Read a short history of western legal theory reviews, rating & opinions:Check all a short history of western legal theory reviews below or publish your opinion.
100 Reviews Found
I have completed all tasks to be told more tasks to come soon. Its been days and still waiting. I have accrued over 250 dollars and nothing to spend it on. If i dont have any fresh tasks soon i am deleting the android game and certainly not recommending it for anyone.
Distinct moments in the formation of american legal system are pointed and explained in this short book. The historical landscape and its reflections in the law are explained in to give the reader a comprehensive view of the field. With sections about natives tribes’ law, African-American traditions and distinct patterns of colonizations in America with its law developments, the book provides useful informations. Amazing overview. Readable introduction. Profitable reading.
As the author of numerous legal histories, including the first volume of a fresh multi volume treatise on American legal history, Professor White is eminently qualified to write this volume for Oxford's Very Short Introductions series. Rather than surveying the development of American legal doctrine across a wide dozens of topics, though, White often chooses to focus on legal aspects of US history. The effect is an uneven treatment that will likely provide his readers with some interesting material while leaving them wanting more, even when the necessarily short nature of the work is considered.White devotes his early chapters to settlers' interactions with natives and the growth and development of slavery. He info how they used legal doctrines to define their relationships with both groups. It's not surprising, however, that they should do so. While law facilitated the desire of settlers to move west and push natives out of their way, there is nothing particularly interesting about the legal aspects employed in a lot of cases. Also, while law DID create slavery possible, it also created emancipation possible. White also goes into detail about the law's role in other developments in US history that illustrate that law has always played an necessary role in America's history, but does not always explain why the law developed as it e book improves when it moves to chapters devoted to specific locations of law such as property, torts, family law, and criminal law. Family law and torts are given amazing treatments, but property deserves a fuller explication of how a rapidly growing society led to the development of specific property doctrines and not others. In addition, there is virtually no coverage at all of constitutional law (the constitution is mostly mentioned as it touches on other matters, such as natives (Johnson v. McIntosh) or slavery (Dred Scott)), commercial law or civil procedure. On the other hand, for some reason, there is a nice treatment of the development of communications law from the days of radio to the show time. Intellectual property is mentioned only in general as facilitating innovation.A particularly interesting chapter covers the role that lawyers have played in society and the changing ways that they have been educated and developed to meet that society's changing needs from larger numbers of lawyer with less formal legal knowledge to today's highly trained but very narrowly focused specialists. Jurisprudential developments, however, are not covered at all and readers will search no mention of such subjects as law and economics, originalism, critical legal studies or gender similar scholarship.While the challenge of covering such an immense subject in such a short zone is daunting, White's success in some locations indicates that it can be done if a uniform approach is taken. His switching between a US historical narrative that discusses the law's role and a more traditional approach that looks at particular locations in isolation results in an uneven treatment, leaving the reader more knowledgeable in certain locations than others. But, ultimately it's hard to understand whether this book is about the law's role in American history or the history of American law.
Bertrand Russell wrote A History of Philosophy with posterity in mind. Written during the exigencies of the Second Globe War, Russell gives preponderance to the history of philosophy in the West. From the pre-Socratics to John Dewey, Russell chronicles Western philosophy with inimitable analysis, wit and passion. It's not exhaustive by any means, but as a one volume treatment of philosophical culture in the West, it's beautiful much perfect. Russell, more than anything else, was a amazing reformer and thought education to be essential to our species. Russell abhorred the orthodoxy of higher education as a system reserved only for the arcane and the privileged; philosophy was something to be cherished and openly exchanged, from impunity and social barriers. Russell's judicious balance of erudition and accessibility shows on every page. The only time it feels arrhythmic is when Russell conflates the political dynamism of his era with the days of antiquity. Reference to this can be found in his synthesis of Rousseau/Hitler or Locke/Churchill. Other than that, I have no qualms with Russell's illustration of philosophy in the West. Russell also has the potential to positively surprise you, as well. Those I expected to be cannon fodder (Hobbes, Rousseau, Hegel, Mill, Marx, etc.) are reviewed with considerable objectivity and restraint. Russell clearly prioritizes certain systems over others, logic and empiricism, for example, elicit greater intellectual stimulus than, say, metaphysics. This isn't to suggest that Russell's preferences suspend his ability to cogently and consistently define the changes in epistemology, just an observation that he's not detached in the same method that defines the body of academic writing. It also has to be said that the text is a very handy reference point for any student of philosophy. This is an perfect one volume treatment of Western philosophy written by a brilliant man, who clearly respected his readers enough not to cloak his work in impenetrable prose. Highly recommended.
I had been seeking an overall history of philosophy and this one is fantastic! I almost didn't it because not only is it more than 800 pages but it was also written in 1945 -- I thought it would be a slog to obtain through, since I'm not an academic and never went to college. Rest assured it is NOT a slog! This is a phenomenally simple book to read, the writing style is clear and smooth and modern. I'm only half method through and learning SO much; now I understand why sometimes when I was reading books on religion or science or even history, I would feel like I got dropped in the middle of an on-going conversation and I was left out in the cold. Brilliant book.
The book is great; highly recommended. The kindle edition has typos, probably from an inaccurate OCR system, with quotes like "Kant says that if you are kind to your brother because you arc [sic] fond of him, you have no moral merit".The chapter metadata also wasn't loaded into the table of contents, only the division into a few multi-hundred-page main sections. That makes the Kindle edition harder to use as a reference, though the find functionality somewhat. Overall, I think the Kindle edition is still quite serviceable, but if these sorts of things bother you, maybe go for the hardcover.
This is a beautiful awesome compendium of Western Philosophy. I have one negative critique. There are locations where Professor Russell uses a quote and then does not say from what book the quote originates, nor is there a footnote. Of course, the quote is from the current philosopher that Professor Russell is discussing. But, once quoted, say Hegel, then the quote is not footnoted. I like to know the exact book and page of the quote. Nevertheless, this is a beautiful awesome book. The first third of the book with the Greeks, of course. I liked the chapters on Nietzsche and Marx the best. I know these two thinkers well, yet still learned some fresh information about them. For me, the most interesting idea in this book is the link between the Romantics, specifically Rousseau and Byron, to Hegel, to (of course) Nietzsche and the Fascism that engulfed Europe just years before this book was published. Also, the Empiricist of England (Locke the most prominent) fractured into two groups, one which produced countries like the USA and another which produced a country like the now defunct USSR. It's very interesting. A lot of philosophy books are not accessible to the layman like myself because of the obscurantist writing style of the professional university philosopher. For example, I tried to read Hegel's "Logic" years ago but only understood maybe 30 percent of what I read. Here, I understood a amazing 85 percent. Russell writes in a colloquial style that the every-day-person can grasp. However, there are some passages that will create you feel like your brain is going to explode. But again, if you are "into" philosophy, this is a amazing book. I was disappointed that there was no chapter on Kierkegaard.
It took a while before I finally finished "The History of Western Philosophy." There is a lot of history and Bertrand Russell covers a lot of history very quickly and briefly and still the book is 900 pages thick. That said, it was well written and not too hard to read. The hardest for me was to hold track of all the relationships explained. To truly understand all of them, I'd need to read it a couple more mmarizing "The History of Western Philosophy" is not possible in a book review and I won't attempt it. One necessary subject in this book is that it is as much "history" as "Philosophy" Thus at the times where there was less necessary contributions to the field of philosophy, the author still summarizes the history that happened and how that influenced later philosophers. In fact, how the history influenced philosophy and how philosophy influenced history is a key theme throughout the book. Russell shows has they are intertwined and caused each e book has three huge parts (each about 300 pages). They are 1) Ancient (mostly Greek) Philosophy, 2) Catholic Philosophy, and 3) Modern Philosophy. The book is chronological with sometimes forward references and a lot of backward references. Of all the philosophies, most of the time is spend on the Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle philosophies as their influence is so huge. Even though Bertrand Russell is quite critical of them and considers them overvalued... I guess he contributes to that by focusing on it much again :) That said, it is also a central theme that Bertrand Russell is not shy whatsoever to give his own opinion about the philosophies, changing his book partly to the philosophies of Bertrand Russell. That also means that if you are looking for a neutral summary of philosophers, then this book is not it. The opinions of the author did probably created the book more readable and accessible as it is at times as if he joins the philosophical discussion... except that the other philosophers are not able to argue back to Bertrand Russell. Unfair...I thoroughly enjoyed the History of Western Philosophy. It was thorough in breath though sometimes shallow in depth. That caused me to learn a large amount about history and the role of philosophy. For anyone interested in that and not bothered by the lack of neutrality, this book is highly recommended. For people looking for a practical book, this is not it.
I'm almost 40 and I've been mildly curious about philosophy throughout my adult life. Unfortunately, I had yet to read anything meaningful about it, because all the previous attempts to educate myself were thwarted by the pretentiousness of all the authors I had tried to read on the topic; I suspect one can't be accepted in this field if they speak like human beings.History of Western Philosophy, however, is different: even non-experts can read this introductory book! How awesome is that? On top of that, Russell has a delicious whimsical side to him, which transpires in this book just enough for the occasional comic relief. Although an atheist himself, he does present the important formal reverence to religious matters as avoid offending anyone (in fact, he even uses the appropriate jargon regarding heathens, heretics and the such, although I believe most of it is tongue in cheek).Apart from all that (which was the critical part for me), the book is obviously well respected, and it's remarkably thorough (which means you shouldn't be concerned with the content's verity or its coverage of the topic). Speaking of thoroughness, I'm quite satisfied that I happened upon it in digital format, because I later realized how thick the paper ver must be, and that I would most likely have been intimidated by it to the point of not buying the book in the first e Kindle ver does have a few OCR issues (typically locations missing between words), but they're few and far apart enough not to become any meaningful hindrance to fluid reading.UPDATE: I finally finished reading the book, and I wanted to add a few things specifically for novices like myself. If you're a newcomer to philosophy AND you're just a casual reader, expect that you won't be able to understand everything, and that you will remember much less than what you understand. This is necessary in two ways. On one hand, knowing this, you shouldn't obtain discouraged when you don't understand something as well as you'd wish to: you'd probably forget it anyway, so just hold on reading -- the necessary thing is to obtain an overall idea, not to remember every small detail (which is anyway impossible). On the other hand, the fact that you'll unavoidably forget a lot of items is quite unfortunate, because after you finish with the Antics, the cross-references become increasingly more necessary and relevant. So I suggest that, if your reading habits let it, you might wish to jot down a few words about each philosopher IMMEDIATELY after finishing each chapter; you probably wouldn't need more that two or three phrases with what you found most distinctive about that person, so you can later remember more about each of them at a glance.Having said all that, expect that in the end you'll leave with maybe 10% of what you've been reading -- and that's if you're lucky. But that's ok: what matters is that you leave with an understanding of what philosophy is really all about, and that you will definitely get. Plus, you'll certainly be able to put almost any Western philosopher in roughly the right period, you'll develop likes and dislikes, and you'll end up with a much better understanding of what and why it is that Western philosophers have been doing what they've been doing for the past few thousand years. And let's be honest: what more can you hope for?
This was a truly spectacular book and I rate it a solid 5 stars. I liked it much more than Will Durant’s acclaimed The Story of Philosophy, and equally as much as Leonard Peikoff’s History of Philosophy lectures.I like to think of this book as “a history of Western thought.” Russell profiles and summarizes every philosopher and philosophical movement from Thales to John Dewey and his own school of logical analysis. Each chapter was clear and interesting. I found Kant, Hegel, and Bergson less clear than other chapters, but that may just be because those philosophers themselves are hard to ssel didn’t just report on how ideas changed and impacted society, he also explained the history and workings of society in each period. I found this especially helpful for the first book about ancient philosophy and the second about the medieval ages. I also really loved how detailed Russell was in his analysis and retelling of the history of the Church. All of that was completely fresh to me, and I didn’t know how much I was missing by not delving into Church history!Also, I gotta say, his chapters on Rousseau, Berkeley, and Byron were exceptional. I loved the letters exchanged between Rousseau and Voltaire (I literally laughed out loud reading them). Berkeley was clearer than he’s ever been before. And even though I was never interested in Byron previously, Russell intrigued me with his description of him. I’ve already added some of his poems to my Kindle to check out!Usually long books annoy me. This one didn’t. Every sentence felt absolutely necessary, and I was often left with wanting to know more about each figure, idea, and period!Russell occasionally injected his opinion or brought up inconsistencies within the philosophies he was describing, but not nearly enough for my tastes. It was always very obvious when he was commenting as himself and when he was describing or speaking for the philosopher he was writing about though, which was great.Overall, this was an perfect survey of Western philosophy. It was amazing as an introduction to the ideas of these thinkers, as well as a “history of Western thought” like I mentioned at the beginning of this review. If you wish something that goes deeper into the philosophies of some of these thinkers, check out Leonard Peikoff’s History of Philosophy. If you’re more interested in the history aspect, you can check out Will Durant’s Story of Philosophy. (I think Russell’s book is complimentary yet slightly superior to Durant’s.)I highly recommend this book, and the Audible ver narrated by Jonathan Keeble.
I liked the full coverage of the ideas and social and political context of the most prominent philosophers in three parts: ancient philosophy, catholic philosophy and modern philosophy. I liked to learn that philosophy can’t prove or disprove religious dogma, although most philosophers produced “proofs” of immortality and the existence of God by falsifying logic, making mathematics mystical and presenting deep-seated prejudices as heaven-sent intuitions. And I liked to know twentieth-century logical analysis school, of which Nobel laureate Bertrand Russell is considered a founder, which searches elementary truths by means of successive logical and empirical approximations, as in science.I recommend this book to all those interested in comprehending the evolution of the most prominent philosophers of all time in the human pursuit to comprehend life and how to live a amazing life.I gave five stars to this book because it’s a thorough and grand opus that provides a life changing comprehension of what it means to comprehend life and how to live a amazing life.
We are in 1946, Russell is building the chain of ideas pushing civilization to the current state. His erudition is profound but he is biased. And that's what makes this book so good. The Russell historian is using at least three hats as mathematician, English citizen and philosopher himself. The former is by far the most entertaining and edifying. For example, the mathematician starts boldly picking Pythagoras as the most necessary thinker ever. Although nuts, Pythagoras wrote the first mathematical proof. "Q.E.D.". And then he goes over the centuries digging up inconsistencies within the thinking frameworks being discussed. This is particularly rewarding if we did our homework and read the books he is discussing. Seems that civilization needs much more of this "curiosity to understand the world" which is all over the put within this book. And Russell shows a consistent path towards progress.
The complete title is:History of Western Philosophy and its Connection with Political & Social Circumstances from the Earliest Times to the Show DayThis is a amazing book that I'm enjoying a lot.Unfortunately the complete title is butchered so you might think, as I did, the book is "just" about the history of omitting the complete title the publishers are dismissing the main strength of this book which is Philosophy's connections with politics and society throughout history.Had I known the book is also a history of politics and society I would have read it a long time ago.
This was an perfect short crime story. I was surprised that so much action, mystery and suspense could all come together so nicely in such a short period of reading time. This would create a amazing selection for when you're in a waiting room or or at a long lunch and wish some amazing entertainment.
I like Penner's writing style. Brunelle is a fairly typical guy, amazing at what he does but carrying around a few personality flaws. But the writing is believable and that's amazing enough for me. Those looking for legal thrillers that aren't farmed out by the huge names might search some solace in this series. Test it ...
Just got hooked on Stephen Penner books, and I can't place them down! Love, love, love the fascinating intricacies of the legal system, mixed in with humor and relationships! Hold 'em coming, Stephen!
I love this series and Brunelle. He's a amazing hero and clever. He's clever in this short story too but it's just too short to obtain really involved before it's over. I'll stick with the full length novels!
Full of Suspense, quick moving, and a truly amazing "who done it". Very difficult to place down once you start reading. I was constantly test to obtain ahead to the next page. I almost ran out of breath!
Penner is an perfect author. His books are exciting amd very hard to place down. Each novel seems to be better and more exciting than his last. I love his characters and the a lot of twists in his stories. I consider Penner to be in my top ten authors. Cant wait for his recent effort.
penner should have left david brunelle be a prosecutor! his change to a defence lawyer does not read that well. and again penner, i feel, is much better in the longer ver rather that in this sort of a short story form.
This is an impressive fast read. I hate to be the kind of person preaching on Doom's Day, but I do search the definition of progress to be a multi-faceted, direct correlation to humanity, or as this book challenges, inversely related. As Le Corbusier once stated in Towards a Fresh Architecture, "[Progress is] the study of min points pushed to its limits." I think that we forget that limits do exist. On a sustainability level, we seem to forget that growth is bound to a carrying capacity which is only a constant. We exceed limits in population, in wealth, in energy consumption, and we are doing so blindly because we believe we are progressing. This is the first that I heard the term "progress traps" (which I think Wright may have coined himself), and I believe we seem to fall under the impression that distilling or expanding our limitations is an ultimate form of progress, when in fact, its lack in sustainability will only push us back. If you have the time, it's a beautiful fast and enlightening read. If you are still on the fence with the concepts discussed in the book, I recommend finding it at a local library before committing to buy. For me, I recommend so, if you are interested, there is a documentary based on this book called "Surviving Progress" (2011). I prefer the book so much more, but the documentary wasn't that bad.
This is a "big picture" book. The author fearlessly reaches general conclusions about the nature of humanprogress that others might back away from, conclusions that I fully agree with. Quoting words in a painting by Gauguin, he asks "Where did we come from; what are we; where are we going?" His answers are disturbing but illuminating, especially now when we face potential catastrophes from human-caused global warming and nuclear disaster [pay attention to what's event in Fukushima in November, for example. If you aren't scared now, you will be.] Wright also convincingly explains the two reasons why there will never be enough meal for everyone. This alone is worth the 's obvious to Wright (and to me) that instead of seeking progress, we need to seek sustainability, including reducing human population to a reasonably sustainable level. If there is still time.
As a professor of cinema studies, I’ve taught movie history for almost two decades and have used just about every textbook on the market, including Parkinson’s "History of Film," Mast and Kawin’s "Short History of the Movies," and Wexman’s "History of Film." I consider Dixon and Foster’s book the best short history of movie currently readers a compact, illuminating tour of movie history from its beginnings to the show day that covers major milestones and movements while highlighting necessary figures marginalized in previous histories of the medium, especially women filmmakers and directors of e comparison with Cook’s "History of Narrative Film" created by another reviewer is misleading. It’s a fine book that I own in several editions, but it’s also a lengthy, exhaustive chronicle of movie history that runs 22 chapters. It’s suitable for a sequenced, 2-semester course on the history of movies, but overkill for a class running a single semester—as a lot of do. It’s also quite pricey at $e advantage of Dixon and Foster’s textbook is that it provides a briefer survey of movie history (at 10 chapters) without sacrificing nuance or analytical rigor. Not an simple feat! It’s also far less expensive than Cook’s book in paperback—a boon for uld one want for a more detailed discussion of one’s own favorite filmmakers, movements, or eras? Of course. But that wouldn’t be in keeping with the aim of the book, which is to deliver a short, knowledgeable, and accessible introduction to movie history. At this it succeeds commended.
This book is an attempt at nothing less than a history of film, from the beginning to the starts in the beginning, with Thomas Edison and George Melies and the movie of the Jules Verne story From the Earth to the Moon (that's the one where the Man In The Moon suddenly gets a spaceship in the eye). From there, the book explores the silent movie era, the coming of sound, the patriotic and propaganda movies that were produced during Globe Battle II, movie noir, the sudden freedom in topic matter that happened in the post-war era and French Fresh Wave. The book ends with an exploration of fresh digital technology, and the fact that movies no longer have to be shot on actual also looks at movies around the world, during each era, including from countries that were not known for their cinematic output. It also specifically mentions many, a lot of films, some of which are probably gone is book may be a small light in the overall movie analysis, but, remember, the title is A Short History of Film, not A Long and Detailed History of Film. For everyone else, this book is very much worth the time. The casual reader and the movie lover will learn more than they ever wanted to know about movie history.
This is a fine discussion of (western) moral theory and its history up to the early twentieth century. It may not be the best short introduction to the history of ethics, but it is perceptive and reviewer on Amazon comments that MacIntyre's writing is not clear. I found his diction at times quite lucid; however, his style is learned in the early to mid twentieth-century British (Scottish) way. This book is not always an simple read, but it is an informative one. It is amazing for someone who is interested in the subject, who is looking for an historical introduction, and who is willing to careful rt of the reason why it is not an always simple read is similar to MacIntyre's rebuttal to A. J. Ayer. MacIntyre, contra Ayer, believes that right understanding of the history of moral theory is not just descriptive rehearsal of what different people thought but involves the participant in the philosophical enterprise itself. Therefore, MacIntyre's history includes philosophical argumentation. It not only reproduces the reasoning process of historical persons but also demonstrates MacIntyre's own evaluation of moral theories.I initially read the first edition, which is essentially identical to the second edition except that the latter includes an updated preface. Otherwise the two editions are the same. The preface in the second edition is essential reading and not to be skipped over. In it MacIntyre addresses weaknesses in four chapters: on Christianity, on the British Eighteenth-Century, on Kant, and on modern moral rhaps most lamentable in the book is that MacIntyre did not correct more thoroughly in his second edition these acknowledged errata (especially that involving Christian ethics) or omissions (such as lack of Jewish and Islamic ethics and more basically ethics of the medieval period). The faulty readings and lacunae appear in both editions. It would have been more helpful to readers if he had created in the text the emendations that he notes in the preface to the second rticularly noteworthy in the book's historical narrative is the keen sensitivity that MacIntyre shows to the bearing of social and community life on ethics. This first appears in his discussion of Greek ethics but extends to his final reflections. Throughout the history of moral theory has been a tension between the embeddedness of ethics within a particular method of life and the tendency to individual choice. This may be viewed as the distinction between our living with, and adopting, a moral vocabulary and framework of ends, rules, virtues, and commitments given to us by the social fabric that we inhabit, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, our choosing "both with whom we want to be morally bound and by what ends, rules, and virtues we want to be guided" (p. 268). The former is focused on the community; the latter, on the cIntyre does not discuss in depth in this book that the one approach to ethics tends less toward social fragmentation than the other. That is left for his later works.
Edit: I first read this book seven years ago. I now change some of my original observations. His section on Greek ethics is simply too amazing to warrant anything lower than a five star rating. I do think the writing is clunky at times and the latest half of the book is very uneven, but it is still a fine e title of the book is misleading. It gives one the impression that AM will gives us a survey of the history of ethical positions. While he does do this to a degree, that is not the point of the book. AM's argument is that key terms in ethics change meaning with the change in language and/or social custom (269). Secondly, key moves in philosophy and social theory change ethical begins with Greek ethics and gives a thorough review of it. Interestingly, AM wrote this book before he endorsed Aristotelian ethics as the method out of the modern morass. He is more critical of Aristotle here than he is in After e next key move is Christianity. This section is weak for a number of reasons. AM had not yet converted to Christianity and as a effect he depended on much out-of-date and long-refuted German scholarship on Christianity. Secondly, ten pages on Christianity? He tried to summarize Augustine and Aquinas in two paragraphs! That being said, his summary, while too brief, was accurate. Augustine and Aquinas reinterpreted key sections of Plato and Aristotle, respectively, into explicitly Christian categories.But something changed in the history of Christianity. Luther arose. Luther introduced a hero that had been absent in ethical discussions: the individual. Luther also introduced fresh rules for social ethics. Luther bifurcated morality by positing absolute and unconditional ethical commands on the one hand (God says so) with the self-justifying rules of shop and state on the other (124). This paved the method for autonomy and e rest of Western ethics can be seen as a footnote or an outworking to this. With the idea of contract introduced, social ethics now revolved around the tenuous idea of "natural rights." Western thinkers could not (still can't!) reconcile an authoritarian state with limits to the state's power. Locke tried and came very close to doing this.Evaluation:The Good: the reader has a amazing understanding after reading AM. This book's argument is much tighter than that of After Virtue. Also, AM does a superb job in showing (hinting, rather) the inevitability of interpreting ethical norms from within a community. He perfects this move in After e Bad: The writing style could be improved. It is like watching an elephant run. I forgot how man times the author used the word "just" (and not in the sense of justice). Secondly, as he notes in his preface, his section on Christianity is weak. Thirdly, he spends too much time on analysis and too small on exposition. This is okay if the reader already understands the thinker in question. It is annoying if he doesn' title might have given the impression of a negative review of the book. Far from it. Alasdair MacIntyre is the most necessary ethicist I have read, and I heartily commend all of his works.
I am an avid reader. I love globe and military history. I am in my late 50's. I read up to 4-6 books a month. Rarely, do I come across a book that bores me.Well this one has bored me to death. One of the prior readers gave this a 1 star rating. He stated that the book appears to have been a poor translation. Badly edited and the written. At some points the writer completely looses his ability to create his point. I have to say this statement is 100% true. I want I would have taken this review seriously! I noticed other readers had given it a beautiful decent review... So I bought it. A huge mistake!It pains me to even give this book a ranking of 1 star. Thank god I didn't the longer version. This book was written in 1902. the author died in 1928. With this being written over 100 years ago there is a difference in word meanings along with religious terms that are out of date with todays is is the most agonizing 371 pages I have ever read. From the fist chapter right until the end. With each chapter you are hoping the next one will obtain better, but it doesn't. I honestly don't know why Amazon is this book. It is far from a short history.If I had it to do over again I never would have bought this book. Learn from my mistake. DO NOT BUY THIS BOOK! Save your for another book. It's a pity I wasted the time reading this book! I have absolutely nothing amazing to say about this book.I hope this informs the next prospective buyer not to this book. Respectfully, S. Thompson
I have never been formally a student of History, but it fascinates me as an zone of study. Over the latest fifteen years or so I have read a lot of History, with unique focus on History of Europe, as this is the zone that has defined the modern world. The most confusing part of European history is the intertwined saga of Germany, the Holy Roman Empire and Italy. I purchased a kindle book on the Holy Roman Empire, but it proved to be disappointing, as it was published towards the end of the 19th century and its style was archaic. After that poor expeience I was hesitant about buying this book published in 1902 and the only reason I went ahead was the low on Kindle. Fortunately, the book turned out to be eminently readable and informative. It clarified a lot of doubts I had, and filled in a lot of grey locations in my mind. The style is not only readable, it is also entertaining. Treatment of serious matters is puncutated with intersting and humorous anecdotes with little interesting info that bring the period alive. For example Charlemagne was not only a amazing ruler, he was also a man for careful accounting - he is said even to have counted the eggs as they arrived for use in the palace. When talking of the severe discipline in the schools run by Benedictine monasteries, there is mention of the incident of the pupil who set fire to the school hoping to escape punishment, which mainly consisted of flogging. There is the tale of Hans Stortebeker whose latest request was to pardon as a lot of of his companions as his body might run past after the head was chop off. He had reached the fifth when the executioner, not happy at losing so a lot of victims, tripped his headless body.If the book lacks something, it is an insight into the constitutional structure of the German Kingdom and the Holy Roman Empire. What exactly was the relationship between the King and the heads of different entities like duchies, margraviates, cities, arch bishoprics etc. that created up the conglomeration called Germany. What was the extent of their financial, military, administrative and judicial autonomy vis-a-vis the King/Emperor? These questions remained unanswered after reading the book. Still, it is an enjoyable read. My major regret is that it ended at the Peace of Westphalia. I am now looking for an equally readable work that will take me from 1648 to 1945.
Amazing movie history book, reading it for class, but if it wasn't for that i'd still very much have fun it. So interesting full of amazing facts. overall amazing read. got here sooner than expected which was great. I couldn't search it anywhere, and got it for a amazing too!Thanks!
So a lot of typos in volume 2. In volume one the author constantly drops the numbers from different King’s and Pope’s names leaving you uncertain which Otto or Benedict he is referring to. He also makes judgement calls on different historical figures without supporting evidence in his text (Weepy, not good with finances...). And he writes like he swallowed a dictionary so it’s not very readable for the modern audience.
A Short History of Disease by Sean Martin is a very highly recommended concise, simple to read history that presents a amazing overview of infectious and non-infectious e book begins with definitions and origins and then is divided up by time periods, from prehistory to modern times. "Analyzing case studies including the Black Death, Spanish Flu, cholera, leprosy, syphilis, cancer, and Ebola, this book systematically maps the development of trends and the recent research on disease into a concise and enlightening timeline." Naturally anything with such a broad scope is not going to include an exhaustive amount of info covering every faucet of every disease. It does have a nice balance of history and diseases, including how society has handled them over the decades - and spread ntents include: Introduction: Definitions, Origins; Chapter One: Prehistory; Chapter Two: Antiquity; Chapter Three: The Dark and Middle Ages; Chapter Four: The Fresh World; Chapter Five: Early Modern to 1900; Chapter Six: The Twentieth Century; Chapter Seven: Fresh Diseases; Notes, Glossary of Diseases, Bibliography, and Index.I'll freely admit that I have a fondness for books on diseases and outbreaks of different epidemics or pandemics, so this accessible survey of diseases is right up my alley. I thought Martin did an perfect job presenting the history of diseases in a method that doesn't seem too daunting or overwhelming while including a wealth of pertinent information. As is also my wont, I was thrilled to see that A Short History of Disease contains notes, a bibliography, and index. I really liked the inclusion of a glossary of diseases which I think could be helpful for the novice.Disclosure: My Kindle edition was courtesy of Oldcastle Books for review purposes.
The author challenges our assumptions about progress from animals (e.g. apes) to humans. He points out some characteristics of mankind that are in ways more "primitive" than our assumed ape ancestors. For example, our human acts and inventions designed specifically to destroy other humans.While you may question his references about the nature of animals and man in past centuries, one only has to read the newspapers or watch TV fresh broadcasts to reflect on the chance that we are NOT the most advanced form of human life.
Cioran sat quietly at a coffee beside Sartre for nearly a decade before re-inventing himself in French, his second language, with arguably the finest French Prose since Paul Valery. This book consists entirely of medium length essays which all seem to advance the same central theme: Nihilism and s hard to consider Cioran among the philosophers. When I hear his name I think first of Poets, Novelists and Dramatists...yet he never wrote poetry, drama or novels. I consider him a hero with the globe as his stage...his entire existence seems like it dropped out of a poet's brain, a dramatists tact and a Novelist's irony. Never boring. Always engaging. Full of surprise, even when we've guessed the score. Highly Recommended!
Every year, Canadians eagerly huddle around their radios to listen to the Massey Lectures, broadcast by the CBC. For the 2004 season, Ronald Wright was the honored speaker. He presented a series of five lectures, titled A Short History of Progress. In 2005, Wright's presentation was published as a short book, and it became a bestseller. Martin Scorsese's movie, Surviving Progress, was based on the was an awesome success for a story contrary to our most holy cultural myths. Wright believed that the benefits of progress were highly overrated, because of their large costs. Indeed, progress was approaching the point of becoming a serious threat to the existence of humankind. "This fresh century will not grow very old before we enter an age of chaos and collapse that will dwarf all the dark ages in our past."He pointed out that the globe was dotted with the ruins of ancient crash sites, civilizations that self-destructed. At each of these wrecks, modern science can, in essence, retrieve the "black box," and explore why the mighty society crashed and burned. There is a clear pattern. Each one crashed because it destroyed what it depended on for its survival.Wright takes us on a fast tour of the collapse of Sumer, Easter Island, the Roman Empire, and the Mayans. He explains why the two oddballs, China and Egypt, are taking longer than average to self-destruct. The fatal defects of agriculture and civilization are old news for the folks who have been paying attention. It has become customary for these folks to believe that "The Fall" took put when humans began to domesticate plants and animals.Wright thinks the truth is more complicated. What makes this book special and provocative is his notion of progress traps. The benefits of innovation often encourage society to live in a fresh way, while burning the bridges behind them as they advance. Society can search itself trapped in an unsustainable method of living, and it's no longer possible to just turn around and painlessly return to a simpler mode. Like today, we know that the temporary bubble of energy is about over, and our entire method of life is dependent on energy. We're me types of progress do not disrupt the balance of the ecosystem, like using a rock to crack nuts. But our ability to stand upright freed our hands for working with tools and weapons, which launched a million year process of experimentation and innovation that gradually snowballed over time.We tend to assume that during the long era of hunting and gathering our ancestors were as mindful as the few hunting cultures that managed to survive on the fringes into the twentieth century. But in earlier eras, when huge android game was abundant, wise stewardship was not mandatory. Sloppy tribes could survive -- for a fore they got horses, Indians of the American west would drive herds of buffalo off cliffs, killing a lot of at a time. They took what they needed, and left the rest for legions of scavengers. One website in Colorado contained the [email protected]#$%!& of 152 buffalo. A trader in the northern Rockies witnessed about 250 buffalo being killed at one time. Wright mentioned two Upper Paleolithic websites I had not heard of -- 1,000 mammoth skeletons were found at Piedmont in the Czech Republic, and the remains of over 100,000 horses were found at Solutré in France.Over time, progress perfected our hunting systems. Our supply of high-quality meal seemed to be infinite. It was our first experience of prosperity and leisure. Folks had time to take their paint sets into caves and do gorgeous portraits of the animals they lived with, venerated, killed, and lly, our population grew. More babies grew up to be hunters, and the availability of android game eventually decreased. The grand era of cave painting ended, and we began hunting rabbits. We depleted species after species, unconsciously gliding into our first serious progress me groups scrambled to search alternatives, foraging around beaches, estuaries, wetlands, and bogs. Some learned how to reap the little seeds of wild grasses. By and by, the end of the hunting method of life came into view, about 10,000 years ago. "They lived high for a while, then starved."Having destroyed the abundant game, it was impossible to return to simpler living. This was a progress trap, and it led directly into a far more risky progress trap, the domestication of plants and animals. Agriculture and civilization were accidents, and they threw begin the gateway to 10,000 years of monotony, drudgery, misery, and ecocide. Wright says that civilization is a pyramid scheme; we live today at the expense of those who come after r most of human history, the rate of progress was so slow that it was usually invisible. But the latest six or seven generations have been blindsided by a typhoon of explosive change. Progress had a habit of giving birth to issues that could only be solved by more progress. Progress was the most diabolically wicked curse that you could ever imagine. Maybe we should turn it into an insulting obscenity: "progress you!"Climate scientists have made models showing weather trends over the latest 250,000 years, based on ice cores. Agriculture probably didn't begin earlier because climate trends were unstable. Huge swings could take put over the course of decades. In the latest 10,000 years, the climate has been unusually stable. A return to instability will create civilization seph Tainter studied how civilizations collapse, and he described three highways to disaster: the Runaway Train (out-of-control problems), the Dinosaur (indifference to dangers), and the House of Cards (irreversible disintegration). He predicted that the next collapse would be global in ly, the solution: "The reform that is required is... simply the transition from short-term thinking to long-term." Can we do it?We are quite clever, but seldom wise, according to Wright. Ordinary animals, like our ancestors, had no need for long-term thinking, because life was always lived in the here and now. "Free Beer Tomorrow" reads the flashing neon sign on the tavern, but we never exist in e amazing news is that we now possess a mountain of black boxes. For the first time in the human journey, a growing number of people comprehend our amazing mistakes, and are capable of envisioning a fresh path that eventually abandons our embarrassing boo-boos forever. All the old barriers to wisdom and healing have been swept away (in theory).Everywhere you look these days; people are stumbling around staring at little screens and furiously typing -- eagerly communicating with globe experts, engaging in profound discussions, watching videos rich with illuminating information, and reading the works of green visionaries. It's a magnificent sight to behold -- the best is yet to come!Richard Adrian ReeseAuthor of What Is Sustainable
A good, brief, very high level overview of some human 'civilizations' and how the physical limitations of their environment lead to their demise. Of course, at the heart of this is mankind's inability to really plan long term. I think this is because of a couple factors. Maybe its by natural selection but we just don't naturally plan for very long term; we place too much emphasis on short term gains. And even those that are intelligent enough to be able to plan long term realize that unless everyone gets on board, its not going to happen. On top of all this is I think the 'prisoners dillema' where it may be everyone's best interest to act a certain way, but it always benefits the individual more to act in their own best interest. For example, we are all better off if we all recycle, but regardless of what everyone else does I am better off if I don't bother to spend the time separating out my garbage because I could spend that time doing other more productive things for myself.
The book was poorly edited - several typos and misspellings. It read as if it was a not good translation from another language to the extent that some para graphs were unintelligible. At times it seemed rambling and difficult to discern the point the author was making.
This is a relatively well-written, thoroughly competent overview of Quebec history from a predominantly socio-economic perspective. As another review notes, there are shades of Marxism; unlike this other reviewer I understand that Marx was an originary figure in socio-economic history and so ANY book written with an economic basis will present the influence of the author of Das Kapital, and to me that's not necessarily a poor thing. These writers don't ignore the role of the Catholic church, the Seigneurial system, or artistic production in Quebec history; they begin from the position that all these institutions are given structure by economic relationships, a fairly widely accepted historiographical position. If they're a small dry and schematic about it, well, introductory historical texts have a tendency to be a small dry and slight beef with this tome is that it generally presupposes a familiarity with Canadian history that readers looking for an introductory text on Quebec might not have. For example, the October Crisis is mentioned early in a chapter and never especially well explained. This surely has something to do with the writers' determination to resist a "great men and events" way of historiography and to explicate a narrative of change based on socio-economic conditions, but it can leave the U.S. educated reader scratching his or her head or running off to wikipedia to obtain up to speed. Combined with the tendency of this kind of introductory history to read as an thick blur of names, dates, and locales, the constant need to look outside the text makes for a book that, while not especially challenging in its terminology or style, can nevertheless be difficult to obtain mendable as the best general history of Quebec I've seen that's addressed to an English audience, Dickinson and Young's work nevertheless leaves the field wide begin for other writers.
This book is awesome for an Overall History of Movie and definitely amazing to see what kind of movies were amazing in their times and the effects of history that had on the movies. Their are a lot of movies in this book and i suggest watching them all to obtain inspired to make your own films because the film industry portrayed in this book is much better than the industry we have now
“Russia is a country with a certain future; it is only its past that is unpredictable.”Even before the table of contents, Tag Galeotti sets up his fresh book, A Short History of Russia, perfectly. He relays the above Soviet joke, which is funny on the surface and then becomes more so when Galeotti illuminates the truth behind it. Russia’s leaders have manufactured and modified its history time and again depending upon what benefits the desired national self-concept. That is why a book like this is necessary. It divides truth from probable fiction while still explaining why the fiction was originally seen as necessary. It explains (as the book’s subtitle eludes) how Russia invented roughout the book, Galeotti uses the metaphor of a palimpsest to describe the nature and motivations of the Russian people. If you blink, you’ll miss the metaphor’s introduction. A palimpsest is “a document that has been used and reused, time after time, over decades, and yet on which the earlier writings are still just about visible.” The Russian people, Galeotti writes, are just like this, “citizens of a patchwork nation that more than most shows these external influences in every aspect of life.” He explains more fully:“Russia is a country with no natural borders, no single tribe or people, no real central identity . Its very scale astounds — it stretches across 11 time zones, from the European fortress-region of Kaliningrad, now chop off from the rest of the Motherland, all the method to the Bering Strait, just 82 kilometers (51 miles) from Alaska . Combined with the inaccessibility of a lot of of its regions and the scattered nature of its population, this helps explain why maintaining central control has been such a challenge, and why losing that grip on the country such a terror for its rulers . I once met a (retired) KGB officer who admitted that “We always thought it was all or nothing: either we held the country in a tight fist, or else it would all fall apart.””Thus the palimpsest metaphor is perfect. It is a patchwork of itself and other nations, of its current self and its past self. As much as Russia has tried to transform itself and cover-up its former self, its history remains etched into its eotti’s goal, then, is to provide a brief but thorough outline of this history. He begins with the Ryurikids and the Kievan Rus’, then follows the thread through the Mongol invasions, Ivan III, and Ivan IV (AKA “the Terrible”). All of the tsars obtain anywhere from a glancing mention to an extended chapter, with Peter the Amazing and Catherine the Amazing rightfully weighing more heavily in the narrative. But in this short history, Galeotti balances depth with breadth, moving right along to the social movements of the 19th and 20th centuries and evaluating the important aspects of the Soviet Union before jumping into post-Soviet Russia and now the Russia of o features of this work are distinct, and they bookend each chapter. The beginning of each chapter provides a timeline of necessary events, essentially acting as an outline for the chapter for reference as you read. This is an immense support in providing a framework for each chapter, aiding with comprehension. At the end of each chapter, Galeotti provides some resources for further reading, giving the reader the best books on the topics in that chapter. Instead of simply listing them, he quickly explains why each book is helpful or comments on its features. I plan on coming back to these sections when I wish to dive deeper into Russian history so that I can pick out some of the books he eotti, being an expert on Russia both historically and in the modern-day, makes some very insightful connections between Putin’s Russia and the Russia he has laid out throughout the book. It helped me immensely in both understanding the historical content I teach and understanding Russia in the globe today. If either of those interest you in the least, I recommend reading A Short History of Russia. It’s not as large a commitment as the Chinese history Superpower Interrupted, yet it gives as broad an overview with plenty of specific tidbits for any historical appetite.I received a review copy of A Short History of Russia courtesy of Hanover Square Press and NetGalley, but my opinions are my own.
I have treasured my earlier edition of this book since it was first published, and I'm very happy that the expanded third edition is more of what created the original so great: the depth of knowledge about movie history and the enthusiasm the authors present for the movie medium. I read it, and wish to devote the rest of my life to seeing all the unbelievable films they write of, and that I've so far missed. I especially like that Dixon and Foster place American cinema in the context of world-wide cinema, especially since some amazing international movies come and go in the wink of an eye even in cosmopolitan American cities.
Excellent! Reread the chapters on Greek ethics twice on the first read and a third time afterwards. Worth it just for that section. Amazing concise explanations for such a huge body of work (Homer to Socrates-Plato-Aristotle). Cannot recommend enough. Much meal for thought. Whatever the works shortcomings in covering so much, it's clarity and incisive observations and exposition more than merit the work -- 5 stars.
I enjoyed this book very much. I had seen some German history in the course of studying the language in college, but this treatment was far more lucid than those I had seen before. In fairness, perhaps I only say that because this was in English - I did not have to struggle with the language in addition to the happenings themselves. Nonetheless, I found that I came away with a much better feeling than I had before for the origins of Charles the Amazing and his position in history; for the overwhelming importance of the Reformation, and for the essentials of the Thirty Years War. It is real that, in the style of the 19th and early 20th century, the author does not dwell overmuch on dates, but this actually allows a cohesive story to be built up, instead of a confusing chronology. A few maps would have helped, but again, in 1902 that was not the norm.I should note that I read this in the Kindle edition, and found it to be typeset with above-average quality for that genre. There was one major glitch in which a section about Bismark had been dropped in accidentally in a discussion of the 16th century, but aside from that, the conversion was well done.I would recommend this to anyone who finds European history interesting, and would like a amazing introduction to the portion of that that occurred in German-speaking lands.
"If you don't learn history you are doomed to repeat it." Have you ever heard this quote, I know I have hundreds of times. After reading this book I realized 2 very necessary things; that everyone that has ever said that is a hypocrite and that the human race is on a course for self destruction. Only recently in history is the globe capable of sharing info in an instant but the human race as a whole is raging ahead like blind conductor on the freight train of life heading straight for a cliff. This is probably the best referenced and most succinct telling of the rise and fall of every civilization in recorded history leading up to the path we are on today which is so frighteningly related to the extinct ancestors we all share. Ronald Wright sees the writing on the wall and realizes the light at the end of the tunnel is rapidly approaching but it can either be hope or oblivion. No civilization in history has been so global as the human race is today, or as destructive. A turning point is required NOW! Progress for the sake or progress forsakes us all. Things can be done, but they aren't being done. It's not too late but the time has come. Read this book and obtain everyone you know to read it if enough people begin their eyes we might be able to save ourselves.
We hear much of ‘progress’ today without being created adequately familiar with what the concept means to us, to our globe and to the societies we live nald Wright’s intention in this book is to examine how and in what ways in which civilizations have ‘progressed’ and what their outcomes have been. His contention is that by examining the historical evidence of who we are and where we have come from, we might be better placed to determine how well we are faring and towards what end we are e author writes simply and directly basing his arguments on ample evidence.He points out that while our future is in our own hands, we must trust not in unfounded optimism but rather be sensitive to the info that we possess, both that passed down from history and that presented to us from our understanding of morality and insights presented by scientific investigation.‘Progress’ neither in the affirmative or its obverse is guaranteed without our making sound decisions.
What is the difference between our 21st century global civilization, the ancient Sumerians, the Easter Islanders of Cook's day, empirical Rome, or the Maya civilization. Answer, not much. The latest four are all societies that had their heyday, become stuck in a paradigm, and then brought ecological disaster on themselves via overpopulation and over exploitation of natural resources. "Each time history repeats itself, the goes up", Wrights quotes from some pertinent graffiti. The cost this time could be in the billions of is a short book 132 pages of actual text with another 68 or so of footnotes at the end. It is a angry rush through human history exploring the collapse of those civilizations and a couple that have been more sustainable.Wright also explores the traps of progress. That is mankind becomes so amazing at hunting he drives his meal source into extinction. Then we become so proficient at an irrigation technology we ruin the land. We become so amazing at weapons we make bombs that could ruin the whole world. As a race, he contends, we seem to push every technology to the brink, to our collective woe.I read with highlighter in hand. I had to restrain myself for marking whole long sections. As it is, the book now has a pink glow. Several pages have yellow tabs so I can search passages easily again. One such passage from the book summarizes it for me:"The human inability to foresee - or to watch out for - long-range consequences may be inherent to our kind, shaped by the millions of years when we lived from hand to mouth by hunting and gathering. It may also be small more than a mix of inertia, greed, and foolishness encouraged by the shape of the social pyramid. The concentration of power at the top of large-scale societies gives the elite a vested interest in the status quo; they continue to prosper in darkening times long after the environment and general populace start to suffer."I remember as a biology major we studied the boom and bust cycle of animal populations. It was suggested in class that the human animal could follow the same cycle. The professor dismissed the idea, but not so Wright. He sees us at the high point in a few years, then the collapse unless we act other passage really struck home with me: "The idea that the globe must be run by the stock shop is as angry as any other fundamentalist delusion, Islamic, Christian, or Marxist." That tears at the very sand we have our society built e sheer pace of Wright's march through history mirrors the author's urgency about how long we have to act to save our society. The countdown has already begun. The question remains, do we have the gumption to take the important actie book is at its heart liberal, and rightly so. Any possible solution to forestall the potential social collapse will not be from the top of the pyramid. They long ago seemed to have forgotten the concept of usufruct; we are just borrowing this planet from our kids and grandchildren. Wright holds out a glimmer of hope, but the candle is flickering.
This book provides a brief, but very comprehensive, history of Finland from the bronze age to the twentieth century. I found the extensive info on the early history of Swedish-Finnish expansion extremely helpful, although the book is a bit skimpy on the subject of the Finnish civil war. The book rightfully calls itself a "short" history, but it's a satisfying overview.
I wonder if the other reviewers who panned this book items their own shirts or send them out. I suspect that rather than disliking the book they dislike the message. MacIntyre uses this book to drop the bread crumbs to lead moderns back to the foundation of Western Civilization, which curiously enough takes us back to the beginning. "You shall not cease from exploration; and the end of your exploring will be to arrive where you started and to know the put for the first time." MacIntyre is one of those philosophers who holds that there is a true world, that there are right and wrong choices for human beings, that we have screwed up our language and philosophical discourse to the point where they mean nothing and the only respond is to rectify our primary understanding, to recalibrate our thought to reality. I search the author to be difficult because his thought is so loaded with content and one must follow him carefully. DON'T BUY THE KINDLE EDITION YET. THE GREEK TERMS ARE DISTORED BY POOR SCANNING AND THERE ARE NUMBEROUS TYPOS (LIKE LEAVING OUT THE WORD "NOT" IN A SENTENCE).
I love this quirky book. I was looking for a general history of Germany before 1400, and books written for the average reader about that period of time are not that interesting or simple to find. This book was written over 100 years ago by a college professor, and I figured that scholarship regarding that period of time probably hasn't expanded much since then (except perhaps for the widely read history buff, which I am not). I didn't expect to love this book, but I am really enjoying the author's style, his explanations of why he has organized the different chapters, and the inclusion of detail about the people that bring that history to life, more than just dates and names. It's probably dated in a lot of ways, but for me, the general reader, it's very enjoyable.
As a genealogist I have fun putting the folks with whom I am working in a put of their everyday lives. This economic history of Quebec from early contact to early 21st century, focuses on the familiar names and dates as well as lesser known times and groups of people. In addition to being packed with data and evidence it is simple to read and not be overwhelmed with details. I highly recommend it all folks who have ancestors or grandparents from French Canada. I enjoyed this sufficiently to reread it again and again.
The idea of progress is a relatively knew idea within the history of humans. The idea of progress is fundamental to the ideas of Capitalism and economic growth. A lot of Americans blindly believe that of progress, economic growth, and Capitalism are leading to the betterment of humans. If one carefully reads the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report, it states that CO2 (and other greenhouse gasses) emissions are driving global warming and thus climate change. That report also says that economic growth and population growth are driving those imate change is one of the "progress traps" Wright is talking about. Progress does not inexorably lead to the betterment of humans. Nor do growth economies, including Capitalism. Wright helps readers see the huge pictures of how humans have interacted with the Earth in ways that destroy civilizations and threatens to ruin our host, e Myth of Progress by Tom Wessells is another amazing book about progress.
Wright discourses eloquently on the most urgent problems of our day (the raging shop economy, causing global warming, overpopulation, meal shortages, poverty, environmental destruction, and resource depletion), from the perspective of the destructive history of human civilization popularized by scholars like Jared Diamond (Collapse) and Joseph Tainter (The Collapse of Complex Societies). ASHOP also draws from economic, scientific, and cultural disciplines to assess the crisis of modern civilization. The book sometimes loses focus on its overall social critique and becomes too bogged down in the info of its historical narratives; and, there's small here that hasn't been said before. Nevertheless, this is a well-written short work that neatly summarizes the world's dire predicament and urgently calls for change before it's too late.
This is a brilliantly written book that successfully balances the historical and philosophical detail of western thought since the early Greeks. While I have not read Russell's acclaimed title, I can confidently say that this history is exactly what I required as an average reader of philosophy with a desire to expand my knowledge of the discipline and achieve a broader understanding of the contributions of its major figures and others have pointed out, this history is particularly special for its acknowledgement of thinkers that are traditionally excluded from histories of philosophy but which have influenced the development of philosophy in lasting and compelling ways. Additionally, and most surprisingly, Sir Kenny's history remains remarkably accessible and enjoyable throughout without sacrificing clarity and precision. Truly a special contribution and one that will likely grow in acclaim as years go on.
This is a unbelievable overview of the whole of Western Philosophy written by an perfect if somewhat unsung philosopher and historian, Anthony Kenny. Mr. Kenny’s approach of first giving the philosopher’s history and then an in-depth study of the philosophical work they covered, works very well for spot reference, though I couldn’t support reading it from cover to cover. The book really rounded out my understanding of this nebulous topic’s growth and specialization though the centuries. I highly recommend.