic in the world today and is arguably the topic most in need of a rational, open, scientific discussion. This book is an attempt to make some of those rational arguments and foster discussion. Mr. Dennett concedes quite early in the book that that is his intent--to raise important questions and give possible answers that need research, not to provide definitive answers.

Regardless of the fact that definitive answers aren't going to be found in this book, it is worth the read by anyone interested in the subject. Mr. Dennett does a great job of "breaking the spell" and bringing some illuminating arguments regarding the existence of religion and its continued ability to thrive in human society. I would also recommend doing a search of "Daniel Dennett" on youtube for an introduction to some of the arguments he makes in this book.

This book has a bit more scholarly depth than the other books by the so called "four horsemen" and requires more careful consideration than the other books simply because of the nature of Dennett's view on religion. He never comes across as attacking religion the way the other three famous recent writers do. Dawkins's book is just as good, but it may be for a different audience. This book has a more philosophical bent.

The purpose of the book is to examine the phenomenon of religion from a scientific perspective in order to see if it can be adequately studied by science. He argues that religion should not be off-limits to scientific inquiry, and I think most people would agree with that assessment. Even intense religious believers, if they truly believe, should think that science would have something to learn from their beliefs. One would think so, but this is often not the case. Believers are more often offended by the inquiry.

He discusses evolutionary theories for why religion may be, and how it possibly evolved into what it is today from the more simple beliefs of primitive peoples. His discussion also touches on morality and meaning of life as it relates to religion...or not.

He thinks that a large portion of religious belief is really just belief in belief, rather than actual belief in a god. This assessment is probably correct because of the stigma associated with nonbelief. He advocates more scientific study of religious belief to get to the truth of why it exists, and that can hardly be criticized.

This is a thoughtful book that should be considered by the religious as well as the nonreligious.

great book and Pals uses his creativeness to cover the major philosophers and scientists in a particular order to demonstrate intellectual evolution (intelligence evolves as time passes and we learn from previous ages) and he also brings out how the fact the philisophers (as most humans) try to "prove" THEIR experiences in life as they perceive it. The perception complicates their objectiveness. For instance, Freud was an atheist so Freud was out to prove there is no God. Freud did not want to reveal "truth" but only what HE thought was truth. Whether it is truth or not, was irrelevant to him and many others. Each philosopher builds on the previous with a critical critique of each by Pal and the others. I thought this was a great book and easy to read (unlike other philosophy books which are extremely difficult) 5 stars for Pals!

Refreshingly readable account of the major developments in the science of religion. An excellent introduction to the field for general audience.

I had to read this book for my introduction to the study of religion-class, but it turned out to be a very interesting book. Pals has a good ability to explain complex terms and theories in relatively easy language, even when dealing with quite obscure ideas and material. The purpose of the book is to give new students and interested laymen a basic overview of the eight most important theories various researchers and thinkers have put forward since the birth of the "study of religion". Late in the 1800's, we moved from a strictly theological view of religion, (in reality; Christianity and all the others) to a more comparative perspective.

The eight (really nine, but oh well) theories were put forward by the following people, that each get a chapter before the conclusion ends the book in it's last chapter; E.B. Tylor & J. G. Frazer, Sigmund Freud, Émile Durkheim, Karl Marx, Max Weber, Mircea Eliade, E. E. Evans-Pritchard and finally Clifford Geertz. Each chapter contains a small biography of the thinker, an overview of the theory and the history of it, summaries of the most important works, analysis of the material presented, critiques put forward in response, notes and finally a bibliography of suggestions for further reading.

I found the book to be very useful and interesting, and it is an excellent introduction to the field for newcomers. The book shows relatively well the madness and basically evil ideas that is represented by Marx, Freud and to some degree Durkheim. "Strangely", these very people are of the same racial background, and all their ideas have had major negative effects for gentile culture, see a connection anyone? It is a very peculiar and suspicious side to Pals that whenever a theorist is doing something good he's a Jew, but when his ideas are bad for European cohesion, he's "a German" or a "Frenchman". This way, suddenly Freud, Boas and various others in the books are suddenly just your average Fritz German doing objective research with no political consequences. A volume that should be read along with this book is Kevin Macdonald's book "The Culture of Critique", available here on Amazon.

The two scientists that are most filled with genius in this book seems to me to be Mircea Eliade and Max Weber, the first one interestingly enough being friends with two major European freedom fighters; Corneliu Codreanu and Julius Evola. Eliade was actually a member of Codreanu's organization back in his native Rumania, something that should give you a good hint of his honourable soul.

To summarize; a sturdy hardcover book that gives you a highly valuable introduction to the field and that should be of interest to anyone remotely interested in politics, philosophy or religion.

Highly recommended!

I actually needed this book for my Introduction to Religion class but I'm sure I will keep it even after I am finished with the class. Pals breaks down the theories into their simpliest forms and makes them so easy to understand. He summaries each theorist's section with an analysis and a critique which makes the interpretation of the text that much easier. This is a wonderful book and I would suggest it to anyone looking for possible explanations of some of the world's most popular religions...

I was very disappointed with this purchase. Since several pages were missing and there has been a lot of highlighting going on, I don't think that the description of the book as "like new" was truthful. Would not recommend that you purchase anything from this seller.

PRODUST WAS SHIPPED AS PROMISED. BOOK WAS IN GREAT SHAPE, PRATICALLY NEW. WILL DO BUISNESS AGAIN

The Mappes/Zembaty reader has everything one would want in an introductory primer on ethics and social policy. The editors have collected well-argued and important essays by philosophers, jurists and laymen on most of the politically charged topics of today, from abortion to pornography to environmentalism. Unfortunately, the book has not been updated to include any treatment of behaviors made newly possible by the Internet; perhaps a newer edition will accommodate this angle.

Truly a classic book! If I had read this book during my college years, I definitely would have been a physics student instead of doing computer engineering. Even though I knew about Schrödinger Cats, It was the biggest surprise for me to read that it was in fact physics' encounter with consciousness. It was always - shut up and calculate approach for most of us. Also being a Vedanta student, it feels good to see that philosophy and science are converging to the same point. Simply the best book on science that I ever read! And it was such a great coincidence that I saw Dr. Fred Alan Wolf and Larry King on CNN discussing the similar subject the day I finished this book.

Quantum Enigma goes where few science books dare to go: right up to the border that separates physics from philosophy. And there it stops. The implication though is strong that something, a field of consciousness (?), is behind the universe and everything in it.

It takes a little while to grasp its concepts and I am not completely convinced of all arguments. However, its a very interesting read and I'm naturally a "doubting Jane" when science is involved. I question everything beyond the norm. What this has done is spiked my interest in String Theory so as well as recommending this book as a good starter, I would then recommend you read The Elegant Universe. Better to read this one first.

Happy enlightenment!

This book on interpreting the quantum facts is one of the best I've read. It is one of the best, I think, in its understandability of the enigma one is faced with in trying to go beyond the Copenhagen interpretation.
This book presents the measurement problem of quantum physics and explains why conscious observation must have some role in influencing reality, if you choose to go beyond CI. The way the authors explain Bell's Theorem and how it became a testable theory that answered the EPR challenge to quantum theory is succinct and comprehensible to the layman, for which it was writen.

This book is by far one of the most concise and simplest elucidations of various quantum phenomena... treating Copenhagen interpretation, the famous EPR paradox, Bell's theorem & inequality and more. Since I am not a physicist or physics major, I found their approach welcoming and I cannot critique the physics of the book, but I do have some major qualms with Quantum Enigma.

My prime objection to this book is that the authors implicitly believe in the reality & truth of free will throughout the text. I was a student in Bruce Rosenblum's class at UC Santa Cruz so I was able to ask questions to one of the authors of the book. The issue of free will was one that Rosenblum was not a fan of discussing, often dismissing the nearly uniform proclamation of the natural sciences that free will (i.e. our conscious control of choices) is an illusion.

This is may not seem like a profound objection to a book about physics, but Rosenblum & Kuttner insist themselves on the importance of free will to their book: "the existence of a quantum enigma depends crucially on free will." (p.168) If this is true, one would expect a substantial discussion of this concept yet the authors devote less than 2 pages to it. In these 2 pages, the authors admit, "Though it is hard to fit free will into a scientific worldview, we cannot ourselves, with any seriousness, doubt it. J.A. Hobson's comment seems apt to us: `Those of us with common sense are amazed at the resistance put up by psychologists, physiologists, and philosophers to the obvious reality of free will.'"

This quotation is essentially saying that Rosenblum and Kuttner cannot accept the notion that free will is an illusion because of "common sense." Physicists of all people should know that our so-called "common sense" and our intuitions are often skewed and sometimes totally incorrect. Quantum mechanics is a perfect example of this - as is Copernicus' discovery that we live in a heliocentric system - yet this notion of not trusting our "common sense" seems to not occur to Rosenblum and Kuttner in relation to free will. Often in the Quantum Enigma course (Physics 75), Bruce Rosenblum would simply say, "I know I have free will" - a statement that should make any philosopher, physicist, or biologist cringe - and presumably anyone who values empirical data over subjective "intuitions." Why should we trust our intuitions and "common sense" over the empirical data in this one case of our apparent free will?

The quotation above also belies a major problem with Quantum Enigma, where physics supposedly meets consciousness. The views of those fields named in the quotation above - psychologists, physiologists, and philosophers - are notably absent from Rosenblum and Kuttner's book. In Quantum Enigma where "physics meets consciousness," David Chalmers' book from the 80s is invoked often; they also mention Libet's studies from the 1980s. The problem with this is that an immense amount of research has been done since the 1980s in the blossoming field of neuroscience, which relate directly to our notions of intention, free will, consciousness, and self-representations. None of these findings are even mentioned even in passing in Quantum Enigma.

Patricia Churchland, a philosopher and neuroscientist, states in her book Brain-Wise, "So far, there is no evidence at all that some neuronal events happen without any cause... Importantly, even were uncaused neuronal events to be discovered, it is a further, substantial matter to show that precisely those events constitute choice." From a biological perspective, there appears to be no room for free will. Rosenblum and Kuttner even admit as much when they begin the quotation above with the phrase, "Though it is hard to fit free will into a scientific worldview..." If free will is hard to fit into a scientific worldview, and "the existence of a quantum enigma depends crucially on free will," would it not seem practical to devote a little more than two pages to the discussion of free will? Wouldn't it be necessary to understand the views of biologists, psychologists, neuroscientists, and philosophers on these issues of consciousness and free will to have a full, accurate, scientific picture of the situation?

Certainly physics can expect to "encounter" consciousness because physics intends to find a holistic explanation of the universe, and consciousness is obviously part of the universe physics intends to explain. In our search to understand both quantum mechanics and consciousness, we must be honest and open to all sides of the story. Unfortunately, Rosenblum and Kuttner leave out the arguments from biology, psychology, neurology, and some physicists when discussing the quantum enigma where "physics encounters consciousness." This is an overwhelming handicap, especially because of the authors' supposedly "common sense" presupposition that humans have free will. I admit that there is certainly a quantum enigma that presents itself in what we know as the "measurement problem," and Rosenblum and Kuttner should be congratulated to attempt to bring this to light to combat pseudoscience. But to understand the Quantum Enigma, we cannot start with presupposed truths, especially including the notion that we have free will.

With this in mind, I give the book 3 stars for its extraordinary conciseness with which it explains the phenomena of physics but the lack of biology, philosophy, neuroscience, etc. severely handicaps their interpretations and conclusions.

I've kept Thoreau at arm's length over the years. I sensed his brilliance yet secretly accused him of purposely unconnecting from the world. I was recently lead to him while looking for some essays on gardening. The first subject he covers in Walden is ecomomy. Economy rates low on my reading list. I was further warned by the difficulty of his text in general. Still, I was close to discovering his writings. In the beginning pages he takes me on a tour of opinions needing to be voiced in my life. My fear of crankiness is dispelled with freshness on every page.

How does one review a classic? In this day of eco-spirituality, Thoreau is a must-read. This edition is easy to read, but not the best quality paper. I don't expect it to have a long shelf life.
Thoreau is one of the saints of American ecology. His writing takes one to a different time and place, and yet one in which the rape of the landscape was already taking place. I suggest following Walden with Annie Dillard's marvelous Pingrim and Tinker's Creek.
Emerson's essay on Thoreau is a happy bonus.

My first copy of this book was indubitably from some other publisher. So I'm not commenting on this particular volume but the content of the work itself.
I have always loved this book but it wasn't until recent years that I realized what a controversial book this was. Thoreau published this book at his own expense and he sold very few copies. Later on he stored most of his unsold copies in an attic. He once claimed to have the largest collection of book published by Henry David Thoreau than anyone alive - and I'm sure he did.
But why didn't people buy this book? Well, for one thing it was critical of "the neighborhood". For another thing it was critical of "the values of his neighbors". For another thing it was critical of the values of his countrymen; it was critical of Capitalism; it was critical of modern life; it was critical of the "consumer mentality"; it was critical of the work ethic; it was critical of buying things; it was critical of "getting ahead" and "accumulating; it was critical of working for a living; it was critical of achieving; it was a critique on the civilization of the day - and it was not positive.
So why did it make me feel good to read it then and why does it have the same effect on me today?
I don't know but whenever I get lonely to go have a talk with an old friend I go to the book shelf and pick up Walden by Henry David Thoreau.

I wonder if Thoreau wrote the way he did as a way of imparting to his readers how much hard work he put in to living in the woods. If so, he was successful.
This book contains many, many little gems of clever witticism and solid advice, but it's quite difficult to sift through all of the pointless and trivial paragraphs in order to separate Thoreau's genius from his madness. It is almost not worth it. I've lived twenty-two years having not read Walden and I did not live them as a hillbilly. Therefore, I probably would have been perfectly able to function in society without reading this monster.
Again, though, the gems in this book cannot be denied. They are a mirror, in front of which is standing American society.
Some have called Thoreau arrogant. I disagree. Although Americans might not want to see what Walden has to show them, they should not take this disgust out on the messenger. Thoreau did not imagine what he had to say about American society, but rather he observed it. That is not arrogance, it is realism and bravery.
I do, however, truly wish I'd not read this book. Someone should sort out the passages of value and publish them in a small volume that most people might actually be able to get through. American society would be the beneficiaries of valuable knowledge and information without the drag of the rest of Thoreau's book.

Strangely surprising how pertinent many of Thoreau's perceptions, opinions and insights on habits and values are to modern day society and culture. And impressive how vehemently he professes these views in some sections. No sugar coating here. This is raw stuff, presented with language and skill we've lost over the years.

My favorite quote: "One generation abandons the enterprises of another like stranded vessels"

Thoreau is inspired and inspiring.

purchasing through Amazon was breeze. Got product quickly. Purchased new. Product obviosly new and in perfect condition. Book itself is superb. All in all it's a 10 on a 0 to 5 scale, with 5 being best!

Eda Goldstein does a great job of describing, in detail, Ego Psychology from a historical, theoretical, and practical perspective. I was particularly fond of Part II dealing with the ego and its functions and defenses. She writes with a clarity that is difficult to find when reading books dealing with detailed theoretical perspectives. I would highly recommend this book to socials workers and pyschologists alike. It is a wealth of information that you will find yourself referencing again and again.

This book is an excellent primer for clinical social workers working with volatile populations as it addresses ego functioning and deficits in depth. It additionally provides invaluable insight into borderline and other personality disordered individuals, as well as a survey of other noted theorists, besides Dr. Goldstein in the areas of ego functions.

Hot-n-hulky Eda Goldstein has written a classic for mental health practitioners. A skillful integration of Ego Psychology practice and treatment.

Dr. Goldstein's book provides students with a survey of the major contributors to ego psychological theory. To her credit, she manages to effectively communicate sometimes difficult material without resorting to the complicated jargon that one often finds in similar psychoanalytic texts. Ego Psychology and Social Work Practice 2nd Edition enables beginners to appreciate some of the insights of the ego psychologists without having to read and interpret the original texts. This would be a daunting task and unnecessarily laborious for a beginning student. It also provides more experienced clinicians the opportunity to review material germane to clinical practice or as an accompaniment to more advanced reading.

When examined properly by a good author, the medieval period is an interesting and exciting phase of human history. This book is a horrid attempt at examining the period.

It is extremely boring and poorly written. The author uses phrases in it that you have to read five times to comprehend. Most of the book is filled with adjectives describing how something sounds or looks. Of course it is a good thing for authors to give the reader a vivid sense of what something looks like in person, or of the true meaning of poems or liturgical writings, etc. But most of her book is filled with descriptive adjectives rather than giving real information.

This book was used for a college introductory course to the Medieval world. I would NOT recommend it. There are so many wonderful books on this time period, that it is a shame to turn students away from further study of this topic (which it has done for every student in my class I have spoken with).

I think the book came just the way I was told.. But I found the book cheaper somewhere else and sent it back.. But thank you anyways for the purchase.

Harris combines the best modern scholarship with a detailed analysis of the text to provide a reasonably clear picture of The Bible and its origins. Practicing Christians and others owe it to themselves to become familiar with the The Bible outside of the bounds of the strongly biased presentations that are more readily available.

Folks here who criticize this as "liberal" or "not respecting the alternative viewpoints" are simply reacting to the fact that Harris is seeking to approach the topic with an objectivity and degree of scholarship that is uncommon. If someone's cherished misconceptions about The Bible turn out to be simply incorrect then we shouldn't blame Harris for revealing that fact. Don't shoot the messenger.

Harris's book was not the easiest thing to read. However, the reason for this is that nearly every sentence in the entire book was something new to me! I describe the book as "dense," therefore, not to insult it, but to marvel at the sheer amount of information contained within.

The book is not theological, though there are places where the author's own biases shine through slightly. This isn't a huge deal to me, because I'm not sure I've ever read a book where the author's beliefs didn't in some way affect the text. Just read carefully. If there's something you don't understand or agree with, read the text yourself and try to "see it from his point of view." It's not important at all that you AGREE with his reading of the Bible, but you SHOULD be able to UNDERSTAND his reading of the Bible.

I've used Harris's book for two college classes and have a big problem with Stephan Harris's writings. In almost all readings, one can see that Harris as often as possible points at any hint of disagreement within biblical messages/traditions. Now don't get me wrong, differences in biblical writings are important to note, but many of the things he brings up are so outlandish (ie claiming that 'many scholars' think Jesus never claimed to be the God's son) that his supposed 'non-sectarian' view is really against any religious interpretation. He will even inject his own anti-religious views directly into the writings (saying that Paul was WRONG in saying that homosexuality is unnatural because modern science has proved otherwise!! - what has this got to do with what Mark actually wrote?) Look up some info on Stephan Harris. He is a member of the Jesus Seminar - a bunch of 'scholars' who decide on what Jesus did by voting with a system of colored marbles in California. In fact of the 100s of members at this Seminar, only a dozen or so are actual Ph.D holding New Testament scholars. And all of them have expressed anti-religious views (claiming that Jesus never claimed to be Apocalyptic).

The biggest problem in Harris's writing is that he writes about the Bible in an INTROverted way. That is, he examines all biblical writings in a 'modern day / postmodernist' fashion instead of looking at the Gospels in the context in which they were written (Extroverted writing - getting something OUT of them). CS Lewis once said the purpose of reading a book is to learn something new, or obtain a new perspective - not enforce your previous prejudices. This is exactly what Harris fails to do, and why I fail to read his writings without getting pissed off. If I had a dollar every time I saw the words "scholarly interpretation" in this book, I would fly out to the Jesus Seminar and see how many pounds of sugar those crackers put in their Kool-Aid every day.

In studying the Bible, it is difficult to find credible sources that are not too colored with biases. This textbook approaches the study the way one would approach any work of literature: analyzing the historical contexts and the textual contexts to gain a better understanding of the work. While this is a nonsectarian publication, it does have a slight bias from a nonreligious standpoint. It is a good balance to all the religious perspectives out there though. The information is detailed though occasionally I wanted more. But this is a good starting point for those looking to study the Bible seriously.

This is an excellent collection of Aristotle's works that is very interesting and well written.

This is a concise singular source on Aristotle and with enough in it to understand a great deal about him. Since so much of what he had to say has been taken apart by later philosophers it is helpful to have the real "basics" for a reference.

It's approach is especially useful in comparing him to Plato. Plato's world was one of changeless things assigned for lofty contemplation and for Aristotle, as we are told in the introduction, it was a world for empirical investigation. In this volume these works are found nearly complete: The Physics, On Generation and Corruption, On the soul, the Metaphysics, the Nicomachean ethics, the Politics, and the Poetics. The contents list a Preface, Introduction and Bibliograhpy as well as chapters on, Organon, Physica, DeCaelo, De Generatione Et Corruptione, De Anima, Parva Naturalia, Historia Animalium, De Partibus, De Generatione, Metaphysica, Ethica Nicomachea, Politica, Rhetorica, and De Poetica.

I recommend the Hardcover over the paperback. I also recommend this over the multiple volume approaches to his life and thoughts. Even if you don't find the introduction to be complete it is still very useful, as an overview of all that this author felt was needed for a "Basic Works".

I love Aristotle and this is a good collection, but my book fell apart! I had a course that used just this book, and despite the fact that we all took good care of our copies, nearly all of our books tore in half or lost pages. Some actually had to make a new book out of it!

After Plato, Aristotle is by far the greatest Athenian Greek Philosopher. A polymathic genius whose interests ranged from poetry to theology to astronomy, physics and biology, Aristotle systematized Western thought and laid down many of the basic rules for argument and rationality which still stick with us today.

This collection includes Aristotle's major works including logic, metaphysics, scientific works, and works on ethics.

I won't be the first reviewer to point out that this book is shoddy in binding; my son's school copy fell apart after less than two weeks of teenage reading. Surely, if one is still to take Aristotle seriously, one will need a longer acquaintanceship. If one is only "cruising" through Aristotle, then this flimsy volume includes far too much.
Nevertheless, what a thrill to review the nearly complete works of Aristotle in one quick paragraph! No one could deny his central role in the intellectual history of the world, but one shouldn't forget that his influence was as much pernicious as valuable. If, as might well have happened, his works had perished and Anaximander's survived into the Middle Ages, would we not have dodged a lot of dogmatic bullets?

This is a required text for a class of mine. Easy to read and follow along even if you're not a mathematically inclined person. Enjoy.

First things first: You have to really like maths to appreciate this book. If you have ever wondered how to prove Pythagoras' theorem geometrically, or would like to find out how Archimedes estimated pi, this is the book for you. If not, buy another.

The book has a good mix of stories, explanations and mathematical proofs. It actually answered questions I have been wondering about for a long time (proving Pythagoras' theorem and finding the formula for solving second order equations), but even if you are not the nerd I am, there is a big chance you will find this book fascinating.

This is a great book whether you are a fan of, or a practicing mathematician. Good reading and a great library reference addition.

This is a very nice and elegantly written book. The proofs of the theorems selected as great are presented in simple terms. They require no more then high school mathematics(although some of these proofs are not rigorous, for example on the summation of infinite series). The only problem I can see is with the choice of the theorems (too many from geometry) but of course that is a matter of taste. I would have given the book five stars if there had been a chapter on Godel's theorem in it.

William Dunham is the author of several books on the history of mathematics.

In this brief history of mathematics and mathematicians, the author, rather than writing a little bit about a large number of mathematicians, has provided longer treatments of a few. The 'few', naturally, being the most talented/famous from the earliest days. To include:

Hippocrates
Euclid
Archimedes
Heron
Cardano
Newton
The Bernoullis
Leibniz
Euler
Cantor

This book spends some time building and describing mathematical problems and concepts in ways that the average reader will understand. He also relates biographical information about the people who worked on them. Some of the history is quite fascinating, such as the practice in the middle ages of public challanges between mathematicians to solve problems, much like a gun fight of the Wild West.

This would make a good volume in any library.

Math teachers should own (and read) this.