Read readings in the philosophy of law reviews, rating & opinions:

Check all readings in the philosophy of law reviews below or publish your opinion.

100 Reviews Found

Sort by: Most Accurate (default) | Newest | Top Rated

  • 0

    Useful review?

    clash of clans []  2020-5-11 22:47

    recommend amazing amazing amazing amazing amazing amazing

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    guns of glory []  2020-5-21 22:34
    [email protected]

    Just played Guns of Glory on a phone application via mistplay reviews. Played this one with amazing interest as on the mobile you got the impression of controlling your characters on the ground level, helping catch pick pockets etc etc. Like all mobile ads this was misleading. Don't obtain me wrong the android game itself was addictive and you can spend hours playing (If you play via mistplay you can earn a fair few Amazon vouchers), but yeah false advertising? Really? Unfortunately this is a huge pitfall a lot of android games like these fall into. For example you can expect a nice create your kitchen safe android game but instead you obtain something quite various (garden scapes see add for application and play game)

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Readings in the Philosophy of Law []  2020-2-7 20:37

    Amazing book for the class. Easier to follow than other books.

    0  


    Add your opinion on readings in the philosophy of law or scroll down to read more reviews ↓

     

  • 0

    Useful review?

    Readings in the Philosophy of Law []  2020-2-7 20:37

    It was an amazon product and in pristine shape. I still use it as a reference and would recommend it to anyone.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Readings in the Philosophy of Law []  2020-2-7 20:37

    The first half of this book, this author tries to use complex phrases to create very easy points. The second half is actually decent. I read this entire book for a class I had. It was quite the chore.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Readings in the Philosophy of Law []  2020-2-7 20:37

    great

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Readings in the Philosophy of Law []  2020-2-7 20:37

    Great

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Readings in the Philosophy of Law []  2020-2-7 20:37

    Did its job.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Readings in the Philosophy of Law []  2020-2-7 20:37

    Like. A small more beat up than the description, but it does the job.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Readings in the Philosophy of Law []  2020-2-7 20:37

    The publisher should be ashamed of this paperback version. For a $100 book, the binding cracks the first time you begin it to read, and the pages start to fall out. This is ridiculous! How much more would it have cost to use proper binding glue?If the book is needed for a class, I would suggest a hardcover version. If you have other options, look for a philosophy of law textbook ever, the reading material itself is beautiful comprehensive and well place together.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Readings in the Philosophy of Law []  2020-2-7 20:37

    Satisfied with the condition of the book

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Philosophy of Law (Oxford Readings in Philosophy) []  2020-1-22 1:52

    The book was a bonus for a student, and he stated that it was what he needed.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Classic Readings and Cases in the Philosophy of Law []  2020-7-25 20:6

    Too expensive to spend on a textbook. Amazing articles but if it was not needed reading for a class, I would not have spent this much on it.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Classic Readings and Cases in the Philosophy of Law []  2020-7-25 20:6

    Book was in even better condition than I expected. Thanks!

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Jurisprudence, Text and Readings on the Philosophy of Law (American Casebook Series) []  2020-7-17 21:14

    The seller sent it very quickly and the book was very well packaged. Aristotle would be proud. (He is a huge part of this book)

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Jurisprudence, Text and Readings on the Philosophy of Law (American Casebook Series) []  2020-7-17 21:14

    The item was in amazing condition. Had no issues receiving it on time either. Overall amazing seller.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Jurisprudence, Text and Readings on the Philosophy of Law (American Casebook Series) []  2020-7-17 21:14

    Met my expectations!

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Jurisprudence, Text and Readings on the Philosophy of Law (American Casebook Series) []  2020-7-17 21:14

    New 'Aquinis' is as poor as new 'Shapespear' and you all know that.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Jurisprudence, Text and Readings on the Philosophy of Law (American Casebook Series) []  2020-7-17 21:14

    Dense read but the book was in amazing condition.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Jurisprudence, Text and Readings on the Philosophy of Law (American Casebook Series) []  2020-7-17 21:14

    I used this book in a law school class on Jurisprudence. The book is weak on Cicero and the Stoics, powerful on the 20th/c movements. Best of all, it introduced me to the work of John Finnis!

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Jurisprudence, Text and Readings on the Philosophy of Law (American Casebook Series) []  2020-7-17 21:14

    It's almost like when you had to know latin in to read the bible, except it's the 21st century and we're still needed to read a law book that belongs in the early 20th century. It's too verbose and not very clear for most readers. When one is taking a lot of classes in college and time is not on your side, this book is a nightmare.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Jurisprudence, Text and Readings on the Philosophy of Law (American Casebook Series) []  2020-7-17 21:14

    Surprisingly, the book was received in a timely manner. I was just a bit disappointed because of the huge puncture (from some instrument) that penetrated the front hard cover. I was grateful it did not go further into a lot of pages, but generally I was satisfied.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Punishment and Responsibility: Essays in the Philosophy of Law []  2020-1-15 21:15

    exellent

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Philosophy of Sex: Contemporary Readings []  2020-7-1 18:37

    Ordered it for school. Expensive but what else was I going to do?

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Reason and Responsibility: Readings in Some Basic Problems of Philosophy []  2020-1-29 1:2

    what I was looking for

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Reason and Responsibility: Readings in Some Basic Problems of Philosophy []  2020-1-29 1:2

    Helped ne so much

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Reason and Responsibility: Readings in Some Basic Problems of Philosophy []  2020-1-29 1:2

    I RENTED THIS BOOK I WISHED I WOULD HAVE PURCHASED IT.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Reason and Responsibility: Readings in Some Basic Problems of Philosophy []  2020-1-29 1:2

    First 30 or so pages must have gotten wet...pages were crumbly and folded over.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Reason and Responsibility: Readings in Some Basic Problems of Philosophy []  2020-1-29 1:2

    Mint Condit' compradre

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior (The Philosophy of Law Enforcement) []  2020-1-1 18:19

    Finished this book really fast! Loved it! The only reason I am giving it a 4 star review is because of the section "Red Pill" near the end of the book. Before this section he gives you a warning not to read it if you are in any position other than an investigator. It makes sense because he is mainly talking about the fact that being an investigator is all about finding facts and not having private beliefs because they can interfere with your job. This makes sense but he goes on a rant essentially about how the Christian belief is false. That's fine, it's his beliefs but I didn't search it important to "plug" his beliefs on religion in this book (He mentions in this section that he is an Atheist now) especially because he already mentioned how it was extremely unprofessional to use your religion on the job, i.e. praying with victims, passing out church service cards, etc., which I completely agree with him there. You're a professional and your job is to serve and protect. Otherwise this book is a must have regardless!!

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior (The Philosophy of Law Enforcement) []  2020-1-1 18:19

    I really liked the beginning. There are some locations that need to be reviewed, words are missing or out of place. Then the ending of the book was like a whole various person was writing.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior: The Philosophy of Law Enforcement []  2020-6-21 19:4

    This is a super simple and fast read that I was needed to obtain for my Policing class. I'm not interested in becoming a police officer so I was dreading having to read the book. However, the author uses a lot of humor and statistical evidence to back up his claims which I enjoyed. He actually at one point says reading academic things makes him wish to hurl himself out a window so the writing style/language is much more laid back which makes it an simple read. Also, I live in PA and the author is a police officer in PA so that created the book automatically a small more interesting. As a side note, I loved the Red Pill chapter. Create sure to read it when you obtain the book.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior (The Philosophy of Law Enforcement) []  2020-1-1 18:19

    Bernard Schaffer is a very interesting guy. His is an outstanding writer of both fiction & non. He is a police detective. He led another life as a kid actor which he tells in another essay, "BJ Schaffer is Dead" about serving his sentence as a kid star on TV. As I said: one interesting in this short essay, he tells of his journey to & some glimpses of, his life as a police officer. It is a amazing piece of writing & is both inspiring & honest. He tells it like it is. At least like it is for him. This is not a story of "action & adventure" (although it contains bits of both), but more just man telling about why & how he became a police officer and what it means to him. You feel it. At least I do, when I read it.I say, in the spirit of full disclosure, I have become of fan of Schaffer's fiction & felt I had to to read this. I was fortunate that it was when I got it in the Kindle Store. It is 99 cents right now. I had not yet read any of his other work yet when I got this. I say now that I have read this, and some of his other work, I would gladly a buck for this essay. More, for a collection of his essays, I would gladly $10 (and I really have fun reading well-written essays/articles. Especially those taken from the writer's life).It is a refreshing to read a writer who writes from his heart, while still maintaining his craft. I am sucker for amazing writing in almost any genre. Bernard J Schaffer is an perfect writer & storyteller, whether telling stories from his life or those he creates from whole cloth (or wherever he gets them from).Here is an excerpt from his essay "BJ Schaffer is Dead" that gives a amazing taste of the flavor of his writing, & is a nice segue to Method of the Fighter (it is from the latest paragraph of that essay, which you can search easily using any amazing find engine):"Me? I'm a guy who worked at a gas station to create ends meet while I went to the Police Academy. I scrubbed toilets, worked landscaping and mopped laboratories late at night. At 34 years old, I'm a police detective who makes his living putting poor people in dark places. I'm a father to two children, and I can tell you that their love and admiration means more than the vacant adulation of the masses on any level."Not only do I believe him, I feel I learn from him, both about writing & about life. That is valuable. Check out his work.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior (The Philosophy of Law Enforcement) []  2020-1-1 18:19

    I purchased this book to gain a better understanding of police. While no one source of information is the only valid source of info, this book provides valuable information and insight. You won't become a police expert in reading the book, but no single book will create you an expert. You will gain a larger view, see more of their street-smart globe and this has value. It is worth the buying and the time reading. Thanks Mr. Shaffer.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior: The Philosophy of Law Enforcement []  2020-6-21 19:4

    The book started off great, but the author lost me, when he seemed to side with the poor guys, by excusing some of their behavior. I respect his opinion, but he is preaching to a 29 year, retired detective, who saw more, and was more successful than he was. I do not say that in a self agrandizing way, but a easy fact. I am not impresssed that he worked in a huge town department, nor do I keep that versus him. I have stayed very close to my department in retirement, not because it defines my life, but because these people are my other family and I love them as such. Seeing all of the nonsense, that is media / liberal driven, that these officers now face, I do consider them heroes, despite what the author may believe. What is needed now is nothing short of uncommon valor. Despite the authors success, I would never have a moments hesitation in debating rhese problems with him.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior: The Philosophy of Law Enforcement []  2020-6-21 19:4

    Bernard Schaffer is a very interesting guy. His is an outstanding writer of both fiction & non. He is a police detective. He led another life as a kid actor which he tells in another essay, "BJ Schaffer is Dead" about serving his sentence as a kid star on TV. As I said: one interesting in this short essay, he tells of his journey to & some glimpses of, his life as a police officer. It is a amazing piece of writing & is both inspiring & honest. He tells it like it is. At least like it is for him. This is not a story of "action & adventure" (although it contains bits of both), but more just man telling about why & how he became a police officer and what it means to him. You feel it. At least I do, when I read it.I say, in the spirit of full disclosure, I have become of fan of Schaffer's fiction & felt I had to to read this. I was fortunate that it was when I got it in the Kindle Store. It is 99 cents right now. I had not yet read any of his other work yet when I got this. I say now that I have read this, and some of his other work, I would gladly a buck for this essay. More, for a collection of his essays, I would gladly $10 (and I really have fun reading well-written essays/articles. Especially those taken from the writer's life).It is a refreshing to read a writer who writes from his heart, while still maintaining his craft. I am sucker for amazing writing in almost any genre. Bernard J Schaffer is an perfect writer & storyteller, whether telling stories from his life or those he creates from whole cloth (or wherever he gets them from).Here is an excerpt from his essay "BJ Schaffer is Dead" that gives a amazing taste of the flavor of his writing, & is a nice segue to Method of the Fighter (it is from the latest paragraph of that essay, which you can search easily using any amazing find engine):"Me? I'm a guy who worked at a gas station to create ends meet while I went to the Police Academy. I scrubbed toilets, worked landscaping and mopped laboratories late at night. At 34 years old, I'm a police detective who makes his living putting poor people in dark places. I'm a father to two children, and I can tell you that their love and admiration means more than the vacant adulation of the masses on any level."Not only do I believe him, I feel I learn from him, both about writing & about life. That is valuable. Check out his work.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior: The Philosophy of Law Enforcement []  2020-6-21 19:4

    I purchased this book to gain a better understanding of police. While no one source of information is the only valid source of info, this book provides valuable information and insight. You won't become a police expert in reading the book, but no single book will create you an expert. You will gain a larger view, see more of their street-smart globe and this has value. It is worth the buying and the time reading. Thanks Mr. Shaffer.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior (The Philosophy of Law Enforcement) []  2020-1-1 18:19

    There is value to be found in this book. A lot of amazing info and valuable stories that have proven to be beneficial to officers all across the nation, and I'm sure that a lot of more will continue to learn from this book on into the future. I like to take every possibility I can obtain to learn from a veteran LEO, and appreciate the experience they ever, this is not "the method of the warrior" or "the philosophy of law enforcement." Those are huge claims to be created and the claiming of those titles for this book should not have been done. This book is one man's journey; one man's philosophy on not only law enforcement, but religion, race, orientation and life as a whole.I came to learn more of the mind of those who have gone before, and I did learn a lot, but much of this book is unnecessary. Just as this author cares not for the worldviews of his fellow officers, I could not care less about his views on anything that isn't directly similar to law enforcement. The title is deceptive, at best. This book holds very small fighter philosophy, a lot of data on active shooters, which is very helpful, and quite a few interesting anecdotes from the author's past.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior (The Philosophy of Law Enforcement) []  2020-1-1 18:19

    Kindle ver has some amazing and up to date information (21 July 2016). His perspective on the black lives matter movement really created me think hard on what it all truly means. I am not in law enforcement, though I am a senior in college pursuing Criminal Justice so this book is a amazing insight as to what I want. I am also a USAF veteran, and a lot of the things he points out about people and leadership are hurdles I saw while in the Air Force. This book is a amazing tool for anyone who wants an lesson about leadership vs. management.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior: The Philosophy of Law Enforcement []  2020-6-21 19:4

    I stumbled on this book one late night working that long 12 hr shift. Not only did it capture my attention, but I also blew through it within 2 hrs. This short essay did wonders for me. It relit that fire inside me that was starting to flicker. If you don't know what I am referring to, that is because you haven't been on the job long enough to understand that statement. I was yearning for more when I read the latest page. The author answered the call and added a few fresh chapters with this fresh copy. B Schaffer has a fresh fan, who is also an avid reader along with over 10 years policing under my belt. I'm currently reading Superbia and that is one awesome work of art. Real Blue Line....that will stay with me forever. If you are looking for some direction or answers that just can not be answered, begin this book and read. Not once, but a few times. The answers you are looking for and our purpose is right in front of our eyes, thanks to B Schaffer.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior (The Philosophy of Law Enforcement) []  2020-1-1 18:19

    I stumbled on this book one late night working that long 12 hr shift. Not only did it capture my attention, but I also blew through it within 2 hrs. This short essay did wonders for me. It relit that fire inside me that was starting to flicker. If you don't know what I am referring to, that is because you haven't been on the job long enough to understand that statement. I was yearning for more when I read the latest page. The author answered the call and added a few fresh chapters with this fresh copy. B Schaffer has a fresh fan, who is also an avid reader along with over 10 years policing under my belt. I'm currently reading Superbia and that is one awesome work of art. Real Blue Line....that will stay with me forever. If you are looking for some direction or answers that just can not be answered, begin this book and read. Not once, but a few times. The answers you are looking for and our purpose is right in front of our eyes, thanks to B Schaffer.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior (The Philosophy of Law Enforcement) []  2020-1-1 18:19

    Love Bernards books. He makes them all interesting with facts from his his career as a detective.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior: The Philosophy of Law Enforcement []  2020-6-21 19:4

    There is value to be found in this book. A lot of amazing info and valuable stories that have proven to be beneficial to officers all across the nation, and I'm sure that a lot of more will continue to learn from this book on into the future. I like to take every possibility I can obtain to learn from a veteran LEO, and appreciate the experience they ever, this is not "the method of the warrior" or "the philosophy of law enforcement." Those are huge claims to be created and the claiming of those titles for this book should not have been done. This book is one man's journey; one man's philosophy on not only law enforcement, but religion, race, orientation and life as a whole.I came to learn more of the mind of those who have gone before, and I did learn a lot, but much of this book is unnecessary. Just as this author cares not for the worldviews of his fellow officers, I could not care less about his views on anything that isn't directly similar to law enforcement. The title is deceptive, at best. This book holds very small fighter philosophy, a lot of data on active shooters, which is very helpful, and quite a few interesting anecdotes from the author's past.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior: The Philosophy of Law Enforcement []  2020-6-21 19:4

    For the most part I did agree with the author on the points which he created in this book. There are a couple of things that I have a issue with. Number one is the chapter on "The Truth about # Black Lives Matter." If you are speaking about officers killing black individuals then you haven't looked at your statistics too well, as more cops each year slay white individuals than they slay black individuals. The other aspect is if we go by the slogan "Black Lives Matter," then where are these people when every day young black men and women are killing each other? So, do Black Lives Matter? No more or less than anyone else. My second issue is his views on religion and how he purports that we as officers should rely only on science. As a Viet Nam combat veteran and an officer that has been involved in a couple of shootings, I can attest that when the bullets were flying even those who did not believe in a higher being was praying. Besides even scientist can't agree on science. Just look at the "Global Warming" arguments.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior: The Philosophy of Law Enforcement []  2020-6-21 19:4

    Kindle ver has some amazing and up to date information (21 July 2016). His perspective on the black lives matter movement really created me think hard on what it all truly means. I am not in law enforcement, though I am a senior in college pursuing Criminal Justice so this book is a amazing insight as to what I want. I am also a USAF veteran, and a lot of the things he points out about people and leadership are hurdles I saw while in the Air Force. This book is a amazing tool for anyone who wants an lesson about leadership vs. management.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior (The Philosophy of Law Enforcement) []  2020-1-1 18:19

    This is a super simple and fast read that I was needed to obtain for my Policing class. I'm not interested in becoming a police officer so I was dreading having to read the book. However, the author uses a lot of humor and statistical evidence to back up his claims which I enjoyed. He actually at one point says reading academic things makes him wish to hurl himself out a window so the writing style/language is much more laid back which makes it an simple read. Also, I live in PA and the author is a police officer in PA so that created the book automatically a small more interesting. As a side note, I loved the Red Pill chapter. Create sure to read it when you obtain the book.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior (The Philosophy of Law Enforcement) []  2020-1-1 18:19

    Found this to be an insightful look at true police work and for most it gives the all necessary mental outlook required to survive the oppressive negativity faced by officers.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior: The Philosophy of Law Enforcement []  2020-6-21 19:4

    Finished this book really fast! Loved it! The only reason I am giving it a 4 star review is because of the section "Red Pill" near the end of the book. Before this section he gives you a warning not to read it if you are in any position other than an investigator. It makes sense because he is mainly talking about the fact that being an investigator is all about finding facts and not having private beliefs because they can interfere with your job. This makes sense but he goes on a rant essentially about how the Christian belief is false. That's fine, it's his beliefs but I didn't search it important to "plug" his beliefs on religion in this book (He mentions in this section that he is an Atheist now) especially because he already mentioned how it was extremely unprofessional to use your religion on the job, i.e. praying with victims, passing out church service cards, etc., which I completely agree with him there. You're a professional and your job is to serve and protect. Otherwise this book is a must have regardless!!

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Way of the Warrior: The Philosophy of Law Enforcement []  2020-6-21 19:4

    I really liked the beginning. There are some locations that need to be reviewed, words are missing or out of place. Then the ending of the book was like a whole various person was writing.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Philosophy of Law: A Very Short Introduction []  2020-7-13 20:4

    Based on unbelievable books like Jonathan Culler's "Very Short Introduction to Literary Theory," I had come to expect more from the series. This book is poorly written, full of muddy, half-developed thought, and even includes several e book is organized as a more or less chronological presentation of major schools of legal philosophy (from natural law and positivism through critical legal studies), with the major thinkers in each school usually receiving their own brief sections. Unfortunately, these sections tend to consist largely of scattershot presentations of different doctrines asserted by the thinker. Small attempt is created to string the doctrines together into developed thoughts, or to suggest what issue the thinker hoped to solve by setting forth his or her doctrines, much less to locate the doctrines in a larger intellectual history.I found that if I was already familiar with the thinker being discussed, the book's presentation often contained subtly misleading phrasing; and if I was not familiar with the thinker, I came away still unclear about why the thinker had bothered to assert the various, vague statements about the law that had been summarily presented. One premise of the Very Short Introduction books is that it's not impossible to say something worthwhile about the significance of a philosopher's contribution to legal theory in even a single paragraph. But doing so requires work. It requires synthesizing the philosopher's claims and locating them in some context, not just throwing out a few vaguely connected, undeveloped doctrines. Those interested in getting a first impression of the philosophy of law would be better off visiting the Wikipedia pages of a few legal philosophers than buying this me specifics:This is the kind of book that a passage like the following -- "Raz actually postulates a stronger ver of the 'social thesis' (the 'sources thesis') as the essence of legal positivism" -- and then fails to define the "sources thesis." The thesis is evidently necessary enough to be mentioned three times in two pages, but is never defined.If you're like me, and you like your theses to be stated, you might search this book frustrating.Another characteristically frustrating passage: "Since Kelsen argues that the effectiveness of the whole legal is a important condition of its validity of every norm within it,..." I can't even tell what went wrong in that sentence: is it a typo? Poor grammar? Unclear thought?(For more straightforward typos or grammar errors, see p. 37 ["by reference to three elements; efficacy, institutional character, and sources"], p. 55 ["Can I not have a duty without you (or anyone else) having a right that I should perform it."], etc.)The author also gratuitous, unsupported praise or scorn for different thinkers, such as the following throwaway remark about Critical Legal Studies: "Yet the possibilities of transforming the law seem frequently to be diluted by the destructive, even nihilistic, tendencies of some of the more dogmatic adherents of CLS." Really? Thanks for the tip! (No identification of these adherents is offered, nor any clarification of the sense in which they are "nihilistic," nor any clarification of how their nihilism might dilute the chance of transforming law.)Finally, the book includes a glaring omission that is apparently typical of philosophers of law who were trained in England. It makes no mention of the thought of (the German) Friedrich Carl von Savigny, and instead presents a lot of of Savigny's central ideas as though they were invented by (the English) John Austin, who in fact got the ideas directly from Savigny.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Philosophy of Law: A Very Short Introduction []  2020-7-13 20:4

    This is an awesome book to have on hand. It is succinct in defining the various philosophical approaches to law, who is similar and influence what, etc. I am taking a Philosophy of Law and Morals class (Phil. Major). This book, about the size of your hand is strong in an informative way. Strongly recommend it for anyone and especially students. You won't be disappointed.I bought it used. It was in brand fresh condition apply described in the sellers info. Amazing and affordable with fast delivery.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Philosophy of Law: A Very Short Introduction []  2020-7-13 20:4

    potable and handy. It is simple to comprehend and amazing for philosophy of jurisprudence.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Philosophy of Law: A Very Short Introduction []  2020-7-13 20:4

    This book was my first introduction to the "Very Short Introduction" series of inexpensive paperbacks published by Oxford University Press. The nice thing is that these books measure about 7 X 4.5 inches, so they create the excellent "plane" books, but yet are produced to the strict standards of OUP. I was just amazed at how much solid analysis is contained in the 107 pages of text in this volume, not to mention the "references" section, bibliography, and complete index. The author, who is emeritus at the University of Hong Kong, has essentially boiled down his comprehensive "Understanding Jurisprudence" volume (OUP, 2005, 350 pages) into this concise survey. There are also 15 illustrations and several boxed pages where a particular point is examined in a min e book is divided into 6 chapters. The subjects are Natural Law (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Finnis and Fuller); Legal Positivism (Hart, Bentham, Austin, Kelsen, Raz); Law as Interpretation (devoted to Dworkin); Rights and Justice (Hohfeld, Posner, Rawls); Law and Society (Durkheim, Weber, Marx, Habermas, Foucault); and Critical Legal Theory (CLS, Unger, Lacan, Derrida, feminist legal theory, critical race theory). This is a lot to cover in a full-sized volume, but amazingly there is much solid analysis and discussion built into this little paperback. It is the excellent device for those wanting to refresh their familiarity with the jurisprudential field; it also serves as an effective and skillfully-written introduction for those fresh to the topic. There are a lot of extra interesting titles in this Oxford series that I plan to explore--what a amazing idea!

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Philosophy of Law: A Very Short Introduction []  2020-7-13 20:4

    The Very Short Introduction... series has several advantages over other series that serve the same function of providing an introduction to a topic matter. The main advantage is physical size. Mr. Clark refers to it as the excellent "plane" book. That's true. But even better, it is a real pocket book. They fit easily into the back of one's jeans waiting for the odd moment to be pulled out and used. They can usually be easily read in a couple of hours.But that format has limitations. I search that the VSI volumes that are devoted to a single thinker are much more useful than the ones that cover a broad topic matter. (It inspires me to a poor pun. "A very short intro to a very huge subject" is almost Oxfordmoronic. O, never mind.)At best, when dealing with a topic matter as opposed to an individual thinker the VSIs are concise intros. But sometimes, as with the VSI to The Philosophy of Law the treatment seems shallow. Wacks is very amazing on some of his thinkers: Rawls, Dworkin, Hart, Weber, and Habermas are all fairly well done. Some of the others are not as well handled- I found his treatment of Locke, Marx, Foucault to be cursory at best. It felt like a survey of a take it for what it is. This volume is a very fast overview of a lot of thinkers (see Mr. Clark's review for a amazing listing). Some of these thinkers are necessary enough to deserve their own volume in the series (Locke, Marx, and Habermas). Others like Rawls and Dworkin deserve such treatment. Prof. Wacks has provided us with a fast and method to orient ourselves to future reading in this field. I just cannot support but feel that he could have done better. That if he had taken the time to flesh out his presentation for another fifty or so pages that it would have been a much more useful member of the VSI family.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Philosophy of Law: A Very Short Introduction []  2020-7-13 20:4

    The philosophy of law is one of the few fields of philosophy that have remained legitimate in the sense that practical questions and contemplations are not eschewed. Too often philosophical debate wanders into conceptual hallways that could best be described as mazes, but one cannot obtain to their centers even with keeping one hand on the wall. One gets forever lost in the entanglement of concepts, with nothing ever settled, and if an idea is deemed to be practical it follows that it must be uninteresting or illegitimate.But legal reasoning is a requirement for human well being, and then the question arises as to what system of concepts best encapsulates it. A lot of questions arise when contemplating proper philosophical frameworks for legal contemplation, and a lot of of these are answered in this book, written of course for those readers who need a fast introduction to the topic matter. No reader would expect an in-depth discussion of the philosophy of law from this book, but there is enough in it to enable readers to investigate specialized subjects of e author begins the book by stating that the philosophy of law is "rarely an abstract, impractical pursuit", and he explains the (weak) demarcation between "descriptive" and "normative" legal theory. Because of its put in history, the author discusses the doctrine of natural law first, and this discussion sheds considerable light on why a lot of modern conservatives are committed to this philosophy of law: it seems to create legitimate the social hierarchies that these conservatives insist we e doctrine of legal positivism is then discussed, and in this regard the most interesting (and disconcerting) discussion is the "pure theory of law" of Hans Kelsen. The Kelsen theory is interesting since legal norms in this conception are all relational: any one particular norm must be justified or authorized by another norm, giving in the end a huge hierarchy of norms with a "basic norm" sitting on top of the hierarchy and representing a completely formal or hypothetical construct. One should not view it as arbitrary though, since its selection is based on whether or not the legal is "effective". The author does not really elaborate on this notion, but the open-ended nature of his discussion motivates the reader to investigate this doctrine in more detail through outside reading.If read in the light of current controversies in the interpretation of legal statutes by the United States Supreme Court, probably the most interesting discussion in the book concerns the legal philosophy of Ronald Dworkin. Dworkin himself is very critical of latest decisions that have been created by the Supreme Court in the latest two years, but his criticisms in this regard are not brought out in this book. What is discussed is a conception of the law that seems "extralegal" in that it views legal contexts as being intertwined with moral and political ones. This makes legal reasoning more than just an app of rules, and forces the judge to consider the consequences that his edicts will have on the cause it is still in its infancy as a legal philosophy, considerations of jurisprudence brought about by discoveries in neuroscience are not discussed in this book. Called by some the "neuroscience of law" this branch of jurisprudence will probably not be taken seriously by the majority of legal philosophers for some time to come. This reviewer recommends the book by Brent Garland for those who wish to supplement the reading of this book by considering what is at the show time very exciting developments in both neuroscience and legal philosophy.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Philosophy of Law: A Very Short Introduction []  2020-7-13 20:4

    Jurisprudence, from the surface, is a tasteless subject. It distracts a lot of fold more than it attracts. However this little book softly lands you onto the subject. As you delve deeper, the topic becomes more and more interesting. Every serious student of jurisprudence will search this book greatly helpful to be initiated into the subject.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Philosophy of Law: A Very Short Introduction []  2020-7-13 20:4

    A concise jurisprudential introduction. Well worth a read for anyone fresh to the topic or studying jurisprudence in college. If it could have another title it would be Jurisprudence for dummies. For more in depth reading the main text by the same eminent writer.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Human Nature (Hackett Readings in Philosophy) []  2020-1-21 20:55

    I was looking for something a small more insightful than simply a mix of texts from well known thinkers on the subject. Surely there are more insights than this scattered bunch.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Philosophy of Law: A Very Short Introduction []  2020-7-13 20:4

    Wacks' created no secret that this was a very short introduction. It was difficult reading because it was very pithy and thing was repeated twice or expanded upon. The author however, gives us an perfect list of texts for further e study of the academic and philosophical locations of law are generally overlooked in traditional law schools. This is the topic matter that is the intersection of law and e book accomplished its purpose. For that reason I rate it highly.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Philosophy of Law: A Very Short Introduction []  2020-7-13 20:4

    This book does small to improve the reputation of jurisprudence as boring and far removed from the practical concerns of lawyers (and even, at least in the US, from those of a lot of law professors). Certainly one can learn things from it, but it won't be a particularly pleasant e author (RW) mentions in his introduction that even "sensationalist criminal trials ... that have become regular tv fare encapsulate features of the law that characteristically agitate legal philosophers" (@xiii-xiv). He would have done better to have illustrated the problems that agitate legal philosophers with exactly such real-life cases -- for example by organizing the book according to those agitating issues. Instead, most of the book is organized according to a much more ivory-tower principle, namely a tour of schools of philosophy (natural law, positivism, Dworkin's thought, and then brisk catalogs of a dozens of sociological and "critical" approaches); even the one chapter ostensibly organized on the basis of problems ("Rights and Justice") amounts to the same sort of sequential shlep (utilitarianism, law & economics, Rawls) .Aside from the inclusion of a few photographs and two text boxes (illustrating consequentialism and the Coase theorem), small effort seems to have been created to create this book vivid or appealing to a general reader without a law education, notwithstanding that a few may have soldiered through it. The discussion is dry and humorless. The fact that it mentions a lot of authors isn't necessarily a virtue. The latest two chapters short, for the most part puzzling descriptions of different schools of thought (although RW does spend a small more effort critiquing the Marxist approach). The sections on Derrida, Foucault and Lacan are too compressed to have been useful, and could have been omitted or lumped together in exchange for more elaboration elsewhere. No attempt is created to provide a bigger picture at the conclusion of any chapter, nor is there even the briefest of conclusions for the book as a whole. The book peters out like a stream disappearing into sand: its latest words are a 1-sentence description of an "offshoot" of critical race theory. There are plenty of other books in the VSI series that are fatter than this one, so lack of zone doesn't seem like an adequate excuse for this lack of suspicion is that RW's having written a large textbook on the field may have constrained his imagination to produce sort of a mini- or outline version, instead of starting from an entirely different, more user-friendly conception (more selective, more "applied"). This book isn't up to the standards of the VSIs on, say, ethics, democracy, or ideology (just to cite examples from philosophy). I read the book as preparation for teaching upper-level undergraduates in law & politics next semester; despite the pertinence of the subject and the convenient length, the odds are very low I'll recommend it as a supplemental text.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Human Nature (Hackett Readings in Philosophy) []  2020-1-21 20:55

    This book is being used a text book for a course on our campus. This item comes highly recommended to use for spreading information.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Human Nature (Hackett Readings in Philosophy) []  2020-1-21 20:55

    amazing book

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Human Nature (Hackett Readings in Philosophy) []  2020-1-21 20:55

    It’s still an necessary book a lot of decades after it was first published. Perfect & readable for a non-scientist like myself.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Human Nature (Hackett Readings in Philosophy) []  2020-1-21 20:55

    Had to obtain it for class but professor never used it. On my own time I found some interesting reads

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Human Nature (Hackett Readings in Philosophy) []  2020-1-21 20:55

    Interesting topics

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Philosophy of Law: Introducing Jurisprudence []  2020-7-27 20:22

    Wase of getting a extended warranty

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Philosophy of Law: Introducing Jurisprudence []  2020-7-27 20:22

    My professor assigned my class to read pages 30-34 and this wouldn't be so much of an problem if the author actually offered page numbers for his digital copies... Zone does me no good, give us page numbers!

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Philosophy of Law: Introducing Jurisprudence []  2020-7-27 20:22

    Just what my son required for school at a fraction of the price!

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Philosophy of Law: Introducing Jurisprudence []  2020-7-27 20:22

    This is truly a genuine first introduction to jurisprudence: read this before any other 'introduction'. My students with zero (fore)knowledge of jurisprudence or philosophy, found this accessible, helpful, and intelligibly written.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Witcraft: The Invention of Philosophy in English []  2019-12-20 18:32

    Amazing fresh perspectives. Well written, easily understandable.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Witcraft: The Invention of Philosophy in English []  2019-12-20 18:32

    amazing summary

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Reign of Relativity: Philosophy in Physics 1915-1925 (Oxford Studies in the Philosophy of Science) []  2020-2-4 13:7

    Its content is ambiguous and I think it is understandable only for expert in the field

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Reign of Relativity: Philosophy in Physics 1915-1925 (Oxford Studies in the Philosophy of Science) []  2020-2-4 13:7

    Dear Prof. Ryckman:I've read your relativity book, and I think you came quite close on p. 60 ff, to the geometrical anomaly. I think if you go back over what you said, you will conclude that you were suggesting one exists, and you are I point out in the paper linked below, it is Einstein's notion of a "natural" coincidence, which he sets out explicitly in RELATIVITY, and by implication in the 1905 ever, I think your issue identifying it is that, when you wrote the book, you were not sufficiently aware of of the set theory controversy which gave rise to another expression of what appears to be the world's oldest view of mathematics: natural mathematics (for a more extended treatment of this point of view, see P. Maddy's NATURALISM IN MATHEMATICS). I don't see Garciadiego or Grattan-Guinness cited in your book, nor is Cantor mentioned. We are in the middle of a renaissance of the historiography of set theory, and I benefited from it greatly. You will too.Until you grasp the geometrical anomaly at the heart of the relativity simultaneity, I don't think you can understand the history fully. For example, "pratical geometry"--Einstein's term for his formulation of natural mathematics--arose from the need to avoid supposed "paradoxes" (Garciadiego is particularly illuminating on the topic of the supposed logical content of the "paradoxes"), and from the general feeling--of long standing (and by the way, you seem to feel it yourself)--that the "difference" between representation and reality had somehow to be addressed. Whether that is important or not, it is not achieved by "natural" coincidence--that much is, finally, the way, your qualms about Einstein's artful phrasing are also expressed in the Stachel and Howard book, in Sarkar's discussion of Einstein's 1905 paper on Brownian motion."Practical geometry" plays to internally consistent role in unique or general relativity. It is not a principle, hypothesis or deduction. It is nothing. Its expression in relativity is "natural" coincidence--and that is should not, however, be surprising that we have been able, finally, to locate a term in relativity which we can present plays no internally consistent role in the argument (which is what was needed to disprove it). As an advocate of natural mathematics, Einstein did not believe arguments were, or could be, internally ever, no one previously was able to present directly an anomaly. All commentators were able to do--and you in your book are one of them--was to express qualms about Einstein's approach. I am sure Einstein himself never was aware of the anomalous position of "natural" coincidence in relativity.And if you do believe in natural mathematics, it doesn't matter. However, I do think it is worth noting that we can finally demonstrate that relativity is internally inconsistent.I think Prof. Friedman left out the crucial "coordination principle"--"natural" coincidence--first, because he didn't message it, but second, because its role is not to "coordinate": "natural" coincidence has no role AT ALL.Where this leads, logically, is to the Pythagorean theorem. If we cannot obtain to general relativity because of "natural" coincidence, then the question arises once again: is the Pythagorean theorem internally consistent. I think not. I think any proof includes an impermissible "natural" coincidence. But I cannot locate it yet.Where is it?Cordially yours,John RyskampRyskamp, John Henry, "Paradox, Natural Mathematics, Relativity and Twentieth-Century Ideas" (May 19, 2007). Available at SSRN: [...]

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Reign of Relativity: Philosophy in Physics 1915-1925 (Oxford Studies in the Philosophy of Science) []  2020-2-4 13:7

    Ryckman's book is an perfect work full of novel insights. Ryckman single-handedly revives the non-positivist "transcendental philosophy" insights of early discussions of General Relativity Theory. Much of this suggestive insight and interpretation was lost with the triumph of the logical positivist (later logical empiricist) appropriation of Einstein's relativity theory as showing that Kant's a priori and transcendental philosophy was overthrown by Einstein. Schlick and later Hans Reichenbach became the "standard" interpreters of General Relativity Theory by the end of the 1930s. Later American philosophers of science, such as Adolph Gruenbaum and Wesley Salmon, even where not agreeing with all claims of Reichenbach, very much followed his lead and tended to dismiss the neo-Kantian and phenomenological interpretations that were developed by European thinkers concerning relativity theory.Ryckman discusses the work on unified field theories of mathematician Herman Weyl and the physicist Arthur Eddington, as well as the philosophical interpretations of general relativity by Ernst Cassirer and Emile Meyerson among others. Ryckman's grasp of both Husserl's phenomenology and of the relevant differential geometry is superb.His long sections on Herman Weyl are tremendously informative and illuminating. I think Ryckman's interpretations of Eddington as a "transcendental philosopher" in the traditional sense of Kant and Husserl are a bit of a stretch, however, as Eddington's philosophical excursions were very much seat of the pants. Nevertheless Ryckman persuasively discredits those, like Susan Stebbing, who ridiculed Eddington's philosophical interpretations without understanding the physics and mathematics that led him to them.A minor but significant weakness is Ryckman's totally downplaying and dismissing the influence of the German romantic idealist Fichte on Weyl's interpretation of field theory and matter, claiming that Weyl was interested only in Fichte religious thought. In fact Erhard Scholz has created a well documented case in different articles that not only Husserl but Fichte was a very powerful influence on Weyl's interpretations, and Weyl says so himself in his autobiographical reminiscences.Overall Ryckman's work is an outstanding contribution and I hope it will revive interest in phenomenological philosophy of physics among physicists as well as Anglo-American philosophers.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy (NONE) []  2020-5-6 18:12

    Comprehensive discussion of the natural law and its philosophical foundations.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy []  2020-6-14 20:9

    This book is a classic, first published in German in 1936 and translated into English and revised in 1947. Written by Heinrich A. Rommen, a refugee from Nazi Germany who taught at Georgetown University from 1953 to 1967, it is a unbelievable introduction to natural law. If you have any interest in natural law, this book is well-worth rt I concerns the "History and the Idea of Natural Law." Part II concerns "Philosophy and Content of the Natural Law." These sections (in a brief 237 pages) will tutorial you through the legacy of Greece and Rome, the Age of Scholasticism, Hugo Grotius, through the Enlightenment to our time. We pass through "The Win of Positivism" to "The Reappearance of Natural Law."I persevered to the end, even though it is very challenging. It helps, I would suppose, if you have some background in philosophy and law, but is still readable if you don't. (My son Matthew recommended it to me and without that background also continued on to the end, recognizing the value of Rommen's work.)The book is nicely divided into sections, chapters, and sub-sections within the chapters that create it clear where you are headed, which to me with small knowledge of natural law was very helpful. When I became saturated by the text, it wasn't long before there was a natural break where I could pause to reflect before continuing eat yourself to some serious reflection grounded in the Western tradition, and I think you will come away with an appreciation of the value of natural law for our own time.**This quote is from Etienne Gilson, "The Unity of Philosophical Experience."

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy []  2020-6-14 20:9

    D.S.Heersink makes a common error commited by modern sophists; and that is of presuppossing the truth of a premise on the basis of the erroneous human authority of previous modern sophists. In this case the previous modern sophists are the empiricists David Hume and ore. This appeal to fallible human authority is not philosophy but ideology because philosophy proves its conclusions as opposed to presuming their truth based on fallible human authority. D.S presumes that Hume and Moore already decisively refuted the natural law theory(NLT). However, they have done nothing of the sort. Anyone educated in moral philosophy(ethics) as exposited by Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas knows the principles of ethics show in theoretical philosophy, specifically the scientific theory of human nature and the Aristotelian science of metaphysics as exposited by Aquinas and Aristotle. Aquinas derives moral goodness from human nature in the natural moral law; see his Summa Contra Gentiles Book III:129. This is a small known text that proves the existence of the natural moral law, not from the eternal law of God as in the Summa Theologiae but from human nature itself. In my course paper as a graduate student in philosophy I wrote on this topic and how it relates to the so-called "naturalistic fallacy" arguments versus the NLT. I discovered that ore and his empiricists/illogical positivists allies are instead the ones who commit a fallacy. They commit the fallacy of equivocation between between a true distinction and a logical(conceptual) distinction. Their fact/value distinction is a reflection of the logical(conceptual) distinction between being and goodness in general; however there is no true distinction between being and goodness in general. In reality being and goodness in general are the same and this is what allows Aquinas to derive moral goodness in the natural moral law from goodness in general as applied to the amazing and being of human nature. By means of the true identity but logical distinction beween the goodness and being of human nature, Aquinas is able to derive moral goodness from the perfections of human nature without violationg the logical distinction between the being of human nature and goodness in general( reflected in the fact/value distinction). Therefore in the ore/David Hume objections to the NLT they commit a fallacy of equivocation between the true distinction between fact and value, which is false and is opposed by Thomistic NLT, and a logical(conceptual) distinction between fact and value, which is real and is affirmed by Thomistic NLT. Thus NLT do not confuse facts and "values" and there is no such thing as a naturalistic fallacy. Instead, it is Moore and Hume and their like that commit the fallacy of equivocation between a true distinction and a logical distinction. Further, contrary to Heersink's comments this book by Rommen is an perfect study in the history of NLT detailing the ancient sophists, like their modern sophistic counterparts, who rejected the natural moral law to the corruption of NLT by classical liberalism as represented by John Locke and other philosophical revolutionaries of the 18th century(they used natural law as a prop for revolution,sedition and classical liberalism). Further D.S.Heersink is seriously ignorant when he comments that only the Catholic Church's moral theology embraces Thomistic natural law. First, Thomistic NLT as proven in Summa Contra Gentiles III:129 and as articulated in his Commentary on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics and Politics and certain strictly philosophical segments of the Summa Theologiae's Treatise on Law and Treatise on Justice and Treatise on Temperance; are essentially distinct from theology because their arguments are based on reason alone. Cicero and Aristotle held to an elementary ver of NLT and neither where theologians and both were pre-Christians. Aquinas frequently refers to both Cicero and Aristotle in his writings pertaining to NLT without using them as final authorities in his argumentation for the conclusions of NLT; unlike modern sophists who appeal to fallible human authority as their final word. Aquinas actually proves all the conclusions of NLT using reason alone; which Heerskink would know if he was not ignorant of the works of Aquinas. For example in the Summa Contra Gentiles Book III:122 Aquinas proves that every intentional frustration of the procreative amazing of human sexuality is intrinsically evil and he does the same in his disputed questions on moral evil question 15, article 3. Since every contraceptive act and every homosexual act is an intentional frustration of the procreative amazing of human sexuality, by aaa-I syllogism Aquinas proves by reason alone that every contraceptive act and every homosexual act is intrinsically evil. Therefore he lists contraception and homosexual behavior as species of the unnatural vice which violates the cardinal virtue of temperance. As far as abortion is concerned, while it is real that Aristotle erred on this particular problem it was not because of his NLT principles but despite them. Aquinas since he condemned contraception, necessarily condemned all abortion as intrinsically evil since every abortion is the intentional killing of the effect of human procreation irrespective of when human life begins. These conclusions of NLT are rooted in Aristotle's proven conclusions of ethics, especially his theory of the virtue of temperance and that of natural justice(which Aristole in his Ethics affirms is universal and transcends every civil law and every political society). Message in these arguments there is no reference to religious faith and Cicero, Aristotle, and also Aquinas(SCG III:129 and his strictly philosophical texts) exemplify the capacity of moral philosophers to affirm and articulate NLT without reference to religious faith. Further, the best defense of NLT is not Robert George. He is a token political conservative professor at Princeton University who affirms the "New Natural Law Theory" invented by Germain Grisez and promoted by John Finnis and Martin Rhonheimer. This theory, with absurd, ahistorical, and disastrous results, is the effect of an attempt to save NLT from the empiricists criticism by Hume and Moore, by conceding their objections to classical NLT and then constructing a NLT that is the product of Kantian ethics and its divorce of practical reason from theoretical reason with Thomistic NLT. This explicitly contradicts Aquinas' own proof of the natural moral law from the theoretical knowledge of human nature as presented in SCG III:129 and has disastrous results regarding the nature of human happiness as consisting in intellectual virtue. Further, the nonsense is the empiricism of David Hume in his Treatise Versus Human Nature and the illogical positivism of ore in his Principia Ethica both of which theories of knowledge are self-contradictory and therefore logically impossible. In fact any objection to NLT on the grounds that it presupposes the reality of human nature, while accurately representing NLT, is a false objection that presupposes the empiricists denial of nature, human nature, and especially the human intellect's knowledge of nature and human nature. Similarily all denials of nature, human nature, or human intellectual knowledge of these two are based on errors contrary to philosophical physics or to scientific epistemology(includes theory of knowledge). Like the ancient sophists who opposed NLT, these modern sophists begin with their erroneous theories of knowledge and fit everthing including their ethical theories into their erroneous theory of knowledge. Both are systematically and intentionally ignorant of the scientific exposition of philosophy provided by Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas. As a effect of their ignorance they commit heavy errors in their works including a fallacy of equivocation between a true distinction and a logical(conceptual) distinction in their very assertion that NLT commits their invented "naturalistic fallacy". Finally, the best words to end on are the words of Cicero, as quoted from Rommen's book. These words indicate how far classical NLT is from modern political sophistry, masquerading as philosophy, and from the modern political ideologies of classical and modern liberalism; all of which affirm some form of legal dictatorship known as legal positivism and which denies the very existence of a natural moral law. Cicero states that "true law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting; it summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions... We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people... one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times... Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature,and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst penalties, even if he escapes what is commonly considered punishment." pg. 21 footnote 12 of Heinrich A. Rommen. The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy. Wow!This was not stated by a "religious fundamentalist", a category invented by modernity, but by the non-Christian philosopher Cicero. Now what is real of individuals also pertains to the political society created up of individuals that violate the natural moral law and this is the modern state; the modern state is in violation of the natural moral law because of its promotion of contraception,abortion, sodomy, and pornograpy( the crimes of the modern state) and it will suffer the worst penalties, even if it escpaes what is commonly considered punishment. Unfortunately, my nation the United States of America with its U.S. constitution has been in violation of the natural moral law from its very beginning because of its classical liberalism and racist slavery and now because of the previously mentioned moral evils affirmed by modern liberalism. As far as what texts I recommend to anyone who wants to study ethics and political science. Begin with Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics and the Thomistic commentary on this strictly philosophical work. Next study the treatise that Aquinas has on happiness and the treatises on the cardinal virtues, and the treatise on law as presented in his Summa Theologiae. Finally study his commentary on Aristotle's Politics. A lot of of Aquinas' political writings are collected in an edition by Cambridge. Francis Vitoria is the best Thomistic commentator on matters of political science. Unfortunately, there is no single work that unites all these Thomistic texts into a complete scientific exposition of ethics nor into a complete sicientific exposition of political science. This is something that hopefully will be produced by me in the future. John F. Wippel's "The Metaphysical Thought of Thomas Aquinas" is an perfect historical work that starts this process in metaphysics.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy (NONE) []  2020-5-6 18:12

    Outstanding review of the history of natural law and natural rights. By far the best I have read.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy (NONE) []  2020-5-6 18:12

    Beautifully bound, hard-cover, built-in bookmark, like a collector's edition. The book is a classic in natural law.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy (NONE) []  2020-5-6 18:12

    Natural Law Theory (NLT) was widely discredited by David Hume in his Treatise on Human Nature (1740) and by G. E. Moore in his Principia Ethica (1903), both well before this book was published in Germany during the rise of Nazism. For historical assessments, several texts do a much better job in presenting the historical rise through Stoicism and finally its demise in the Age of Enlightenment. Today, only the Roman Catholic Church, and specifically its Moral Theology, embraces Thomistic Natural Law as its bogus basis for prohibitions (contraception, abortion, homophilia). If a moral reason exists for these prohibitions, it is NOT from Natural Law Theory, it is NOT from the Moral Imperative of the Hurt Principle, and it is NOT from Aristotlean Ethics. The Church and those who appeal to Natural Law Theory commit the Fact/Value Fallacy, and the notion that god built a moral system on a fallacy should place this nonsense to e best defense of NLT is Robert George, whose apologetics are elegant as they are dogmatic.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy []  2020-6-14 20:9

    Heinrich Rommen's book titled THE NATURAL LAW was written in 1946 and published in 1947 versus the background of the rise and fall of the National Socialists and the not good tragedies of W.W. II. Rommen's book is a poignant reminder of what the law should as opposed to the will of the ruler, the party, the Volks, etc. This book is based on the Catholic Scholastics and especially St. Thomas Aquinas'(1225-1275) thinking. Rommen included the later Scholastics such as Suarez c. 1545-1618). Readers are shown a reasonable and logical view of law vs. the will of the ruler(s).Rommen with Natural Law as an attempt to reflect what religious men and women consider as a reflection of God's Law. The thinking was that since God is the Creator and author of nature, Natural Law should be an attempt to reflect God's nature rather than assigning an arbitrary will to Divine mmen's book is clear that the two views re God's nature as opposed to God's arbitrary will are necessary in understanding the temptation to impose unbridled power of rulers which can lead to tyranny and evil. St. Thomas Aquinas' views are a prominent feature of the book. Rommen reminds readers that people should test to maintain a moral code that reflects God's nature. Rommen also with the opposing view that Original Sin means that men are depraved and can do nothing right to please God. Rommen uses St. Thomas Aquinas and the later Scholastics to counter this view. Basically, Rommen argues that Original Sin did not mean that men were depraved. He argued that men were not the best they could be, and the Natural Law not only protected people from criminals, but it also provided a useful tutorial for men to act justly and fairly with other men all of whom were made in God's ese debates started c. 1300s in the disputes between the Realists and Nominalists. The Nominalists are that concepts and ideas were merely names agreed upon for philosophical debate. The Realists argued that concepts and ideas were realities and were vital to an understanding of God, Natural Law, and a just moral code. As St. Thomas Aquinas stated, the law was intended to give each man his due. The Nomialist's arguements re the lack of validity trivialized serious philosophical discussion and deprived the views of God's nature. They emphasized God's will since concepts were mere names and could not lead to Natural Law. This was a very risky concept since men could not create moral decisions since God's will precluded men from acting a moral agents. The Nominalists also argued that whatever evil occured was the will of God. In other words they ascribed evil to God which St. Thomas Aquinas the Suarez stated was impossible with God's nature. The Nominalist implied predestination to men whose fate and salvation were already determined before men were born. In other words, as Rommen makes clear, men were incapable of making moral decisions and had to accept evil as God's plan. This arguement was then used to condone the evil tyranny of unjust rulers who appointed themselves as God's lieutenants on earth. The implied arguement, later accepted in Protestant cirles, was that criticism of an unjust ruler was an attack on God. Rommen presents St. Thomas Aquinas' view that an unjust law was no law at all and led men to sensilessly act in an evil way. Suarez went so far as to argue that an unjust tyrant could lawfully be deposed as such a ruler set a poor example and committed his topics to act in complience with mmen was not a phony idealist. He was clear that no ruler or political party could make heaven on earth. Rommen argued that Natural Law and an attempt to obtain men to act in accordance with God's nature was a reasonable concept of law which could prevent the excesses of tyranny and evil. Since rulers held power, they too were needed by law to act as best they could with God's nature which admitted no mentioned above, Rommen's book was written at the end of W.W. II and was a reminder of what men suffered from blindly listening to evil rulers and political parties. The usefullness of this book could be projected to later attempts at arbitrary power regardless of political labels. One should note that the National Socialists were much less successful in German elections in Catholic regions of Germany during the 1930s, and Hitler & co. (Stalin & co. as well)hated Pope Pius XII and Catholic leaders in their domains. They knew that a relience on a reasonable Natural Law undermined their own self imposed importance. Rommen is clear about this.While THE NATURAL LAW was translated from German into English, the prose is clear. This book is a amazing introduction to Scholasticism and legal reasoning. The book is also valuable for thoughtful men who can refute the appeals to tyranny with better ideas.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy (NONE) []  2020-5-6 18:12

    Heinrich Rommen's book titled THE NATURAL LAW was written in 1946 and published in 1947 versus the background of the rise and fall of the National Socialists and the not good tragedies of W.W. II. Rommen's book is a poignant reminder of what the law should as opposed to the will of the ruler, the party, the Volks, etc. This book is based on the Catholic Scholastics and especially St. Thomas Aquinas'(1225-1275) thinking. Rommen included the later Scholastics such as Suarez c. 1545-1618). Readers are shown a reasonable and logical view of law vs. the will of the ruler(s).Rommen with Natural Law as an attempt to reflect what religious men and women consider as a reflection of God's Law. The thinking was that since God is the Creator and author of nature, Natural Law should be an attempt to reflect God's nature rather than assigning an arbitrary will to Divine mmen's book is clear that the two views re God's nature as opposed to God's arbitrary will are necessary in understanding the temptation to impose unbridled power of rulers which can lead to tyranny and evil. St. Thomas Aquinas' views are a prominent feature of the book. Rommen reminds readers that people should test to maintain a moral code that reflects God's nature. Rommen also with the opposing view that Original Sin means that men are depraved and can do nothing right to please God. Rommen uses St. Thomas Aquinas and the later Scholastics to counter this view. Basically, Rommen argues that Original Sin did not mean that men were depraved. He argued that men were not the best they could be, and the Natural Law not only protected people from criminals, but it also provided a useful tutorial for men to act justly and fairly with other men all of whom were made in God's ese debates started c. 1300s in the disputes between the Realists and Nominalists. The Nominalists are that concepts and ideas were merely names agreed upon for philosophical debate. The Realists argued that concepts and ideas were realities and were vital to an understanding of God, Natural Law, and a just moral code. As St. Thomas Aquinas stated, the law was intended to give each man his due. The Nomialist's arguements re the lack of validity trivialized serious philosophical discussion and deprived the views of God's nature. They emphasized God's will since concepts were mere names and could not lead to Natural Law. This was a very risky concept since men could not create moral decisions since God's will precluded men from acting a moral agents. The Nominalists also argued that whatever evil occured was the will of God. In other words they ascribed evil to God which St. Thomas Aquinas the Suarez stated was impossible with God's nature. The Nominalist implied predestination to men whose fate and salvation were already determined before men were born. In other words, as Rommen makes clear, men were incapable of making moral decisions and had to accept evil as God's plan. This arguement was then used to condone the evil tyranny of unjust rulers who appointed themselves as God's lieutenants on earth. The implied arguement, later accepted in Protestant cirles, was that criticism of an unjust ruler was an attack on God. Rommen presents St. Thomas Aquinas' view that an unjust law was no law at all and led men to sensilessly act in an evil way. Suarez went so far as to argue that an unjust tyrant could lawfully be deposed as such a ruler set a poor example and committed his topics to act in complience with mmen was not a phony idealist. He was clear that no ruler or political party could make heaven on earth. Rommen argued that Natural Law and an attempt to obtain men to act in accordance with God's nature was a reasonable concept of law which could prevent the excesses of tyranny and evil. Since rulers held power, they too were needed by law to act as best they could with God's nature which admitted no mentioned above, Rommen's book was written at the end of W.W. II and was a reminder of what men suffered from blindly listening to evil rulers and political parties. The usefullness of this book could be projected to later attempts at arbitrary power regardless of political labels. One should note that the National Socialists were much less successful in German elections in Catholic regions of Germany during the 1930s, and Hitler & co. (Stalin & co. as well)hated Pope Pius XII and Catholic leaders in their domains. They knew that a relience on a reasonable Natural Law undermined their own self imposed importance. Rommen is clear about this.While THE NATURAL LAW was translated from German into English, the prose is clear. This book is a amazing introduction to Scholasticism and legal reasoning. The book is also valuable for thoughtful men who can refute the appeals to tyranny with better ideas.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy (NONE) []  2020-5-6 18:12

    D.S.Heersink makes a common error commited by modern sophists; and that is of presuppossing the truth of a premise on the basis of the erroneous human authority of previous modern sophists. In this case the previous modern sophists are the empiricists David Hume and ore. This appeal to fallible human authority is not philosophy but ideology because philosophy proves its conclusions as opposed to presuming their truth based on fallible human authority. D.S presumes that Hume and Moore already decisively refuted the natural law theory(NLT). However, they have done nothing of the sort. Anyone educated in moral philosophy(ethics) as exposited by Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas knows the principles of ethics show in theoretical philosophy, specifically the scientific theory of human nature and the Aristotelian science of metaphysics as exposited by Aquinas and Aristotle. Aquinas derives moral goodness from human nature in the natural moral law; see his Summa Contra Gentiles Book III:129. This is a small known text that proves the existence of the natural moral law, not from the eternal law of God as in the Summa Theologiae but from human nature itself. In my course paper as a graduate student in philosophy I wrote on this topic and how it relates to the so-called "naturalistic fallacy" arguments versus the NLT. I discovered that ore and his empiricists/illogical positivists allies are instead the ones who commit a fallacy. They commit the fallacy of equivocation between between a true distinction and a logical(conceptual) distinction. Their fact/value distinction is a reflection of the logical(conceptual) distinction between being and goodness in general; however there is no true distinction between being and goodness in general. In reality being and goodness in general are the same and this is what allows Aquinas to derive moral goodness in the natural moral law from goodness in general as applied to the amazing and being of human nature. By means of the true identity but logical distinction beween the goodness and being of human nature, Aquinas is able to derive moral goodness from the perfections of human nature without violationg the logical distinction between the being of human nature and goodness in general( reflected in the fact/value distinction). Therefore in the ore/David Hume objections to the NLT they commit a fallacy of equivocation between the true distinction between fact and value, which is false and is opposed by Thomistic NLT, and a logical(conceptual) distinction between fact and value, which is real and is affirmed by Thomistic NLT. Thus NLT do not confuse facts and "values" and there is no such thing as a naturalistic fallacy. Instead, it is Moore and Hume and their like that commit the fallacy of equivocation between a true distinction and a logical distinction. Further, contrary to Heersink's comments this book by Rommen is an perfect study in the history of NLT detailing the ancient sophists, like their modern sophistic counterparts, who rejected the natural moral law to the corruption of NLT by classical liberalism as represented by John Locke and other philosophical revolutionaries of the 18th century(they used natural law as a prop for revolution,sedition and classical liberalism). Further D.S.Heersink is seriously ignorant when he comments that only the Catholic Church's moral theology embraces Thomistic natural law. First, Thomistic NLT as proven in Summa Contra Gentiles III:129 and as articulated in his Commentary on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics and Politics and certain strictly philosophical segments of the Summa Theologiae's Treatise on Law and Treatise on Justice and Treatise on Temperance; are essentially distinct from theology because their arguments are based on reason alone. Cicero and Aristotle held to an elementary ver of NLT and neither where theologians and both were pre-Christians. Aquinas frequently refers to both Cicero and Aristotle in his writings pertaining to NLT without using them as final authorities in his argumentation for the conclusions of NLT; unlike modern sophists who appeal to fallible human authority as their final word. Aquinas actually proves all the conclusions of NLT using reason alone; which Heerskink would know if he was not ignorant of the works of Aquinas. For example in the Summa Contra Gentiles Book III:122 Aquinas proves that every intentional frustration of the procreative amazing of human sexuality is intrinsically evil and he does the same in his disputed questions on moral evil question 15, article 3. Since every contraceptive act and every homosexual act is an intentional frustration of the procreative amazing of human sexuality, by aaa-I syllogism Aquinas proves by reason alone that every contraceptive act and every homosexual act is intrinsically evil. Therefore he lists contraception and homosexual behavior as species of the unnatural vice which violates the cardinal virtue of temperance. As far as abortion is concerned, while it is real that Aristotle erred on this particular problem it was not because of his NLT principles but despite them. Aquinas since he condemned contraception, necessarily condemned all abortion as intrinsically evil since every abortion is the intentional killing of the effect of human procreation irrespective of when human life begins. These conclusions of NLT are rooted in Aristotle's proven conclusions of ethics, especially his theory of the virtue of temperance and that of natural justice(which Aristole in his Ethics affirms is universal and transcends every civil law and every political society). Message in these arguments there is no reference to religious faith and Cicero, Aristotle, and also Aquinas(SCG III:129 and his strictly philosophical texts) exemplify the capacity of moral philosophers to affirm and articulate NLT without reference to religious faith. Further, the best defense of NLT is not Robert George. He is a token political conservative professor at Princeton University who affirms the "New Natural Law Theory" invented by Germain Grisez and promoted by John Finnis and Martin Rhonheimer. This theory, with absurd, ahistorical, and disastrous results, is the effect of an attempt to save NLT from the empiricists criticism by Hume and Moore, by conceding their objections to classical NLT and then constructing a NLT that is the product of Kantian ethics and its divorce of practical reason from theoretical reason with Thomistic NLT. This explicitly contradicts Aquinas' own proof of the natural moral law from the theoretical knowledge of human nature as presented in SCG III:129 and has disastrous results regarding the nature of human happiness as consisting in intellectual virtue. Further, the nonsense is the empiricism of David Hume in his Treatise Versus Human Nature and the illogical positivism of ore in his Principia Ethica both of which theories of knowledge are self-contradictory and therefore logically impossible. In fact any objection to NLT on the grounds that it presupposes the reality of human nature, while accurately representing NLT, is a false objection that presupposes the empiricists denial of nature, human nature, and especially the human intellect's knowledge of nature and human nature. Similarily all denials of nature, human nature, or human intellectual knowledge of these two are based on errors contrary to philosophical physics or to scientific epistemology(includes theory of knowledge). Like the ancient sophists who opposed NLT, these modern sophists begin with their erroneous theories of knowledge and fit everthing including their ethical theories into their erroneous theory of knowledge. Both are systematically and intentionally ignorant of the scientific exposition of philosophy provided by Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas. As a effect of their ignorance they commit heavy errors in their works including a fallacy of equivocation between a true distinction and a logical(conceptual) distinction in their very assertion that NLT commits their invented "naturalistic fallacy". Finally, the best words to end on are the words of Cicero, as quoted from Rommen's book. These words indicate how far classical NLT is from modern political sophistry, masquerading as philosophy, and from the modern political ideologies of classical and modern liberalism; all of which affirm some form of legal dictatorship known as legal positivism and which denies the very existence of a natural moral law. Cicero states that "true law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting; it summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions... We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people... one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times... Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature,and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst penalties, even if he escapes what is commonly considered punishment." pg. 21 footnote 12 of Heinrich A. Rommen. The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy. Wow!This was not stated by a "religious fundamentalist", a category invented by modernity, but by the non-Christian philosopher Cicero. Now what is real of individuals also pertains to the political society created up of individuals that violate the natural moral law and this is the modern state; the modern state is in violation of the natural moral law because of its promotion of contraception,abortion, sodomy, and pornograpy( the crimes of the modern state) and it will suffer the worst penalties, even if it escpaes what is commonly considered punishment. Unfortunately, my nation the United States of America with its U.S. constitution has been in violation of the natural moral law from its very beginning because of its classical liberalism and racist slavery and now because of the previously mentioned moral evils affirmed by modern liberalism. As far as what texts I recommend to anyone who wants to study ethics and political science. Begin with Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics and the Thomistic commentary on this strictly philosophical work. Next study the treatise that Aquinas has on happiness and the treatises on the cardinal virtues, and the treatise on law as presented in his Summa Theologiae. Finally study his commentary on Aristotle's Politics. A lot of of Aquinas' political writings are collected in an edition by Cambridge. Francis Vitoria is the best Thomistic commentator on matters of political science. Unfortunately, there is no single work that unites all these Thomistic texts into a complete scientific exposition of ethics nor into a complete sicientific exposition of political science. This is something that hopefully will be produced by me in the future. John F. Wippel's "The Metaphysical Thought of Thomas Aquinas" is an perfect historical work that starts this process in metaphysics.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy []  2020-6-14 20:9

    Outstanding review of the history of natural law and natural rights. By far the best I have read.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy []  2020-6-14 20:9

    Outstanding read on Natural Law that anticipates the loss of a solid rational for law in a post-modern world. As a teacher of Renaissance history and the Enlightenment, I found this work very helpful. The perspective of a European author that fled Nazi Germany actually is quite refreshing. If you are a student of the history of Natural Law this book is invaluable.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy []  2020-6-14 20:9

    Beautifully bound, hard-cover, built-in bookmark, like a collector's edition. The book is a classic in natural law.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy []  2020-6-14 20:9

    The book came quickly and in perfect condition. I havent used it for class yet.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy []  2020-6-14 20:9

    Natural Law Theory (NLT) was widely discredited by David Hume in his Treatise on Human Nature (1740) and by G. E. Moore in his Principia Ethica (1903), both well before this book was published in Germany during the rise of Nazism. For historical assessments, several texts do a much better job in presenting the historical rise through Stoicism and finally its demise in the Age of Enlightenment. Today, only the Roman Catholic Church, and specifically its Moral Theology, embraces Thomistic Natural Law as its bogus basis for prohibitions (contraception, abortion, homophilia). If a moral reason exists for these prohibitions, it is NOT from Natural Law Theory, it is NOT from the Moral Imperative of the Hurt Principle, and it is NOT from Aristotlean Ethics. The Church and those who appeal to Natural Law Theory commit the Fact/Value Fallacy, and the notion that god built a moral system on a fallacy should place this nonsense to e best defense of NLT is Robert George, whose apologetics are elegant as they are dogmatic.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy (NONE) []  2020-5-6 18:12

    Outstanding read on Natural Law that anticipates the loss of a solid rational for law in a post-modern world. As a teacher of Renaissance history and the Enlightenment, I found this work very helpful. The perspective of a European author that fled Nazi Germany actually is quite refreshing. If you are a student of the history of Natural Law this book is invaluable.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy (NONE) []  2020-5-6 18:12

    This book is a classic, first published in German in 1936 and translated into English and revised in 1947. Written by Heinrich A. Rommen, a refugee from Nazi Germany who taught at Georgetown University from 1953 to 1967, it is a unbelievable introduction to natural law. If you have any interest in natural law, this book is well-worth rt I concerns the "History and the Idea of Natural Law." Part II concerns "Philosophy and Content of the Natural Law." These sections (in a brief 237 pages) will tutorial you through the legacy of Greece and Rome, the Age of Scholasticism, Hugo Grotius, through the Enlightenment to our time. We pass through "The Win of Positivism" to "The Reappearance of Natural Law."I persevered to the end, even though it is very challenging. It helps, I would suppose, if you have some background in philosophy and law, but is still readable if you don't. (My son Matthew recommended it to me and without that background also continued on to the end, recognizing the value of Rommen's work.)The book is nicely divided into sections, chapters, and sub-sections within the chapters that create it clear where you are headed, which to me with small knowledge of natural law was very helpful. When I became saturated by the text, it wasn't long before there was a natural break where I could pause to reflect before continuing eat yourself to some serious reflection grounded in the Western tradition, and I think you will come away with an appreciation of the value of natural law for our own time.**This quote is from Etienne Gilson, "The Unity of Philosophical Experience."

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy (NONE) []  2020-5-6 18:12

    The book came quickly and in perfect condition. I havent used it for class yet.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy []  2020-6-14 20:9

    Comprehensive discussion of the natural law and its philosophical foundations.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Jurisprudence Cases and Materials: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Law and Its Applications []  2020-1-27 0:41

    Amazing !

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Jurisprudence Cases and Materials: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Law and Its Applications []  2020-1-27 0:41

    πŸ‘

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Philosophy: History and Readings []  2020-1-29 1:4

    Okay this was for my class and it came in amazing condition

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Philosophy: History and Readings []  2020-1-29 1:4

    College book, exactly as described.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Philosophy: History and Readings []  2020-1-29 1:4

    This book lays out the history of philosophy in an engaging narrative and even contains sections of major works in the latter half. Enjoyed reading it for a class on the same subject. The rental book I was given was in beautiful poor shape though so be aware of that if you decide to rent it.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Philosophy: History and Readings []  2020-1-29 1:4

    Very pleased

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Philosophy: History and Readings []  2020-1-29 1:4

    Succinct and readable explanations of the most significant locations of political philosophy. Provides extra and convenient references for more serious investigation.

    0  


  • 0

    Useful review?

    Philosophy: History and Readings []  2020-1-29 1:4

    There was A LOT of writing in this book, I got it used, but man..... who on earth thought writing in the entire book was better than just getting a seperate piece of paper. Sheesh

    0  



    Search Cloud

    About us

    Use our product reviews finder and generate tons of ratings & opinions on any item, shop product or service. Search, read and publish reviews for brands, TV shows, ebooks, gadgets, video games, meals, music, household items or movies. Would you like to rate recently purchased thing? Go ahead! Express satisfaction or sadness, describe own experience & identify strengths and weaknesses of the product. Write short or detailed review with a few clicks.

    Community

    Publish review of any item you find here, registration is not required
    Share own experience, point out the pros and cons, warn or recommend
    Search for opinions on any item, product or service, read tons of reviews

    Contact

    www.add-reviews.com

    Use contact form to reach us or write a message via email:

    [email protected]

    Describe your problem, share ideas or report a bug on the site.

    https://add-reviews.com/
    0856-458-386