Read routledge handbook of development ethics reviews, rating & opinions:
Check all routledge handbook of development ethics reviews below or publish your opinion.100 Reviews Found
Sort by: Most Accurate (default) | Newest | Top Rated
Required this textbook for one of my classes and when I first got it, I bemoaned over how massive it was. However, it's really simple to read and has a lot of amazing information. I'm not planning on going into land development but this really explained everything from feasibility/programming to website ysis to conceptual design to entitlements and permitting, etc. Very amazing resource!
30+ chapters written by separate people and edited by no one. Repetitive topic matter. Also insconsistent use of terms. There is amazing information in some areas, but buried in lots of other verbiage. Everything from very useful like remediating contminated soil to the extremely obvious such as have enough chairs in public meetings. For next edition, invest in an editor.
This small book was interesting to read. I saw it at a friend's home but couldn't borrow it, so I was satisfied to search my own e cover and title are misleading. A PRIMER OF ETHICS is not an "early American handbook" if, by that term, you assume it is of colonial vintage - and George Washington has nothing to do with it except for looking out from the cover. The book is a reprint of an 1890 (a long time after Washington!) one by B. B. Comegys, based on an earlier work, "The Rollo Code of Morals," by Jacob Abbott. Mr. Comegys' book was written in such a method that teachers and parents could use it to support their kids learn amazing patterns of thought and behavior. It bears a resemblance to stories in the old McGuffey Readers (which are also nineteenth-century).That said, I did search it interesting. The basic, universal principles of truly ethical behavior are stated and explained in easy terms that even you and I can understood, whether you and I like the principles or not. There's a lot of amazing meal for thought here.
Sorry John Lennon, your “Imagine” song imagining a globe without religion is countered very well by this book. Christianity and Judaism is the best blueprint for a just, peaceful and wisdom filled society. This short gem of a book should be read by everybody. Imagine how better the globe would be!!! I love how this book is clearly divided into necessary subjects and explained with concise language. Parent to kid this is a excellent guide.
The concept was amazing and basically the info was pertinent to today, but some of the "ethics" portrayed are less than ethical and could be used by a amazing narcissist to control weak minded people who have small or no moral foundation. For those who have a bond with God and the precepts provided in the Book of Proverbs and John, this is a amazing book to enhance their understanding of life in general.
Please, do not buythis book from this seller. The printing quality is horrible!!! I ordered the fresh book via ”cinderella mendi.” I requested the replacement & the replaced book has the horrible printing quality as well. I marked on the first few pages, so I did not return it; however, I had to buy the book again through Kindle edition. I recommend the Kindle edition or another electronic ver rather thank the actual printed version.
Seller shipped promptly. Packaged arrived like stated. Amazing book for anyone interested in Residential Development. Even if you are a seasoned professional or have been in residential forever like myself you can never know everything. Picking one thing up from a book could be an additional million or a whole fresh business.
Russell's book was first published in 1925; later editors have created some changes to accommodate more latest development in Relativity theory, but Russell's illustrations and text remain as illuminating as they always were.He points out, "A certain type of superior person is fond of asserting that 'everything is relative.' This is, of course, nonsense, because, if EVERYTHING were relative, there would be nothing for it to be relative to. However, without falling into metaphysical absurdities it is possible to maintain that everything in the physical globe is relative to an observer. This view... has led philosophers and uneducated people into confusions. They imagine that the fresh theory proves EVERYTHING in the physical globe to be relative, whereas, on the contrary, it is wholly concerned to exclude what is relative and arrive at a statement of physical laws that shall in no method depend upon the cirtances of the observer." (Pg. 16)He observes, "Physics must... be concerned with those features which a physical process has in common for all observers... This requires that the LAWS of phenomena should be the same whether the phenomena are described as they appear to one observer or as they appear to another. This single principle is the generating motive of the whole theory of relativity." (Pg. 23)He explains, "When people said that zone had three dimensions, that meant... that three quantities were important in order to specify the position of a point in space, but that the way of assigning these quantities was wholly arbitrary. With regard to time, the matter was thought to be quite different... it was thought that the way of fixing position in zone and the way of fixing position in time could be created wholly independent of each other... The theory of relativity has changed this. There are now a number of various ways of fixing position in time, which do not differ merely as to the unit and the starting-point... the zone and time reckonings are no longer independent of each other." (Pg. 42)He observes, "In the general theory of relativity, it is only neighbouring happenings that have a definite interval, independent of the route by which we travel from one to the other... The interval between neighbouring events, with it is time-like, will appear as the time between them for an observer who travels from the one happening to the other... For some routes this time will be longer, for others shorter; the more slowly the man travels, the longer he will think he has been on the journey... I am not saying that if you travel from London to Edinburgh you will take longer if you travel more slowly. I am saying something much more odd. I am saying that if you leave London at 10 a.m. and arrive in Edinburgh at 6:30 p.m.... the more slowly you travel the longer it will take---if the time is judged by your watch... But if you had been a ray of light travelling round the solar system, starting from London at 10 a.m. ... until at latest you were reflected back to Edinburgh and arrived there at 6:30 p.m., you would judge that the journey had taken you exactly no time... the diminution of time would be continual as your speed approached that of light." (Pg. 78-79)He says about Einstein's theory of gravity, "The most interesting point about it is that it makes the law no longer the effect of action at a distance; the sun exerts no force on the planets whatever... The law of gravitation has become the geometrical law that every body pursues the easiest course from put to place, but this course is affected by the hills and valleys that are encountered on the road." (Pg. 81-82) Later, he adds, "The planets move round the sun because that is the easiest thing to do... It is the easiest thing to do because of the nature of the region in which they are, not because of an influence emanating from the sun." (Pg. 124)This (along with Einstein's own Relativity: The Unique and the General Theory), is one of the most helpful explanations of Relativity to us "non-scientists."
Foucault's Archeology of Knowledge builds the foundation of Foucault's work. Not an simple read but in my opinion essential in understanding the broader purpose of Foucault's earlier and later works. The work itself stands alone as an original approach to flushing out Truth and power relations. It draws heavily on others work (Nietzsche) but still is very special (hence a lot of critics/scholars difficulty in attempts at categorizing Foucault).
Russell's book was first published in 1925; later editors have created some changes to accommodate more latest development in Relativity theory, but Russell's illustrations and text remain as illuminating as they always were.He points out, "A certain type of superior person is fond of asserting that 'everything is relative.' This is, of course, nonsense, because, if EVERYTHING were relative, there would be nothing for it to be relative to. However, without falling into metaphysical absurdities it is possible to maintain that everything in the physical globe is relative to an observer. This view... has led philosophers and uneducated people into confusions. They imagine that the fresh theory proves EVERYTHING in the physical globe to be relative, whereas, on the contrary, it is wholly concerned to exclude what is relative and arrive at a statement of physical laws that shall in no method depend upon the cirtances of the observer." (Pg. 16)He observes, "Physics must... be concerned with those features which a physical process has in common for all observers... This requires that the LAWS of phenomena should be the same whether the phenomena are described as they appear to one observer or as they appear to another. This single principle is the generating motive of the whole theory of relativity." (Pg. 23)He explains, "When people said that zone had three dimensions, that meant... that three quantities were important in order to specify the position of a point in space, but that the way of assigning these quantities was wholly arbitrary. With regard to time, the matter was thought to be quite different... it was thought that the way of fixing position in zone and the way of fixing position in time could be created wholly independent of each other... The theory of relativity has changed this. There are now a number of various ways of fixing position in time, which do not differ merely as to the unit and the starting-point... the zone and time reckonings are no longer independent of each other." (Pg. 42)He observes, "In the general theory of relativity, it is only neighbouring happenings that have a definite interval, independent of the route by which we travel from one to the other... The interval between neighbouring events, with it is time-like, will appear as the time between them for an observer who travels from the one happening to the other... For some routes this time will be longer, for others shorter; the more slowly the man travels, the longer he will think he has been on the journey... I am not saying that if you travel from London to Edinburgh you will take longer if you travel more slowly. I am saying something much more odd. I am saying that if you leave London at 10 a.m. and arrive in Edinburgh at 6:30 p.m.... the more slowly you travel the longer it will take---if the time is judged by your watch... But if you had been a ray of light travelling round the solar system, starting from London at 10 a.m. ... until at latest you were reflected back to Edinburgh and arrived there at 6:30 p.m., you would judge that the journey had taken you exactly no time... the diminution of time would be continual as your speed approached that of light." (Pg. 78-79)He says about Einstein's theory of gravity, "The most interesting point about it is that it makes the law no longer the effect of action at a distance; the sun exerts no force on the planets whatever... The law of gravitation has become the geometrical law that every body pursues the easiest course from put to place, but this course is affected by the hills and valleys that are encountered on the road." (Pg. 81-82) Later, he adds, "The planets move round the sun because that is the easiest thing to do... It is the easiest thing to do because of the nature of the region in which they are, not because of an influence emanating from the sun." (Pg. 124)This (along with Einstein's own Relativity: The Unique and the General Theory), is one of the most helpful explanations of Relativity to us "non-scientists."
My sympathies to anyone who has to read this. This was something I had attempted to read on recommendation of a professor. Later on in my graduate studies I had to read it. It is a needed reading for anyone studying rhetoric. If you can obtain through it, you are destined for greatness. It is reading that requires intense concentration and no interruptions!
Foucault’s Archaeology of Knowledge does not deserve its reputation for being so difficult that it is not even worth reading. Once one grasps Foucault’s project the text follows rather easily. I personally read it in two days with my nine year old’s television shows as background noise. It can be e key to understanding the text is to realize that Foucault could have called this book the Archaeology of Archaeology. Foucault has a distinctive way of tracing the undergirding of disciplines which he refers to as discourses. His earlier books examined these discourses by archaelogies of madness, medicine, what became the science of biology and other subjects. Now Foucault wants to, borrowing an overused term, perform a meta-ysis of what he is doing when he performs an archaeology. In other words what is a discourse, what are the rules governing its evolution and in what sense there is no evolution but disruption. A discourse about discourses.I will not test to summarize Foucault’s acc of the nature of discourses but only point out some of its features. Foucault is not interested in the conscious history of ideas but in the unconscious rules governing the discourse. A topic does not consist in truths waiting to be discovered. Any such “truths” are inseparable from the discourse that governs what can and cannot be broached, the criteria by which “truth” is determined, ucault goes so far as to deny the commonly held idea that the globe and its contents are fundamentally rational. I cannot follow him here but I can appreciate the brilliance with which it is articulated.If you wish to understand post-modernism and already have some understanding of Foucault’s archaeologies then read this book. For better or for worse, post-modernism is part of the contemporary academic landscape and it’s better to gain an understanding of it from Foucault than from shrill undergraduate protests. Ingenious, illuminating, delightful but ultimately pernicious. At least that is my opinion. Read it for yourself if you wish to conclude otherwise.
Bertrand Russel was an perfect writer, and one of the few philosophers who truly understood relativity. This book is also a classic. However, the book attempts to explain relativity to the layman using "text" only. The book is not mathematical, and it includes very few graphs or diagrams. This is not the best approach to explaining relativity. Amazing graphs/diagrams/images can to a certain extent replace equations. There are a lot of modern introductory books and multimedia presentations that does a better at job at introducing relativity.I recommend this book as a "classic", but not as an introduction to relativity for the non-physicist.
I think this book can justifiably be called ABZ of relativity. The author sincerely tries to tell us about relativity by building up from primary elements, but at the point it gets to the items that is supposed be really interesting, it becomes unintelligible for the less gifted. He gives three pages to tell us about the difference between mass and weight, but the central concept of "interval" is used for some pages before being poorly defined and explained. I am positively sure he understands relativity and all, and I am sure those definitions are correct in the strictest sense, however they didn't support a beginner, at least in this case. Having said this though, this book is still a very nice read and could be read even if only for its strange humor and wisecracks.
A latest national survey has shown that only six percent of ly variant individuals in this country prefer the term "queer." A lot of loath it. Yet the editor offers only a perfunctory defense. There is much coverage of neologisms like intersectionality and transnationalism. And yet the actual begin of the American movement in Chicago in 1924-25 is not discussed. A lot of other significant contributions, such as the Encyclopedia of Homoity of 1989, are missing. Not recommended.
TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF LAW - AN ACCESSIBLE, FOCUSED ANDTHOUGHT-PROVOKING STUDYCONTAINING BRAND NEW MATERIALAn appreciation by Phillip Taylor MBE and Elizabeth Taylor of Richmond Green ChambersThere are 14 titles in the much acclaimed `Routledge Philosophy Companions' series, and `The Routledge Companion to Philosophy Of Law' is the latest. Certainly this is the title that will confer maximum interest and benefit to students of law and for that matter, experienced practitioners as well.Under the able editorship of Professor Andrei Marmor of the University of Southern California, the book presents a compendium of leaned articles and essays by no less than 39 academics from a who's who of distinguished universities worldwide, from, for example, the University of California at Berkeley, to Oxford and e aim of the book is to provide, in our opinion, thoughtful, scholarly, precisely ytical, yet clearly expressed examinations of an amazingly wide range of jurisprudential problems which lie within the purview of `philosophy of law'. The publishers assure us that the content is entirely fresh and written specifically for newcomers to the field. For undergraduate and graduate students in law and/or similar fields, this book is a e essays are grouped logically under six categories which include: Theories about the Nature of Law... Legal Reasoning... Theories of Legal Areas... Law as a Coercive Order... Moral Obligations to Law... and Rights and Equality.Under the latter heading there is much thought provoking commentary on some very topical problems relating to freedom of speech, including equality, rights and privacy.`Is graphy speech?' is one of the questions asked, or is it an act? Part II on Legal Reasoning is also noteworthy, as is Part III --Theories of Legal Locations -- which contains articles on criminal law, contract, torts, property, family, evidence, international law and environmental Marmor points out in the Preface, the essays are introductory in nature and while they don't assume that the reader will have any prior knowledge of this field, they do `try to advance the ball.' `As readers will come to realize,' he continues, `philosophy of law is very close entangled with other philosophical areas, in particular, moral and political philosophy' and so forth.If you are a law student studying jurisprudence this book will both expand and clarify any number of problems for you while enhancing your understanding of the topic matter, which is often considered abstruse. Even for the non-philosophers among us, the book includes much meal for r your further enquiry and research, there are extensive bibliographical references and suggestions for further reading, as well as a detailed index at the back for ease of use. The publication date is 2012.
30+ chapters written by separate people and edited by no one. Repetitive topic matter. Also insconsistent use of terms. There is amazing information in some areas, but buried in lots of other verbiage. Everything from very useful like remediating contminated soil to the extremely obvious such as have enough chairs in public meetings. For next edition, invest in an editor.
Required this textbook for one of my classes and when I first got it, I bemoaned over how massive it was. However, it's really simple to read and has a lot of amazing information. I'm not planning on going into land development but this really explained everything from feasibility/programming to website ysis to conceptual design to entitlements and permitting, etc. Very amazing resource!
‘The Ethics of Ambiguity’ is one of the three authoritative philosophical short texts on existentialism, ‘The Myth of Sisyphus’ and ‘Existentialism is a Humanism’ are the other two. The ambiguity that Simone De Beauvoir discusses in this book is related to the ambiguity that Sartre and Camus talk about; the ambiguity at the root of existentialism. In ‘The Myth of Sisyphus,’ Camus begins with the encounter with absurd, the encounter at the root of realization that the self cannot be reconciled with the universe. His argument on existentialism starts with a question on suicide and builds to explain the absurd, which once realized, he argues, should not be a source of anguish but bliss. In ‘Existentialism is a Humanism,” Sartre begins with the premise that ‘existence precedes essence’ and goes on to build an argument on why existentialism is the only doctrine that is humanistic. Within this argument, Sartre clarifies why existentialism is not individualistic but a philosophy that focuses on the greater amazing of the collective human race. In ‘The Ethics of Ambiguity,’ Beauvoir begins with the realization of ambiguity of existence around human condition, explores how childhood nurture contributes to this condition, investigates how freedom should be asserted in the face of this ambiguity (through a hierarchy of men based on how they react to the ambiguity) and concludes why existentialism is not individualistic but humanistic.“The continuous work of our life,” says Montaigne, “is to build death.” “Man knows and thinks this tragic ambivalence which the animal and the plant merely undergo,” Beauvoir argues, as she introduces ambiguity of human condition. The ambiguity is related to Camus’ absurd – a realization that there is no universal meaning to human existence or action. Beauvoir goes on to investigate the source for humans’ belief in the universal nature of their actions. “Man’s unhappiness, says Descartes, is due to his having first been a child,” she quotes and explains how we as humans feel happily irresponsible as children, feel protected versus the risk of existence but how the same satisfied ignorance makes us a prisoners of error in our adulthood. In other words, she argues that sooner or later every man realizes that the childhood he grew up with was a globe made for him by his parents or adults and that in reality he is not bound to any universality of rules or ethics. He is free, free to will his own world, chart his own rules, yet he can only do that on the basis of what he has been – a child. “The kid does not include the man he will become, yet it is always on the basis of what he has been that a man decides upon what he wants to be,” she says. This freedom although should be liberating, ends up becoming a disturbing realization, one that lifts the veil of finite ceiling over man’s head and leaves him abandoned in the infinite world. In this abandoned anxiety, despite realizing his freedom, man tends to gravitate towards enslaving himself in the childhood condition instead of living freely. Beauvoir classifies this man into a hierarchy in order to build an argument to explain the real nature of existentialist e lowest man in the hierarchy is called a sub-man - a blind uncontrolled force that anyone can obtain control of. “The sub-man makes his method across a globe deprived of meaning towards a death which merely confirms his long negation of himself,” she says. The attitude of sub-man passes over to the next class in hierarchy, what she calls the serious-man. While sub-man lives in a perpetual anxiety, the serious-man renounces his freedom to a cause. The serious man claim the absolute and ceaseless denies his freedom, “like the mythomaniac who while reading a love-letter pretends to forget that he has sent it to himself. He is no longer a man but a father, a boss, a member of a Christian Church or the Communist party. The serious man wills himself to be the God but he is not one and he knows it.” The attitude of serious-man transcends into the next category - the nihilist. The nihilist, unlike serious-man, under the burden of his freedom decides to be nothing, denies the world, himself and focuses on annihilation of the world. A nihilist who realizes the universal and absolute end which freedom is, further rises up in the hierarchy to become an adventurer. Adventures, she describes is an attitude closest to a genuinely moral attitude – an indifferent and disinterested encounter with the globe that defines the real existentialist freedom. The adventures is perhaps Sisyphus – the man who is ceaseless rolling a stone to the top of the mountain, not in revolt but in lucid e same adventures though, she says also carries the seed of destruction and favorable cirtances are enough to transform an adventures into a dictator. However, she argues that if an adventurer turns into a dictator, he fails to assert his freedom and becomes a slave of tyranny, thereby inadvertently denies his own freedom. “Passion is converted into genuine freedom only if one destines his existence to other existences through the being – whether thing or man – at which he aims, without hoping to entrap it in the destiny of the in-itself,” she says and goes on arguing with elaborate detail on why the only method existentialism can exist, the only method a freedom can be asserted is by asserting it not for one but for all mankind. “A freedom which is occupied in denying freedom is itself so outrageous that the outrageousness of the violence which one practices versus it is almost canceled out.” From explaining the ambiguity of existence, to its reason and reaction, Beauvoir ends with the argument that all this makes existentialism a philosophy that is not individualistic but a philosophy for the collective good, in other words, the ethics of ambiguity – the argument also at the center of Sartre’s ‘Existentialism is a Humanism.’All in all, the book touches on the core principles of existentialism, tackles the absurdity of existence from a fresh direction, and gives the reader a novel perspective on the same principles. For anyone interested in understanding this field of philosophy, Beauvoir’s short but authoritative text should be a must in the reading list.
This mini-tome is a sleep inducing impractical joke on the reader, as well as the lovers the author was trying to simultaneously impress and e only ambiguity is whether this is self-parody or Sartre-parody-in-and-of-itself or e lazy-hazy-glory days of existentialism must have been incredible: feigning deep involvement with the resistance, joining the communist party, hanging out in cafes thousands of miles from the Gulags and alternately denying and rationalizing Soviet atrocities, and confronting your freedom by turning someone else’s two derivative ideas into 200 pages of comically pretentious snooze. If only convoluted repetition without attribution could create ideas one’s own!
Exactly what one thinks should be in the Code. Was very helpful for me as a patient, to obtain to know my rights and patient rights as a whole and the ethical responsibilities of treating physicians. I recommend it to all healthcare specialists as well as to patients who are in need of empowering patient advocacy.
A must read for any libertarian, AnCap, or fan of Rothbard. I would recommend Rothbard in general but the libs and cons aren't very tolerant of ideas that expose their moral inconsistency, lack of understanding of economics and history, and incapability to remain skeptical of what they think they think they know.
Useful review?
The book is detailed and covers all the locations I need for my research on immigrants.
0
Useful review?
This is a collection of chapters that summarize the current state of knowledge of teaching and learning a psychologist, I loved the nerd-out satisfaction of studying how golf is studied. As a 7 handicapper, I loved that most chapters conclude with practical tip on fitness, learning, mental aspects, etc. You have to work a bit for it, but I trust recommendations that are tied to science, rather than just someone's e collection is organized into meaningful sections and you can jump around to chapters that sound most interesting. I read it cover to cover, but that's just how I y complaint is that it while the content is consistently amazing across the chapters, a lot of chapters required a stronger proof/edit.
0
Useful review?
This is a must have for those who want to seek knowledge about restorative justice. The work is a must have for those who are looking for material which may be cited. I highly recommend this to everyone.
0
Add your opinion on routledge handbook of development ethics or scroll down to read more reviews ↓