5 comments about The Harvard Psychedelic Club: How Timothy Leary, Ram Dass, Huston Smith, and Andrew Weil Killed the Fifties and Ushered in a New Age for America.

1. Self-Promotion Pays! Or 'How the Self Promoters Write History'. That might be the title of a book I'll never have time to write.
   
   The four central personages of "The Harvard Psychedelic Club" were and still are among the most ardent self-promoters of modern times, as author Don Lattin sporadically discloses. Huston Smith, whom Lattin calls "the teacher"; Richard Alpert, "the seeker'; Timothy Leary, "the trickster"; and Andrew Weil, "the healer" are all portrayed by Lattin as deeply flawed individuals -- and that's accurate enough -- as highly influential personages -- and that's certainly true, as far as it goes -- and as Shiva-like meldings of destruction and creation. The extent of their megalomania is obvious, but when the original Narcissus stared at his reflection in the still pool, perhaps the face he beheld was truly as handsome as he thought. Lattin himself is of an age, of the `baby boomer' generation, to have been impacted by the activities of all four. In researching this book, he interviewed three of them (Leary is dead), as well as many of their families and associates. He plainly reveres three of them, and keeps a window open for reverence along with disapprobation for the fourth. He doesn't beatify them, however. Given the record of their personal lives, beatification would be utter fantasy.
   
   But there was no "Harvard Psychedelic Club" in an explicit organizational sense. Lattin's use of this disingenuous title for his book is purely an opportunistic publisher's ploy to sensationalize the subject and to cash in on the iconic status of Harvard University in American culture. Really, this is a `group biography' of the four persons mentioned. All of them were active at Harvard in the early 1960s -- I was there also and knew three of them fairly well, especially my classmate Andy Weil -- but les than a third of the book examines their `conjunction' at Harvard. The bulk of the text pursues their much longer later careers, through the decades of the `70s and `80s right up to the present.
   
   In the `Afterword' of the book, Lattin declares: "This book was not about me..." That may be the most inaccurate statement in the whole text. In fact, the whole book is implicitly about Lattin, about his perception of the affect these four men and the `movement' associated with their names had on his life. Lattin is narcissist enough to consider his own life as emblematic of his generation, of the flower children baby boomers now approaching the stage of lif when `memoirs' seem suitable. Like most baby boomers, Lattin sees himself as a `majority' phenomenon, a perspective that limits the authenticity of his research and the perspicacity of his book. He's a journalist; you won't be able to ignore that fact as you read his jaunty pop prose. At his worst, he's glib. His special niche as a journalist is important; he's the `religion' writer for the San Francisco Chronicle. "Spirituality is his bag," as one of his boomer peers might express it. He freely admits as much. He also admits, in his Afterword, his own extensive use of psychedelics and his neverending `search' for spiritual enlightenment, for some kind of vision of a Power controlling human life and afterlife.
   
   It's the "spiritual quests" of his four subjects than intertwines their lives, in Lattin's account of them. A Freudian biographer might have found their diverse sexual quests central, but Lattin treats their misbehaviors as peripheral to the Big Quest. With these four guys, he may be right. Where he goes amiss or amok, in my opinion, is when he defines his entire generation in the same terms, as spiritually restless and needy. Undoubtably, a portion of the generation - a cadre of hippydom - were `seekers' ready to tread in the footprints of Alpert or Smith, but they were not even a plurality. Remember the film "Forrest Gump"? The `retarded' Gump represented his generation's obsessions in his serial adventures. Civil rights, anti-war, sexual freedom, non-conformity, `healthy' living, and environmentalism were all formidable obsessions of the generation, but they are scarcely mentioned amid Lattin's account of the religious hunger that he considers the initiation rite into his Psychedelic Club.
   
   I'm not a baby boomer. I'm a few years too old, born before Pearl Harbor. Really, Mr. Lattin, all of us who entered Harvard in 1960 were too old to be boomers or hippies. If we arrived at Harvard Yard with any counter-culture predilections, they were based on the Beats and the Beach Boys, on Jack Kerouac in particular, and on the hedonistic rebelliousness of California. Kerouac isn't mentioned in "The Harvard Psychedelic Club." Neither are the Beach Boys or, for that matter, any of `rock `n roll'. By Lattin's account, everything began with The Jefferson Airplane. The California cohort at Harvard in the years 1960-1964 came with more experience of mescaline and peyote than Tim Leary at the time. Many of "us' had already discarded drug-fueld mysticism for the more earnest struggle to `fix' our society. Harvard in the early `60s was afire with social protest, with demonstrations against HUAC and lingering McCarthyism, with freedom-riding and lunch-counter sit-ins, with resistance to thecolonialist boycott of Cuba and the limitation of passport freeodms, above all with opposition to the shameful Cold War `business' in Vietnam and the Draft. I was part of all those movements during my Harvard years, and I still consider them the defining experiences of my class ('64). Leary and Alpert? We all knew about them, and considered them a minor diversion. Andy Weil? One of those self-important Crimson editors. Weil's reportage in the Crimson did indeed contribute to the expulsion of Leary and Alpert from their faculty positions in 1963, but believe me, that was `on the docket' anyway. Weil's lifelong `guilt' about his role in the downfall of the (non-existant) Harvard Psychedelic Club is a bit ludicrous; as usual, Weil exaggerates his own importance.
   
   There were most certainly drugs available at Harvard in the 1960s - marijuana, hashish, peyote, laboratory mescaline - though they were used by only a small percentage of the undergraduates. Alcohol was the mind-blower of choice for most. Those drugs were all available at the high school in California from which I happened to graduate (I attended that school very briefly, one of seven high schools I passed through, in four different states). It was the California cohort of my class that brought the Beat Generation to Harvard, and the mind-altering drugs along with it. Allen Ginsburg was there, hanging out with Tim Leary at times, but I'm the guy who brought Kerouac to Harvard. Literally. In the flesh. I staged his two public readings at Memorial Hall. I sat with him at Lowell House High Table, the snooty bastion of Boston Brahminism, and interpreted his chaotic comments to Headmaster Elliot Perkins.
   
   I mention all this in reference to the principal shortcoming of Dan Lattin's literary effort: its partiality to a `post hoc ergo propter hoc' assessment of the milieu, and its dishonesty by omissions. Notice please the subtitle of Lattin's book: "How Timoth Leary, Ram Dass, Huston Smith, and Andrew Weil Killed the Fifties and Ushered in a New Age for America." Sorry, Dan. That's not the whole story after all.



2. Very easy and enjoyable book. Gives reader an idea of what went on behind the scenes during the drug revolution.



3. Lattin's view of the events surrounding the birth of the psychedelic adventure in contemporary america is pretty parochial. Better to go to the source and read Leary's autobiography Flashbacks. It's funny and extremely engaged in the story...on the ground as it were.



4. When I first saw The Harvard Psychedelic Club by Don Lattin., I thought, "OH, NO! Not another reshash of old hash. Give us a break!" The "club" or course, was not an actual social organization, but Lattin's metaphor for how his four main characters interwove their lives.
   
   
   
   However, I was greatly surprised, informed, and entertained by Club. Lattin is a lively, skilled story-teller and adds details, especially interpersonal ones, that have been missing so far as I know. His four members of the club are Ram Dass, Leary, Andrew Weil, and Huston Smith. While Smith was not so active in the club as the other three, thanks to his international renown, his Cleansing the Doors of Perception: The Religious Significance of Entheogenic Plants and Chemicals may turn out to be the most influential psychedelic book in religion. Including Smith may show Lattin's interest as a former religion writer too.
   
   
   
   This quartet, according to Lattin, "did nothing less than inspire a generation of Americans to redefine the nature of reality" (p. 214) and their historical importance "is not so much any particular vision, but the very process of envisioning: (p. 215).
   
   
   
   Lattin is clear that he "recreates" his numerous dialogues, and in the front matter says when possible he checked his reconstructions with at least one person who took part in the various conversations.
   
   
   
   I do strongly recommend The Harvard Psychedelic Club as a window into personality sketches of four significant people of the times, their interactions, and their continuing influence into this century.
   
   
   
   Tom Roberts
   (Ed)Psychedelic Medicine Psychedelic Medicine [Two Volumes]: New Evidence for Hallucinogenic Substances as Treatments
   Psychedelic Horizons Psychedelic Horizons (Societas)
   Psychoactive Sacramentals: Essays on Entheogens and Religion (The Csp Entheogen Project Series, 3)



5. I want to add my praise to the other rave reviews of this important book. The Harvard Psychedelic Club is pure delight! The years have flown by in the twinkling of an eye but I too have never forgotten my LSD experiences from the 1960's. While I'm familiar with the writings of Timothy Leary, Richard Alpert/Ram Dass, Huston Smith and Andrew Weil, I had no idea how their lives converged and all the cosmic links to other leading figures of our era. Of special interest to me were the connections to Aldous Huxley and Maynard Ferguson, two people with deep roots in the mystical Valley of Ojai, California. The whole saga is absolutely fascinating! Plus, it's great fun to see photographs of the main characters in the various stages of their lives. If you've ever wondered what Dr. Weil looks like without his trademark bushy beard, check out this book!
   --Suza Francina

5 comments about Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right.

1. I found this book full of information on how Ayn grew into her view of the world; excellent reading!



2. Let me add to this raging academic discourse.
   
   Well, the author produces well-built sentence formations, hence 2 stars.
   Someone mentioned that the author spend 8 years writing this book. I wonder if at any point in those 8 years Burns bothered to pick up any of rand's philosophical works and familiarize herself with the PHILOSOPHY of the women she decided to write about. I doubt that very much. I, personally, could not bring myself to read past the pronouncement that Burns can't distinguish between Conservatism (that has no philosophy). Objectivism and Libertarianism. I didn't think it would be worth my time to read any further.
   
   Most of the reviewers of this book are obviously liberal/progressive intellectuals. They don't like Objectivism and welcome every opportunity to undermine it (or the individual behind it) in every way possible. So do NeoCons and even some... libertarians. The reason is simple: practicing Objectivism would mean departure from everything they know and are accustomed to (egalitarianism, government control over business or individual, special interests, welfare state, etc). Yes, Objectivism is a radical philosophy that requires a strong independent mind. It simply values human life and individual liberty above all other considerations, and in that, it's most humane of any other school of thought. Unfortunatelly, most Rand critics do not perceive or simply do not accept its humanity.



3. I have not read the book, but discovered the book through a podcast of Jennifer Burns' public discussion at the University of Virgina's Miller Center for Public Affairs. I did notice that the author's speech was tinged with some negative/mocking statements about Rand. In her discussion, Jennifer states that the correct pronunciation of Ayn's name rhymes with "Mine". That Ayn "is the ultimate gateway drug to life on the American Right". These are the first 2 statements she made in her discussion and right away, I was left with the impression that while Jennifer is a impressive historian, author, and academic, she is also not a fan of the "Right". To be fair, the rest of her discussion Jennifer was very objective and she maintained a very academic and non judgmental stance. However, I think it is important to note these 2 comments for any reader so it frames the author's perspective.
   
   Here is the link to a video of Jennifer Burns' discussion on the book at UoV
   millercenter dot org / scripps / archive / forum / detail / 5549



4. Q. Are you going to read either of the new biographies on Ayn Rand?
   A. NO.
   
   [...]



5. "What are your premises?"
   
   With this, her opening salvo at the outset of a relationship, Ayn Rand signaled two propositions that too few have questioned.
   
   First, there's the assumption that people are what they think. In fact, people are what they think and what they feel. By ignoring at least half the motivation of the human race, Rand came up with a half-baked philosophy that is causing chaos in America to the present day.
   
   Second, in her arrogance, Rand assumed by her question that she had the right to inquire about and judge the premises of others. In fact, the woman who asserted, in an interview with Mike Wallace, that she was "the most creative thinker alive" created a closed system of thought that, as author Jennifer Burns suggests, "left no room for elaboration, extension, or interpretation, and as a social world it excluded growth, change, or development."
   
   A scholar rather than an economist or libertarian apologist, Burns had access to many original sources in creating, for the first time, an unbiased, well-rounded portrait of the founder of Objectivism and icon of the American right. In Goddess of the Market, she neither endorses nor condemns Rand but acknowledges her importance as a thinker, both historically and in the context of the present struggle for a consistent American narrative.
   
   Authoritative, nuanced, and highly readable, this is a very important book. Those who can read it--pardon the expression--"objectively" will find much that is worth analysis and discussion.

5 comments about Betraying Spinoza: The Renegade Jew Who Gave Us Modernity (Jewish Encounters).

1. Rebecca Goldstein writes, with exaggeration, that Spinoza "produced one of the most ambitious philosophical systems in the history of Western philosophy." Her book is an excellent introduction to Spinoza even though it is not a scholarly evaluation, as it was never intended to be.
   
   Spinoza lived from 1632 to 1677 in Holland, had an excellent education, knew the writings of Jewish philosophers, and was considered quite intelligent even at an early age. The Amsterdam community expected him to become a rabbi. His views are unalike the notions of most Jews, but he would not have been criticized had he not expressed them at the wrong time.
   
   The Jews who settled in Holland were mostly refugees from the appalling persecution in Portugal and other countries. They had been forced to hide their true religious beliefs, becoming Marranos - ostensible Christians - while living in these lands. They obtained a somewhat precarious right to maintain a synagogue in Holland, but they lacked complete freedom and peace of mind. They felt that they must be very circumspect and not to offend the Christian government in any way. They were deathly afraid that the government officials would see even the behavior of a single Jew as an act of rebellion that was supported by the entire Jewish community.
   
   Since the average Jew and non-Jew believed in such things as God, a soul, faith, and the existence of helping angels, and since the Christians killed even fellow religionists who rejected these notions, the Jewish officials excommunicated several Jews who held contrary views to protect themselves from Christian outrage. One of these was Spinoza, who was excommunicated at age 24, in 1656. Spinoza said that God can be seen in the laws of nature, doubted the immortality of the soul, argued against faith, and denied the existence of angels. The Jewish community did not realize that Spinoza's ideas were not new and that the respected twelfth century Jewish sage Moses Maimonides had the same opinions.
   
   Jewish and non-Jewish thinkers called Spinoza's ideas atheistic and immoral. But, then, as years passed, scholars began to recognize the value of his philosophy. The following are some of his teachings:
   
   1. There are fixed laws of nature that people should study and understand in a scientific and rational manner, making decisions based on the facts that this study reveals, not on beliefs, faith, dogmatism, tradition, or superstition.
   
   2. Everything is determined by nature, not by miracles, magic, prayers or incantations.
   
   3. There are no defects in the laws of nature. God does not need to interfere in this
   world to change anything.
   
   4. People are not the center of the universe.
   
   5. God functions in nature. Scholars differ regarding this point. Spinoza may have meant that God does not exist and what we call God is nature. However, he may have meant that God is not involved in the affairs of this world since the world functions according to the perfect laws of nature.
   
   6. Thinking is affected by natural laws. Cause and effect exist in physical nature; a specific action is followed by a specific result. The same occurs with thinking. In is frequently possible to predict what a person will think based on what has just occurred to the person. Spinoza's critics contend that this idea denies free will because it states that a person is compelled to think particular thoughts. They misunderstand his point. Spinoza is saying nothing more than what modern psychologists say: there is a natural law of cause and effect in regard to both actions and thought.
   
   7. The "foundation of virtue is the endeavor (by a person) to preserve the individual self, and happiness consists in the human capacity to preserve its self." But, while looking out for one's own happiness, one must be careful not to hurt others because harming others eventually harms the individual who causes harm.
   
   8. As the ancient Greek Aristotle taught, a person must act according to the nature of humans and not the nature of vegetation, animals, or inanimate objects. Since the nature of humans is their reasoning ability, people must conduct their lives by using reason.
   
   It is no surprise that people who believe that God is present in the world, changing nature when people pray for changes, who think of themselves as the most important element of the universe - in short, most of humankind - would vilify Spinoza as an annoying heretic and do everything in their power to banish him and his kind far from their sight. However, Spinoza may be right.



2. I don't think the author adequately addressed the extreme hostility Spinoza expressed towards Judaism in his writings. His biblical exegesis was generally critical but the the Hebrew bible was the target of his most severe criticism. I think she makes an unwarranted attempt to water down his hostitility to Judaism.



3. Rebecca Goldstein begins her study "Betraying Spinoza: "The Renegade Jew who Gave us Modernity" (2006) by asking why a book on Spinoza is appropriate for as series of books called "Jewish Encounters" which the publisher describes as "a project devoted to the promotion of Jewish literature, culture, and ideas." Spinoza (1632 -- 1677) was excommunicated with great vehemence from the synagogue in Amsterdam in 1656, and he never returned to it. While some Jewish thinkers have proposed over the years a symbolic, posthumous lifting of the excomminication, there are, for most readers, unbridgeable differences between Spinoza's thought and traditional Judaism. And Goldstein, a professor of philosophy, a distinguished novelist, and a MacArthur fellow, never suggests any such approach, to her credit. Why, then, an introductory book about Spinoza in a series devoted to "Jewish literature, culture, and ideas"? And why a book about "betraying" Spinoza?
   
   Goldstein's answers are a mixture of the personal, historical, and philosophical. Raised in an Orthodox Jewish family, Goldstein received her early education in an all-girls religious school in Brooklyn. Her "secular" education in the school included an overview of intellectual history in which her teacher impressed upon her charges a highly negative view of Spinoza as an atheist and apostate with a highly arrogant view of the power of human reason and a philosophy which was both pagan and untenable. Goldstein became fascinated with Spinoza. Goldstein chose to become a philosopher (she does not tell us why) in the analytical tradition which is, for reasons different from those offered by Goldstein's early mentor, also highly critical of Spinoza's attempt at metaphysics. She was assigned to teach a course in continental rationalism: Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz; and, she tells the reader, returned to the philosopher with fresh eyes. Thus, part of the answer to the question "why Spinoza" is personal, as the philosopher reminded Goldstein of the orthodox religion of her childhood and then became a figure Goldstein in adulthood grew to admire and to teach.
   
   Goldstein's answer also is in part historical. Much of her book is an exploration of the information that scholars have been able to discover about Spinoza's life and about the Amsterdam Jewish community in which he was raised. The Jewish community in Amsterdam were, for the most part, recent refuges from Portugal. They had fled to escape the terrors of the Inquisition. Many of the immigrants were Marranos who had on the surface converted to Christianity but remained internally Jewish. These "New Christians" were the target of the Inquisition and were at risk of a terrible death if they were discovered. Spinoza was raised among a community that was trying to recover its Judaism in a city, Amsterdam, of openness for its time. Goldstein traces various strands of Jewish thought, the rationalism of Maimonides and the Kabbalism that developed in response to it, shows how they were related to the persecution of the Jews by the Inquisition, and discusses their continued influence on Spinoza's own radical thinking.
   
   Goldstein's history is informed by her talents as a novelist. She tries to get inside the young Spinoza and to think about how we would have felt in realizing that he could not accept the teachings of his elders, in his excommunication, in a possible failed love affair, and in other glimpses that scholars have given us of his inner life. Goldstein tries to see Spinoza's writings, chiefly the Ethics and the Tractatus, as memoirs and as personal documents. She is fully aware of the paradoxical character of this approach as no philosopher more that Spinoza tried to get beyond the personal and the idiosyncratic to find a truth "sub specie aeternitatis" that was the same for all people everywhere independent of personal foibles, ingrained prejudices, and beliefs. She gives a good introductory overview of Spinoza's religious critique in the Tractatus and of the exposition of his full philosophy in the Ethics while trying to tie them in to the history of the Marrano's and the Amsterdam Jewish community, to Spinoza's own life, to the development of a scientific world outlook, and to the tumultuous politics of the Amsterdam of Spinoza's day.
   
   And how does Goldstein see herself as "betraying" Spinoza? One might suppose that she would consider the Judaism of her youth and find a way of returning to and adopting it. Here again, this is not what Goldstein is about. She appears committed in a full, honest, and for me highly commendable way to modernity and to the secularism which Spinoza helped bring about. Goldstein "betrays" Spinoza by her commitment to the imagination and to the value of particularity as opposed to what she finds as Spinoza's cosmic and impersonal rationalism. She suggests that some of Spinoza is inconsistent with her feelings as a lover, mother, and novelist. Thus, her book is pointedly dedicated to "Steve" with the addition "DESPITE SPINOZA." And when she points out that the mature Spinoza "could have little considered regard for imagination, a faculty not known for its skill in grasping logical entailments, and therefore a faculty to be deemed both cognitavely and ethically negligible" she observes simply: "But here I disagree." (p. 196) Goldstein refers throughout the book to her love for her two daughters which in Spinozistic terms may verge on the irrational but which she will not give up. And in her brief but good bibliography, Isaac Bashevis Singer's magnificent story "The Spinoza of Market Street", has the last word, as Goldstein quotes the words of its protagonist, a life-long student of Spinoza, saying under the power of love for a woman: "Divine Spinoza forgive me. I have become a fool." It is in appreciation of the power and worth of certain emotions rather than in a retreat from secularism that Spinoza is deemed to be "betrayed".
   
   I have studied Spinoza for many years and learned a great deal from Goldstein's book. I appreciate her candor and refusal to lapse into sentimentality. Goldstein has written a thoughtful and highly personal account of a great philosopher that will be valuable to those who know his thought and to those coming to it for the first time.
   
   Robin Friedman



4. Bertrand Russell calls Spinoza "the noblest and most lovable of the great philosophers". Nevertheless his work is quite difficult to study. Rebecca Goldstein, in this magical book, combines biography, history and philosophy in such a way that one becames captured and fascinated. Rebecca distils the essential aspects of Spinoza's system explaining his influence in modern society and in the making of the American democracy. We frequently find quotations about Einstein and God by the religious. Einstein was a disciple of Spinoza and his God is just like Spinoza's "God or Nature" - there is no supernatural in Spinoza as in Einstein world view.
   I will be forever grateful for this passionated introducton to the work of such a great man.



5. This book is a true rarity -- a nonfiction book that engages directly, honestly, and in depth with serious issues of philosophy and theology, and is also a page-turner. Goldstein deftly combines her knowledge of Jewish history (her treatment of the Sabbatean movement and of the Lurianic Kabbalah is especially notable), her personal intellectual odyssey, elements of biography of Spinoza as a person, and an introduction to his unique philosophical system. Did I mention his influence on Western thought, his relationship to Locke, Descartes, Leibniz, and others?
   
   Goldstein is obviously an admirer of Spinoza, yet she had to overcome two separate obstacles to arrive at this admiration: her Orthodox Jewish education, which gave her a skewed view of Spinoza as an "epikoros" (heretic) and a dangerous freethinker, and her rigorous philosophical training, which emphasized analytic philosophy rather than Spinoza's rationalism. It seems clear to me that Goldstein brought her own intellectual odyssey into the book because she chose to emphasize the importance of Spinoza's background and personality upon his philosophy, so she felt it important to show the reader how her own background and personality emphasized her own thought.
   
   I have met Goldstein a couple of times, but my views are not colored by that. For the non-specialist, this is a brilliant introduction to a fascinating thinker.

5 comments about Thomas Paine's Rights of Man: A Biography (Books That Changed the World).

1. If it is legitimate to call Paine a journalist, he was certainly the one most influential journalist in world history. In this little book, another influential English journalist living in America gives us a short tale of Paine's life and a short summary of Paine's Rights of Man.
   
   While the book is not in every respect satisfactory, it is certainly a useful introduction. Of course Hitchens is unable to write anything boring, even if one disagrees with him. I admit I have not read the man Paine's original texts, - but I may yet do that -, nor a broader specialized biography about him. If one reads anything about the period from US independence to the usurpation of France by Napoleon, Paine is certain to be a player. That Hitchens raises the appetite for more and deeper looks at TP is the main merit of this book.
   
   This book is an oddity in some aspects: its marketing concept rides so blatantly on Hitchens' success with `God is Not Great' that even I, who admired that book, am a little miffed. Wouldn't a proper cover here have given us a picture of Paine's? Maybe with Hitchens on the back? The author is just a little over the top with his self-indulgence.
   
   Hitchens summarizes Paine's life: born in England in the 18th century, a son of a corset-maker, he has to learn the same trade, before he starts doing other things. He is an excise officer for a while, then he emigrates to Pennsylvania, with a recommendation letter from Franklin. There he starts writing pamphlets about common sense and independence and democracy and abolition. He becomes enormously influential and has the ear of Jefferson (while Adams, apparently, disliked him). He becomes famous. He moves back to England and then to France at the start of the Revolution. After having been a progressive frontrunner in America, he finds himself on the `right' in France: advocating moderation and humane treatment of the king. He makes enemies among the Jacobins and nearly gets executed. He observes the abomination of Napoleon's rise to power. He returns to America, where he has as many enemies as friends, and spends his last years in less than comfort.
   
   Paine's Rights of Man is essentially a dispute with Edmund Burke and his negative view on the French Revolution. Given that Paine got disillusioned himself, the dispute is somewhat stunted, but it remains an essential text on the values of democracy over hereditary monarchy. Surprisingly, the book's second part is turning to practical matters of statecraft. One could call it the birth of the welfare state concept.
   Hitchens can't stay away from putting in a final chapter on The Age of Reason, Paine's book about his deist religion containing a barrage against literal bible beliefs, which did a lot to reduce the number of his friends in America. That reads a little like sales propaganda for God is not Great.



2. Hitchens does a great job of highlighting the political genius of Thomas Paine. For Paine, the eighteenth century was the Age of Enlightenment because for the first time humankind was throwing off the millstones of religious dogmatism and political despotism. Paine essentially believed that the rights of man encompassed, "...all the intellectual rights, or rights of the mind, and also all those rights of acting as an individual for his own comfort and happiness, which are not injurious to the natural rights of others."
   
   Paine's Rights of Man was an eloquent yet blistering rebuttal to Edmund Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France. Paine got right to the crux of the disagreement he had with Burke when he admonished him for his argument that governmental enactments of previous generations had the force and authority to bind citizens for all time. An example that Burke used was the English Parliament of 1688, which he praised as a model of the type of reform French citizens should emulate. Paine's answer was swift and cutting "Radical Enlightenment" reason. "Every age and generation must be as free to act for itself, in all cases, as the ages and generations which preceded it. The vanity and presumption of governing beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous and insolent of all tyrannies." Paine also took Burke to task for his narrow understanding of French socio-political and economic problems leading up to 1789. Unlike Burke, Paine understood that the French Revolution, unlike the others that took place in Europe, was not just a revolt against the king. "Between the monarchy, the parliament, and the church, there was a rivalship of despotism, besides the feudal despotism operating locally, and the ministerial despotism operating everywhere." Thus, what Paine witnessed, Alexis de Tocqueville and Georges Lefebvre observed, agreed with, and commented on, in their history's years later. The institutions that Burke defended in his Reflections, such as the nobility, Church, and monarchial rule, all became "fodder" for Paine's "grist mill" in his defense of France's new constitution.
   
   Paine abhorred the institution of nobility and supported its dissolution for several reasons. "Because the idea of hereditary legislation is as inconsistent...and absurd as an hereditary mathematician....Because it is continuing the uncivilized principle of governments founded in conquest, and the base idea of man having property over man, and governing him by personal right." No friend to tradition, Paine took Burke to task for defending the notion of, "...hereditary rights, and hereditary succession, and that a Nation has not a right to form a Government for itself." Paine defended the French constitution's eradication of tithes to the Catholic Church and it "...hath abolished or renounced Toleration, and Intolerance also, hath established UNIVERSAL RIGHT OF CONSCIENCE." Finally, Paine unleashed a most scathing attack against Burke's suggestion that France should reform its absolutist monarchy into a benign form of constitutional monarchy similar to what Britain enjoyed. "All hereditary government is in its nature tyranny." "It occasionally puts children over men, and the conceits of nonage over wisdom and experience. In short, we cannot conceive a more ridiculous figure of government, than hereditary succession."
   
   Thus, Paine's Radical Enlightenment polemic, which sold more than 200,000 copies throughout Europe, was his reasoned and articulate project towards developing a better world. Consequently, there is no doubt that Paine, whose Radical Enlightenment pen proved to be "mightier than the sword" of despotism both in the American and French Revolutions, understood the importance of the nurturing relationship that Enlightenment philosophes had on the French Revolution. "But all those writings and many others had their weight; and by the different manner in which they treated the subject of government...by their moral maxims and systems of economy, readers of every class met with something to their taste."
   
   Recommended reading for anyone interested in political philosophy, enlightenment history, and the French Revolution.



3. I read the first third of the book but then grew tired of it. Its a good book when he focuses on Thomas Paine, but Hitchens can not resist injecting his own views and biases into the book.
   
   When Christopher Hitchens agrees with Thomas Paine he calls him a "free thinker". Which unsurprisingly used today as an euphemism for atheism. The author then criticizes Paine for using the Bible as a justification for individual liberties. But in the 18th century the bible was the essentially the only book that everyone had read. So to use the bibles arguments and analogies to justify your case was not pandering. It was not pandering it was teaching the common man with examples that the he would understand.
   
   If Christopher Hitchens is a "Thomas Paine for our times" he would be a religious, individualist, but Hitchens is neither. Mr. Hitchens disagrees with Paine stance on religion and quarantining rights that favor collective action as opposed favoring individual rights that protected and guaranteed from the collective action.



4. I had forgotten how much American History I have forgotten. Even that Paine was English, not to mention vital dates in and around the revolution. Christopher Hitchens is always a delight to read and makes men and events come to life.



5. Thomas Paine began a unique tradition for American writers. His unbalanced lifestyle existed in contrast to a brilliant mind but his abilities were limited to righteous inspirations. As Christopher Hitchens so intricately penned, Paine was a revolutionary in thought and deed but tried to reach beyond the power of his influence. This book delves into the chronography of his rise and the comparison between his works and those of Burke and Jefferson. As always Hitchens writing style evokes both historical clamor and his own revolutionary tilt towards greater aspirations. It's almost too deep to absorb in one take. You might have to read it twice.

5 comments about Maimonides: The Life and World of One of Civilization's Greatest Minds.

1. Kraemer, Joel. "Maimonides: The Life and World of One of Civilization's Greatest Minds". Doubleday, 2008.
   
   Rethinking Maimonides
   
   Amos Lassen
   
   As a young Jewish student, I was forced to study Maimonides and I really did not like it---I was young and did not want to be told what to do. Now looking back, I realize how much I missed and Joel Kraemer's book has certainly filled in the gaps. In 1947, Kraemer began his own study of the sage (I was three years old) and now he gives us the definitive study of a great Jewish intellectual. The book is extensive and Kraemer takes a new approach. There are many biographies of Maimonides but here he is presented as a sage who is deeply part of an Islamic cultural, religious and intellectual milieu. Kraemer takes time to analyze for us the Islamic context in which Maimonides lived and this is a first for a study of the man. We see that Maimonides's wisdom came from the fact that he was part of more than one world. Coming from Spain (Andalusia), he settled in Cairo as a pious Jew, and he was able to live in a world that was dominated by Islam. He was a writer and a scholar, a doctor, a philosopher, a Talmudic expert, and a philosopher--a true Renaissance man. He I remains one of the most influential minds in all of human history.
   This is the complete story and it is beautifully written. Kraemer went to original sources and he recreates a wonderful period of history when religious traditions clashed and intermingled in a world that was alive with intense intellectualism and religious conflict. Here is the result of Kraemer's 60 years of study and it was worth the wait of 60 years.
   Kraemer gives us an overview and an analysis of all of Maimonides's classic works as well as an account of his life and travels from his birth in Spain through Morocco, Israel and Egypt and here is a book that reads like a novel and that thrills like fiction.



2. Moses Maimonides (1138-1204), philosopher, codifier, scientist, physician, and head of Egypt's Jewish community, was and is considered by many to have been the greatest genius that Judaism produced, greater than even the first Moses who brought the Bible to mankind, or at least second to him. He authored significant Jewish writings, including a Code of Jewish Law and the Guide of the Perplexed, the most important book on Jewish thought. The non-Jewish contemporary of Maimonides, ibn Sana al Mulk, extolled him in verse:
   
   Where he to treat the [present] time with his knowledge,
   He would cure it from the disease of ignorance.
   Where the full moon to ask him for treatment,
   It would obtain the perfection it claims.
   
   Maimonides was born in Cordoba, Spain, but he and his family fled his birthplace because of the persecution by a fanatical Muslim invader that insisted that Jews convert to his faith. Maimonides settled in Fez, Morocco for five years under the same dire conditions, then escaped to Israel where his family remained for a year, and then left for Egypt where he lived for close to forty years (1166-1204) until his death.
   
   Joel L. Kraemer, a retired professor who lectured at many prestigious universities, gives his readers an excellent and readable biography of this exceptional man. He explains Maimonides' ideas by placing his life story within the history of his time - the era of the crusades, the battles of Saladin, the clash of cultures, the persecution of Jews by Christians and Muslims - and by enlivening his presentation with interesting portrayals of dozens of persons who impacted the scholar's life, including accounts by people who knew him. He offers his readers detailed information about subjects important to understanding the great sage, which virtually all Maimonides biographies ignore, such as revealing what specifically Maimonides did at the Egyptian court as a physician, what were his duties as head of the Jewish community, and what conflicts did he face from fellow Jews.
   
   An example of Dr. Kraemer's thorough treatment is his handling of the controversial subject: did Maimonides, the prototype of the outstanding and dedicated Jew, ever converted to Islam to save his life, living the life of a Muslim in Fez, Morocco for five years while practicing Judaism when secluded at home? Most Maimonides biographies spend no more than a page or two on the subject. Dr. Kraemer devotes nine pages and outlines why it is likely that he did outwardly convert. The evidence is based on the testimony of a historian who was with Maimonides in Fez and writers who knew and discussed the matter with Maimonides' son Abraham and with Maimonides' student Joseph ben Judah whom Maimonides loved and treated as a son. While some scholars and biographers claim that persecution also forced him to act as a Moslem in Spain before arriving in Fez, Dr. Kraemer, a careful biographer, finds no evidence to support or deny it.
   
   Another example is Dr. Kraemer's handling of another disquieting question: why did Maimonides and his family leave the Land of Israel, to which he arrived after fleeing from Fez, and only stayed in the holy land for a year? Isn't the land of Israel dear to all Jews? Didn't Nachmanides (1194-1270) criticize his predecessor Maimonides and contend that there is a biblical obligation to dwell in Israel?
   
   Dr. Kraemer shows how it was impossible for the enlightened Maimonides to remain in the land occupied by Christian crusaders who lived in the Dark Ages, under filthy conditions, in a conquered country devoid of education. These near primitive conditions affected the Jews in Israel; they spent much of their time in prayer and mystical contemplation, anathema to a rationalist and progressive thinker like Maimonides. Egypt, where he and his family settled was different. It was a land where study and reason was encouraged, a land where Jews, although not treated as equals - they were forced to pay higher taxes and forbidden to perform certain acts - were not otherwise mistreated, and could rise high in Egyptian government, like Maimonides, who became the friend and chief physician of the vizier of Egypt, Saladin's general administrator of Egyptian affairs. It is possible, although the fact is disputed by scholars, that Maimonides was also a physician to Saladin himself, and this is the view of Dr. Kraemer.
   
   Readers who are introduced to Maimonides for the first time, as well as most people who know little about him, will be surprised, perhaps even shocked to learn that this great sage had views about life that are totally different than those held by most people, Jews and non-Jews alike. God, he wrote, does not need or want sacrifices. Prophecy is not a divine communication, but an intelligent person offering his understanding of a situation. God does not come to the aid of people, the world functions according to the laws of nature. Thus, for example, when the land is flooded, people should not remain in the dangerous area and pray for salvation, but use their intelligence and seek higher ground. People, he also wrote, are not resurrected after death, but their intelligence continues to exist.
   
   Maimonides taught that when the Bible states that God becomes angry at people, the words should not be understood literally because God does not have emotions; the words mean that the act described as provoking divine anger is wrong. It is entirely possible and reasonable to understand that God never created this world from nothing, but "formed" it from preexisting matter; after all the Bible itself states in Genesis 1:1 and 2 that when God began to create/form the heaven and earth "the earth was formless," God gave form to the "formless" matter. He said that many biblical stories should be understood as parables, morality stories and homilies that never occurred, such as the tale of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden - or as dreams, such as the tale of the patriarch Jacob wrestling with an angel. The Bible has two levels of teachings: the surface meaning designed for the average reader, and a deeper meaning for the educated few.
   
   Maimonides gives a different answer to the age old problem: "why does God harm innocent people?" God is not involved. The world, as previously stated, functions according to the laws of nature. These laws are good. People make a mistake thinking that the world was created for them and that God should ignore the overall good of the universe and aid an individual. People are harmed by one of three ways. The laws of nature that benefits the world in general may harm them; for example, a hurricane or storm that cleanses the earth may kill them. Second, people bring harm to themselves, as when they overeat or fail to exercise or make wrong decisions. Third, another person may hurt them; as when a robber robs them or a warrior nation attacks their home. What is significant is that God is not involved in protecting individuals. Maimonides wrote in his Guide of the Perplexed: "With regard to this world, which has a wondrously ordered structure, and which is very good, as the wisdom of the Creator has determined, we must assume that everything that is created in it is for the good, even death. Therefore, a man should [focus on] the existence of the species, not the good of individuals."
   
   This is the genius of Cordoba and these are his thoughts. This is the exceptional mind who could metaphorically cure the ills of mankind and whitewash the spots on the moon. This is he who influenced Spinoza and other thinkers, he who was the true father of the enlightenment. Whether a reader agrees with his ideas or not, they should be known, for they stimulate thought and lead to understanding, and Dr. Kraemer's biography helps people do that.



3. Among the many ephitets applied to the Jewish sage Maimonides (1138 -- 1204) was the "Great Eagle" derived from the Book of Ezekiel. 17:3: "Thus saith the Lord God: The great eagle with the great wings and the long pinions and brilliant colors." In his biography, "Maimonides: The Life and World of One of Civilization's Greatest Minds" (2008), Joel L. Kraemer examines the life and work of the Great Eagle, or the Great Rav to explain why Maimonides is held in high esteem and why he remains important. Kraemer is Professor Emeritus in the Divinity School at the University of Chicago. His study of Maimonides began in 1947, at the age of 14. Kraemer has published books of Islamic thought and books for the specialist in Maimonides. Although his biography of Maimonides is lengthy and detailed, it is written to appeal at least as much to the interested educated reader as to the scholar. An intruiging aspect of this book is the sources on which it draws. Kraemer makes extensive use of what is known as the Cairo Genizah -- a body of 300,000 documents from the Ben Ezra Synagogue in Cairo. These papers include many contemporary letters and manuscripts of Maimonides and much information about him and his times.
   
   Kraemer tries to show the continued importance of Maimonides. The book has an ecumenical cast, as Kraemer stresses the interaction between Muslim, Christian, and Jewish scholars in Maimonides's day and, in particular, Maimonides's heavy indebtedness to Muslim thought. On a related theme, Maimonides was a polymath and a renaissance figure who mastered medicine, the sciences, and logic as well as Jewish philosophy and law. He has become a model for many Jewish people in his combination of high secular and religious accomplishment. Again, Maimonides was deeply aware of what even in his time was developing as the conflict between science and reason on the one hand and religious faith on the other hand. He tried valiantly to reconcile the two in his famous late masterwork "The Guide of the Perplexed." Finally, Maimonides saw has age as tending towards degeneracy, with its increased secularization and loss of religious commitment. He was pessimistic about the religious state of his world. This theme too has echoes in our day.
   
   Even with the Genizah manuscripts, there are many gaps in the knowledge of Maimonides's life, particularly in his early years. Kraemer thus offers a combination of biography, history, as he explains the complex and changing Muslim world in which Maimonides lived, and exposition of Maimonides's works and thought. Kraemer sees Maimonides as endeavoring to "revolutionize Judaism by turning it into a religion of reason. Maimonides wanted to change Judaism from a religion rooted in history, in great events, such as the Exodus and revelation, to a religion implanted in nature and knowledge of natural beings, God's works rather than God's words." (p18)
   
   The book is arranged chronologically in five parts. The first two parts cover Maimonides's first 22 years when he lived in Spain. He then lived in Fez, Morocco for 5 years and in Acre for one year. He apparently converted to Islam under duress and fear for his life and did penance by a trip to the Holy Land. The final three parts of the book cover the 38 years that Maimonides spent in Egypt where he wrote his major works, was a physician to the ruling class, participated actively in Jewish communal and business life, wrote responsa on questions of Jewish law, and served as Head of the Jews among many other accomplishments.Political and personal details are interspersed with discussions of Maimonides's works. Some of the historical information is fascinating but difficult to follow. Besides his forced conversion to Islam, the most interesting personal information about Maimonides involves his relationship with his brother, David. David died during a shipwreck taking much of the wealth of Maimonides's family with him. Maimonides grieved over his death and was despondent and depressed for many years.
   
   Maimonides's reputation rests largely upon his writings. The best portions of Kraemer's book are those in which he discusses Maimonides's voluminous works, especially the Commentary on the Mishna, the Mishneh Torah, and the Guide of the Perplexed. Each of these books is difficult and profound.
   
   The Mishna is part of the Talmud -- called the oral law -- of traditional Judaism, and it includes discussions among the early sages of Jewish law. Maimonides's commentary written between 1161 -- 1168 discusses and summarizes in a philosophical way the teachings of the Mishna. It is best-known for its elucidation of the "Thirteen Principles of Faith" -- the first attempt to establish a creed for traditional Judaism. Controversial at first, Maimonides's thirteen principles have become part of Orthodoxy.
   
   The Misheh Torah. written between 1168 -- 1177, was an even more difficult and influential work. It was in fourteen lengthy volumes in which Maimonides created for the first time a code of Jewish law out of the welter of discussion in the Talmud. Part of Maimonides's reason for writing this work was to settle difficult questions of practice so Jews could devote time to the sciences. This work went far in the attempt to create a Judaism based upon rationalism. In Kraemer's discussion of the text, I was interested in his treatment of Maimonides's views on abortion. He avoids the temptation of reading current ideas on this difficult question into Maimonides.
   
   Maimonides's most famous work remains the Guide of the Perplexed. In this difficult, obscure book, Maimonides tried to resolve the apparent contradictions between science and reason and religious faith and to explain some of the parables and concepts that occur in the Bible. Maimonides was heavily influenced by Islamic thought and by Islamic commentators on Aristotle. The book is written in a deliberately difficult way, with apparent contradictions and esoteric teachings. Readers from Maimonides's time to our own have disagreed radically in its interpretation and in their views of Maimonides's own attitude towards religion. Kraemer's summary of the book draws many insightful parallels between Maimonides' approach to science and reason and that latter taken by Spinoza -- a thinker who was excommunicated by the Jewish community of the Netherlands and who was as far as possible from Jewish orthodoxy. With all this, one can only be hesitant in concluding that Maimonides succeeded in his avowed goal of harmonizing science and reason with religious faith. His attempt, however, has inspired many Jews and persons of other faiths.
   
   Kraemer's book concludes with a consideration of Maimonides as a physician, emphasizing his emphasis on the emotions, on ethical teachings and on the similarities of his teachings with stoicism.
   
   Kraemer has written a thorough and eloquent introduction to a great Jewish thinker. Reflection on what remains valuable in Maimonides's thought is a matter for each reader.
   
   Robin Friedman



4. thought enough of the historical content to purchase a copy for my Rabbi. if you are looking for a detailed analysis of his works, this is not the source. however, if you want to learn his life story (which is what a biography is supposed to be) buy this.



5. I selected this book for its subtitle "life and world...", expecting a portrait of the 12th century in Spain, Morocco and Egypt. I was anticipating more on Spain's re-conquest, the Crusades and a description of everyday life at the time. The book leaned more towards "civilization's greatest minds" which made it an intellectual history and a heavy slog for a general reader like me with minimal background.
   
   Maimonides, who emigrates with his family from Spain to Fez to Egypt is physician with a scholarly avocation. He brings together all existent law and writes on religions and legal issues. His avocation becomes a vocation.
   
   Joel Kraemer describes this period in the infancy of the world's great monotheistic religions. While monarchs raised armies to fight the groups, commerce between the groups flourished and religious scholars shared spiritual and intellectual ideas.
   
   It seemed to me that all three religions embedded mores of the culture into their religions. Religions re-enforced the culture rather than determine it. This was most apparent to me in the religious laws regarding women. Laws regarding their mobility, their dress, control over their marriage, their financial affairs, etc. seem more earthly than divinely inspired.
   
   The author writes of the insecurity of the times. Illness, shipwreck and banditry are only a few ways to die young. There is not only a fear for one's own life, but a fear among survivors. Kraemer cites Maimonides' brother going down to the sea with a large piece of the family's savings.
   
   This book has both depth and breadth. I give this book the full 5 stars for the author's achievement in bringing all this together.

5 comments about Christianity for Modern Pagans: Pascal's Pensees.

1. I am giving only four stars not five because I needed it for a class, and it came later than I expected. Other than that, the book arrived in the condition that I expected. I highly recommend the book for those who want to learn to defend their faith against modern critics and skeptics of Christianity. I also highly recommend the reading for sketpics and critics. Read once quick, then re-read in a critical manner.



2. The book was upside down. If the class had not already started I would have returned it. It is usable but one does not expect to pay for a book that is incorrectly bound without prior approval. I am dissatisfied with this order.



3. It is always a relief to read a very good book of apologists because there are so many ordinary ones. Pascal reads as fresh as when he originally wrote the pensees, and Kreefts adds immeasurably to the understanding and appreciation of Pascal's words. In terms of the quality of this work, I have got as much out of it as C S Lewis or Philip Yancey albiet Pascal is more sophisticated in many ways.



4. 
   Mr. Kreeft does it again in this book about Pascal's 'Pensses'. He picks up Pascal's best or most important 'pensees' and gives us his view of them. He does not intend to explain or interpret them, since they are to be interpreted individually by each of us, but he expands them, he adds to them what a modern reader -living in a neo-pagan world- would have come to his mind.
   
   Mr. Kreeft is a masterful teacher. For those who are afraid of delving into the original authors like Pascal, Thomas Aquinas, etc. we have Mr. Kreeft to introduce us to them.
   
   And for the Christian person this book is almost mandatory, it is the fresh air that we need to keep fighting in this ever more pagan world.



5. I have used this book in my college classes for several years. The reason why is that Kreeft knows how to get the students going. He is, and sounds like, a crotchety old Catholic. He is very opinionated - which is good (and bad). If you like that, then you will love his book on apologetics. But this does get him in trouble several times when he states somewhat imperiously that "Pascal REALLY means this..." (or that). He does this contra Pascal himself who is obviously being subtle. But a good teacher lets the students decide, and often they decide against Kreeft. The other major problem with Kreeft is that in spite of his (imperious?) pronouncement in the beginning of the book that he only included the truly worthy Pensees he nevertheless managed to leave out some of my big favorites. In spite of these somewhat minor criticisms this book is still a classic commentary and can be a terrific way to get in on Pascal.

3 comments about Aquinas: A Beginner's Guide.

1. Although Dr. Feser's book purports to be a "beginner's guide," even well-informed and highly educated philosophers and Thomists can benefit very much from its insights.
   
   One of Feser's particular strengths is to integrate his knowledge of contemporary analytic philosophy into his explanations and "translate" the terminology of traditional Thomism in such a way as to make the two systems interact. Analytic philosophers and Thomists interpret apparently simple words such as "essence," "necessity," and "cause" in very different ways; Feser's ability to reveal the differences between those two interpretations is welcome.
   
   Dr. Feser's outline of St. Thomas's demonstrations of the existence of God are also excellent, and once more the "beginner's guide" subtitle should not lead one to believe that something is lacking. In addition to the nice bibliography provided at the end, this section itself offers very good depth and answers some of the more common objections. The style is clear throughout, which is a testament to the author's grasp of the subject matter.
   
   High recommendations.



2. E. Feser's introduction to Aquinas' thought was exactly what I was looking for: a clear, contemporary introduction (and defense!) of Aquinas' thought which interacts with modern objections. Having read introductions by Ralph McInerny, Henri Renard, F. Copleston, Jacques Maritain, and A. Sertillanges, I can say that Feser's book is better than all of them.
   
   First of all, Feser is faithful to Aquinas' thought. In content, Feser's philosophy is aligned with something, say, Garrigou-Lagrange might write, the difference only being style. If you think Garrigou-Lagrange understood Aquinas, then you will think Feser has, too. Most of the authors I mentioned above more or less understand Aquinas adequately, so far as I can tell. Like them, Feser won't give you any surprises by departing from the tradition (like, say, E. Stump might).
   
   Second, Feser's book is better because it is clearer. There are plenty of thinkers who understand Aquinas decently enough---one thinks of Maritain or Renard, for example. But anyone who has tried to read these thinkers is painfully aware that their prose is not always clear. Feser has given us a book which is in a class by itself for clarity. If you are puzzled by 'matter', 'form', 'act', 'potency', and so on, then this is the book for you.
   
   Third, Feser's book is better because it understands modern thinkers and their objections to Aquinas. Feser admirably defends the existence of God, the classical attributes of God (including divine simplicity), the immortality of the soul, Aquinas' ethical theory, and so on. Not only this, but he shows why objectors to Aquinas usually have not understood him properly. He treats older objectors like Locke, but also newer ones like Dawkins (and many analytical philosophers, too). It is especially its mastery of analytical philosophy and the issues it brings up which makes this book relevant to modern concerns.
   
   Fourth, Feser has a list of recommended reading which is very, very useful.
   
   And to top it all off, this book has one of the best discussions of causality, especially final causality, which I have encountered.
   
   So, if you're shopping for one book to start with in studying Aquinas, you've found it. Or if you've read many introductions but still feel lost, this is the book for you, too. Feser brings the clarity of analytical philosophy, the relevance of modern issues, and the content of classical Thomism all together in this volume.



3. This book not only clearly elucidates Aquinas' central philosophical theses, it also demonstrates that Aquinas, and indeed Aristotle, are just as relevant to our modern world as they were in their own respective times.
   
   Beginning with Aquinas' view of reality in general, Feser provides brief but highly detailed and carefully crafted chapters that explain Aquinas' arguments for God's Existence, His divine attributes, the immortality and immateriality of the soul, and classical natural law (not to be confused with any modern version of new natural law theory). Moreover, Feser concisely critiques some of the more historically popular objections to Aquinas' arguments showing how they not only fail to forcefully counter Aquinas' claims but also how most of them do not even object to Aquinas on his own terms. In other words, most modern critics do not even properly understand what Aquinas is actually saying, and a careful analysis of the arguments is usually enough to respond to many of the objections against him.
   
   This is a short and excellent introduction to the thought of the Angelic Doctor. I highly recommend it to all readers who are interested in philosophy and to those who think that Aquinas' philosophy is outmoded or that his arguments have long been conclusively refuted. Finally, to those who thought that Feser's previous book, The Last Superstition, was too polemical in nature, this book contains much of what is in TLS but with a much more "academic" tone.

5 comments about There Is a River: The Story of Edgar Cayce.

1. this is not a book i would tell anyone to read..nothing in this i found helpfull at all. i forced myself to finish it. i found myself bored in it wondering why i was not learning anything about edgar cayce other than that he had a wife and 2 children. do yourself a favor & do not buy this book



2. The Story of Edgar Cayce: There is a River is an outstanding biography of an expecially gifted 20th Century prophet. This is the original biography of Edgar Cayce and the only one written by someone who actually knew Cayce and witnessed his amazing abilities. The book is very interesting and easy to read compared with some of the subsequent biographies and books on various subjects based on the Cayce "readings." I highly recommend purchasing the book and reading about this remarkable man. You will enjoy it, and it could change your entire outlook on life!



3. This book I can't put down. A story about Edgar Cayce's contributions will contiue to transform lives for years to come. He has psychic powers when asleep.



4. This is a wonderful book that reads almost like a fairy tale.
   
   Awesome walk with God in the growth of our only Prophet in America to date.
   
   Thousands cured by a humble poor man.... This is what God intended for us and for us to carry the torch of Jesus Christ as servants to one another.



5. I have read to page 310, a little over half way and have enjoyed the read but there are 33 pages missing (311 - 342) and then the text repeats (343 -374) twice. I am disappointed to say the least. My immediate thought was the author and or publisher lacks credibility.
   Don't know what else to say.

5 comments about Meetings with Remarkable Men (All and Everything).

1. I've been practicing self-observation, meditation and these sorts of things for years and so my level of being is high enough to grasp some of the 'inner content' of this work. If you are considering reading this without any internal preparation then I doubt you will feel the way I felt when I finished reading it: conscious of my ability to achieve anything! No book has ever done that to me. Gurdjieff actually wrote this book with the intention of giving the reader the material necessary to build a new world. That material to me was strength and with strength anything can be achieved, built.
   
   I looked over the 1 star reviews and noticed that the reviewers did not have the necessary level of being to not only understand this book but really feel it. Gurdjieff once advised his pupils to not take anything he says literally, and I noticed that the 'sense' of a phrase needs to be captured rather than the literal meaning of it. The quote about 'not listening to a woman's advice' is actually taken out of context, Gurdjieff referred to that quote as way to teach us that maps of unknown lands are good for nothing, that it is better to see what the map says and do the opposite. I laughed in parts of this book and I couldn't help but feel inspired by the powerful example that Gurdjieff was.
   
   Here are some of the things that you will learn from this book but again, this book will not teach you about how to become a spiritual person or anything like that, it is not a how-to book, but it may give you the feeling or taste for work, for effort, a taste for real life...
   
   - Conscious movement is always paid for, it is never wasted. Gurdjieff tells us about a man who was always deliberately moving his body, even in quiet moments. That man become one of the richest men in the world. It is believed that Nature paid him for all his 'work', even though the work itself had no real goal other than defeating laziness and accumulating invisible capital.
   
   - People without their soul mates run the risk of becoming irresponsible and leading irresponsible existences.
   
   - The gods help those who bring all of their manifestations into accordance with one clear goal.
   
   - One super-man can achieve the work of more than a hundred ordinary men.
   
   - Reading newspapers weakens the will.
   
   I tried reading Gurdjieff's first book but found it too difficult. This one is much more accessible. Keep in mind that this book is an advanced read, preparation with other advanced books might be necessary, like Samael Aun Weor's Revolutionary Psychology. I would recommend putting into practice Belzebuub's Peace of the Spirit Within before reading this book, because the techniques in that book will raise your level of being in such a way that you will become aware of your own inner world as well as the inner world of others and even the inner content of this book, which is probably more useful than the actual words themselves.
   
   To me, Meetings with Remarkable Men conveys the enormous value of work and our attitude to it. Perhaps Gurdjieff wanted people to develop a taste for work rather than be lazy. One of my favorite quotes which can sum up all of this is by Eliphas Levi, who said: "Pain is a work, work a struggle, struggle a progress, progress real life."



2. Lots of "wiseacring" here. Gurdjieff manages to prove himself a self-aggrandizing whack-job whose philosophy is stolen from Socrates. Socrates boiled down it down to "The unexamined life is not worth living" - Such a pity Mr. G was never so pithy.



3. The book can be hard to read at times as it was written in a foreign language and translated into English. Having studied the Fourth Way for 6 years and practiced in Fourth Way groups, I find this is still one of the best and most motivating books on the subject. Gurdjieff goes over his life as a kid and people who had influence over him as he was growing up as well as into his travels throughout Asia searching for Truth. It is a fascinating adventure book discussing his travels, triumphs, failures, and personal weaknesses along the way. I appreciate the honesty in the book, as he doesn't pretend like most religious figures to be all perfect and show no faults. He comes across as very human with a lot of street smarts. You really need a lot of street smarts to survive out there, be it in the business world or whenever you have to run your own business. A number of people call him a con man, however I would like for naysayers to name one human on this earth who has never done a wrong thing. Of course, it would be some President in their totally deluded minds. The point is everyone has done wrong things and Gurdjieff was very honest with his readers and it was good to see inside his psyche. Without this understanding, one can misinterpret his teachings in the wrong way.



4. Don't waste time reading the reviews on this book. If you have come this far you are supposed to read it.Mind Bomb



5. There is much autobiographical information here, but G.'s intentions are never straightforward.
   There is a deeper intention.
   That is to inculcate into the reader the need to search for the meaning of life.
   Along the way, he tells of many entertaining adventures in cultures and regions not familiar to the West and conveys the fascinating diversity and antiquity of this crossroads of religions, beliefs and ways of life.
   Predictably there are those who find one objection or another to this book, and have come to conclusions without much basis.
   It is a given that some will approach a book like this with skepticism and perhaps disapproval. Some of this is due to hearsay, concerning G.'s reputation as a "mystic" in the Rasputin/Crowley mold or some such nonsense.
   One of G.'s methods was in fact to APPEAR as a charlatan, in order to put off just those people who form opinions too quickly and fail to doubt the limitations of their own perspective.
   Those with a more open mind will be more receptive to more subtle intentions and sense a profound and urgent underlying teaching.
   For those people - those who sense a meaning behind the entertaining anecdotes and storyline - the next step is to read the book IN SEARCH OF THE MIRACULOUS by P.D. Ouspensky, which gives the best account of the man G. and his manner of teaching in the first half of the 20th c.
   But most of all, it is the best explication of the teachings themselves, and a book that to many people is the profoundest and most meaningful book they have ever read.

5 comments about A Personal Odyssey.

1. I just finished reading "Personal Odyssey," my 1st book by Dr Thomas Sowell. I have over the years read a number of articles he has written, but never one of his books. My wife gave me this book as a Christmas present. It has been one of the most enjoyable books I have read in a long time. Dr Sowell definitely "walks the talk". The book is not only superbly written but gives a very personal insight into the person and his character.
   Not withstanding what he went through in his life, the author does not blame society for his shortcomings but rises above them. Dr Sowell has achieved his goals (which have been nothing short of amazing) not because of quotas but because he earned them. The narrative takes us from his birth to his present position as a senior fellow in the Hoover Institute. He places value on hard work, integrity and facts. I am looking forward to reading more of his books.



2. When I became interested in economics a few years ago one of the curent writers I found was Thomas Sowell. I have now enjoyed over a dozen of his books. This autobiography, along with the compilation of his correspondence, "A Man of Letters", provides a view of the events that helped to shape his character.
   
   Whether a reader has liberal or conservative leanings there is much to admire in Dr. Sowell's life. The term "Odyssey" in the book's title is well warranted as it traces his path from early years in Harlem, dropping out of highschool, through earning his PhD in Economics from the University of Chicago, and beyond. My only regret after reading his work is that I'll probably never be able to have a conversation with him.



3. Dr. Thomas Sowell is an excellent writer. I enjoy reading his books. He is beyond pale.



4. The economist Thomas Sowell IS a hero, as well as a tough guy, as two other reviewers respectively describe him here, not only for his formidable intellectual accomplishments, but more important, for his lifetime dogged insistence on seeing things as they actually were, and unflinchingly reaching his conclusions based solely on the data and the rigorous application of logic to that data, no matter where that led him. I have never seen anyone with a greater commitment to the truth and to intellectual honesty, discipline and integrity.
   
   I read this memoir because I had always admired Sowell's columns in the Post,in which he never displayed any interest in playing to the public, or in advancing any personal agenda, or in gratifying his own ego, but , instead, a completely serious interest in telling the unvarnished truth. I was curious about the man behind the scowling face that appeared next to his columns.
   
   I wonder where Sowell's confidence came from so early in his life, but maybe even he doesn't know, and he doesn't seem to be big on navel-gazing. But he is truly an exceptional man.
   
   We would be better off if we had a lot more teachers - and students - like Sowell.



5. If you are interested in Thomas Sowell and enjoy some of his other books, then this book will be the perfect compliment explaining this great man's life. Built off of all personal accounts, Dr. Sowell takes you through his journey from a youngster to today's life.
   
   Intriguing chapters include ones about being in the military, his son's inability to speak early on, and his mental conundrum about whether to get his PhD or not.
   
   I personally enjoyed every page in the book and now feel like I know the man as a personal friend. Thank you Dr. Sowell!