the conceptual foundations of transitional justice Reviews & Opinions
Submit the conceptual foundations of transitional justice review or read customer reviews:
100 Reviews Found
Watch the conceptual foundations of transitional justice video reviews and related movies:
See Symposium on "The Conceptual Foundations of Transitional Justice" on youtube.
See Breaking Down Transitional Justice on youtube.
See David Tolbert | Transitional Justice in the 21st Century: Current Developments and Challenges on youtube.
See Kevin Heller - Transitional justice and the role of amnesties. on youtube.
See The limits of punishment: Transitional justice and violent extremism on youtube.
See Michael Reed-Hurtado: Transitional Justice in Colombia on youtube.
See U.S. Foreign Policy on Transitional Justice on youtube.
See Grassroots Justice: Sierra Leone on youtube.
Scroll down to see all opinions ↓
The emerging social science is a major paradigm shift from that of the failed retributive justice model. This is written by one of the pioneers in the field.
The book presents a timely examination of public transportation systems that deprive a huge segment of the urban minority population equal access to service. The author has chosen a history, primarily through incarnations of bus and rail transportation, in Oakland, San Francisco and neighboring East Bay communities. Over time, the public has endured radical shifts in ownership and management of public transit. The writing style - rigorous in research to satisfy academics, urban planners and those in similar fields, is also lively, engaging and approachable for others. Readers, unfamiliar with historical concepts in philosophy as well as contemporary theorists and organizations who support to shape current policy, will be well rewarded by a easy online search. Most transit systems are currently run by public entities. Their ability to sustain adequate service rise and fall with the state of the economy. They are heavily reliant on Federal subsidies that evaporate as political power in Washington swings from Left to Right as well as impact from local elections. The book covers a wide range of specific instances revealing the disparity in overall service, expenditures for transportation favoring a smaller number of white users of public bus and rail systems, compared to the larger number of minority riders. Funding statistics are included as well as quotes by those who justify bias toward white ridership as it meshes with the desire for locations to remain beautiful to development. This prejudice is embedded in Federally mandated Codes followed by the Multi-County Bay Zone Planning Commission. In the first chapter, a class action suit, challenging obvious racial discrimination, in the end, provides no refuge to mitigate this discrimination but confirms in summery opinion - this is a condition of the past, distribution of transportation assets are “color blind”. This opinion is far removed from reality just as the latest Supreme Court ruling to overturn the Voting Rights Act of 1964 - laws in put to counter voting rights abuses - are no longer needed! Republican controlled legislatures across the country jumped at the opportunity to enact legislation curtailing access to minority voters. The author does provide examples of coalitions of riders, grass roots organizations working together, that have had some success in the Courts reshaping policies to address underlying discrimination. Also noted is the inability to sustain these groups over decades to represent those most in need. Often there is inadequate funding, timing to gather help for organized opposition, a voice to advocate for equal access to public transportation are subjected to declining service. A brief history from early 20th century to the show provides extra background - transit workers forced to strike to get wage increases, shorter hours and better working conditions. Unions often overreach as they gain considerable power. Unlike Europe, with early adoption and development of a sophisticated system of mass transit, the U.S. is built on a “car culture” with the greatest infrastructure expenditures on streets and highways, reconfigured as needed, clogging our cities with a dramatic increase air pollution. The inner town black and brown minority populations are less likely to own a vehicle and must rely on public transportation essential for access to jobs, schools and primary necessities to live. The arc of the research covered in the book is relevant in another zone as it underscores current major inner town true estate developments. Hudson Yards, on Manhattans West Side in Fresh York City, is a excellent example. A center piece of gleaming sky scrapers, office space, amenities for high end users and condominiums for the wealthy. Over 2 billon dollars alone was spent just to extend subway service to the area. This project provides small if any tangible benefit to the huge urban minority population living to the north in the Borough. Overly generous tax abatements that attract these developments further reduce municipal funds to address other needs. The book examines bus services provided directly by tech companies to transport workers who prefer living in San Francisco to jobs in Silicon Valley. This ever growing workforce is depleting affordable housing. Landlords, praying on low income renters who can’t afford legal counsel, effect in “forced evictions”. The thorough research into the history of Bay Zone transit may very well exemplify what is likely being played out, in some form, in locations nation wide. The overarching thesis here to consider - a “right to transportation” and “ right the city” as an inalienable right - would be undeniable if our currently polarized society was capable of embracing them. Continual incendiary statements by our politicians and within the media have flushed out those with hate in their hearts. Words turn into actions that align with darker periods in our history as a nation.
DC playing bait-and-switch again... the “art” in this problem isn’t done by Manipul, but split between two other artists, with several pages looking genuinely terrible. Why DC can’t complete even a little project 4-issue with an A-list artist remains perplexing, but also very typical these days.
I really love Transit and use it daily. Its usually more accurate than my transit authority's own app, since it incorporates crowd sourced data. My 4 stars is because the time it tells me I need to leave is always too late! If I leave when it says I will have to leave in 1 minute, I have to run the whole method to the bus stop! If I leave when it says to, I will nearly always miss the bus. I want I could add a custom buffer for wait time - add an additional two or three minutes.
I love the accessibility and flow of the app. I mostly want that you had an option to "repeat notifications". For example, in my clock application I can choose what days of the week my alarm will go off at 6am. I want that you could choose to repeat reminders on certain days of the week for certain bus times. Every M, W, F I have classes and I need to create sure I arrive by 8am. I want that on transit I could specify that I wish a push notification every M, W, F that my bus is arriving.
Time estimates lately have been really wrong, specifically for leaving work. It used to be accurate but now not only is it inaccurate, it displays a various estimate (also wrong) if you click on the bus. The tracking aspect seems to still work, so it isn't completely useless, and I can see where the next couple buses are and create my own estimate. Interface is still second to none.
I love the interface and info for local modes of transit. The application fails when you test to actually take it's tip and GO on a trip. The instructions completely cover the map so you have to begin Google maps on how to arrive. The estimated walking times must be for basketball players cause ofyen times I have to jog to obtain to the train and barely create it. Has alot of potential.
Huge simple to read UI and a amazing workflow! Automatically shows the nearest stops/stations and fast shortcut to obtain to most likely destination. Unfortunately, the GO functionality is bugged. GO trips never realize you've gotten to the final destination, thus running in the background forever until you stop it. I reported it a while ago and the error still persists, which has dropped my usage of GO down (and GO works best when more people are using it).
Amazing application that works fairly well, minus a few bugs like force closing and freezing. But my BIGGEST problem is the fact that a amazing amount of bus schedules are completely wrong. At first I thought it was human error by bus driver, but at this point I just think that some of the times are just horribly inaccurate.
A formerly perfect application now fiddled into uselessness. The main purpose of this application is to respond thr question, "When is my bus coming?" It used to do this fine, showing my location, all nearby bus stops, and associated bus arrival times. Now, instead, we obtain an intrusive and useless "trip planner" which also obscures most of the map. Where are the bus stops? WHO KNOWS! When is the bus coming? Cant tell you until you enter your trip!
I really appreciate the Application but I'm not liking it since you updated it. I need to be able to access Bus info for both directions on a Bus Route. I could do that very easily before the update. Now it's practically impossible to obtain the opposite direction. It gives me westbound and I can't access eastbound. please help!!
When you need to know where the bus is, this Application does the job 100% accurate. Makes life easy. modernize on the 10/01/19 review, for some unfortunate reason the accuracy of the bus timing has drastically dropped. and instead of getting home on time in this winter, I obtain to spend most of my commute at bus station waiting for the Bus Trasit application shows to arrive in 1 minute. I tried contacting Transit application squad but only got a automated email. I guess Transit was too amazing to be true.
Beware of the widget. Application works amazing but widget does not sync correctly for some reason. I've encountered differences of 15 minutes, and trust me, when its cold... The update/refresh option at the top of the widget does nothing. The only real method to modernize the widget is to double tap on the desired bus line which launches you into the application thus not needing the widget. Widgets are meant for ease of user interface, this one just makes you wait out in the cold unnecessarily.
Love it but its somewhat unreliable and crashes alot like 2 3 times a day and i dont use it that much. Edit: 01/20/2019 this application is alot better than before! Isn't my everyday driver.... yet. Intelligent move on the riders helped ranking system! Really amazing job guys. Thanks.
If you do not stop placing the wrong people to bug this cell phone I am not residing in Vegas any longer. Already to leave not Vegas but California test Catalina island. Could you go rock climbing mountains not in this rainy yucky weather
I've been using this application since it launched, and it has never failed me. But for the past few months or so it has become borderline useless. Times are often incorrect (or not updating quickly enough), and the real-time bus tracking icons have become non-existent. I'm not sure if it's an influx of users, or just not good updates, but I can't stand out in the cold any longer. 3 Stars because it did serve its purpose once upon a time. Seriously, what happened to the tracking icons in Halifax?
will present 3-4 times for one bus to come within an hour but only 1 or 2 will come. there's no method to know if the bus is packed and will not pick u up. sometimes the bus will disappear from the map. will not present or alert when a bus comes early or late. just gives inaccurate info. waste of storage zone
I got up at 7:30 and checked my bus and this application said it would come at 8:12. I obtain ready and check again at 8 and now its changed to 8:17. Fine, i can wait a few more minutes. I leave at 8:10 to take my time walking and when I round the corner what did I see? The bus leaving. Without me. What time was it? 8:12. I went back to the application and it had the absolute nerve to change back to 8:12. I could feel the developers smirking at me as through the phone. Mean! Not even the first time :(
Used to be amazing but now it gets the times wrong for bus arrivals. Too a lot of times I leave thinking the bus is 2 mins but when I scan its more than 15 minute away Edit: now it takes ages to modernize the correct times. Think that C Train is only 12 minute away? Nooooooo the times will change and its 25 minutes. Think you taking that bus? No you aren't. cause there is no bus for 12 minutes!
up untill the latest modernize this application is amazing . how come the application doesnt present Hamilton Road Railway anymore ? living in hamilton this application is kinda useless now .. please fix this !!! and please bring back bus areas on the map. you used to be able to see them in true time !
The time it shows the bus will be at the stop is always incorrect. It showed it would be at the stop in 17 minutes. Went out, waited 20 minutes, checked my phone again and it said 30 minutes. It did finally present up but according to the application it still had 13 more mins before it claimed it would be there. Application clearly needs work done to create it actually accurate. Maybe a method we can track exactly where the bus is at all times so it isn't a guessing android game as to whether or not the bus will be there.
I've used this application for a while now and search it exceptional however today, for the first time I noticed the times for the #792 bus service going to Cranbourne Station is incorrect. PTV updated this timetable 1st July 2018. Hope this info is helpful.
The point of the book is to introduce some beautiful primary jurisprudence/moral philosophy, and the idea that common social problems should be argued with morals and ethics--in fact, they can't be excluded from discussions. If you're not familiar with a lot of the primary philosophical theories that are referenced in socio-political discussions (Kant, Utilitarianism, Aristotle, etc.), the book will be helpful.I found that Sandel repeats himself frequently, and uses a lot of short stories to explain a concept. It felt more circular and kind of energy-draining to test and search out the point he was trying to make. Additionally, he doesn't go into any true depth with the theories, just mentions a few primary points and then goes right into another hypothetical.
ScienceThrillers Review: I never took Sandel’s popular core curriculum course while I was at Harvard, but a lot of undergraduates did. There was something unique about that class: people talked about it, and kept talking about it. Sandel was accomplishing what all educators want they could. He was lighting a , years later, Professor Sandel has written a book based on the content of that course which has now become popular beyond the ivy walls. Which means I had a second possibility to be his student. (Or third chance, if you consider I rejected the idea of enrolling in the online edX ver of Justice as too onerous.)No one would describe Justice as a beach read, but I did read it on vacation, an advantage that allowed me to focus more fully and not abandon the book for too-long intervals. It is a page-turner in its own way. Sandel’s bonus is two-fold. First, he streamlines the key arguments and perspectives of a select group of amazing moral philosophers. The ideas aren’t dumbed down, but they are artfully reduced to their essence. Second, he uses real-world anecdotes to illustrate the app of the different philosophies, and equally important, he explains the intellectual challenges created to each. (Which allowed me to pretend that’s exactly what I was thinking and I was glad he brought it up.)Moral problems used in the book contain the popular runaway trolley problem, outrage over the bailout, exploding gas tanks in Ford Pintos, a consensual cannibalism case from Germany, the voluntary military, surrogate pregnancy, selling kidneys, Bill Clinton and Monica, affirmative action, reparations, evacuating Ethiopian Jews, buying American, and much more. In each case, although Sandel is clearly a contemporary American liberal, he avoids taking a decisive stand but works through the logical conclusion of the relevant moral us about 80% of the book is an engaging, readable distillation of necessary ideas about justice, society, and morality. In the latest 20% or so, Sandel goes beyond teaching and presents his own argument for a fresh approach to justice in our times. Once you wrap your head around it, you realize that he is advocating for a revolutionary re-thinking of the moral neutrality which has been the unwritten goal of justice in America for some decades. His is a bracing, dangerous gambit–but once you’ve read the whole book, you’ll see why it may be the only method to save modern politics.A remarkable, compact book that will stimulate the logic circuits of your brain and leave you pondering Huge Questions.Unusual words: utilitarianism; Jeremy Bentham; John Stuart Mill; libertarianism; universal rights; laissez-faire; pure practical reason; Immanuel Kant; categorical imperative; intelligible realm; John Rawls; moral desert; Aristotle; telosIf you like Justice, you might like:The Righteous Mind: Why Amazing People Are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt.
This is an immensely readable refresher of the principles pertaining to justice as written by a wide array of philosophers, from Aristotle to Rawls. Ultimately, Mr. Sandel argues convincingly that what the right thing is cannot be separated entirely from the hazards of our genes, education and circumstances and that discussions of moral matters require more than considerations of utility and consent. To Sandel, there is a civic dimension to justice that too few attempt to engage. These are thought provoking ideas brought forth in examinations of some very contentious modern problems from immigration to affirmative action to abortion, you name ever, the most attractive thing about the book for me was the self-reflection it promoted in me as I tried to engage the questions as rigorously as I could. Doing that, in the first instance, is the Right Thing to Do, I think.
5 stars for the book; ZERO stars to Amazon for the prominent claims that the Kindle ver contains page numbers.--> It does not.I like my Kindle and I hate zone numbers - part of the reason I chose an e-version of this book was Amazon's claims that it contains actual page numbers. It doesn't and they are not an TE: I am wide begin to being proven wrong and would welcome it; if anyone replies with a method to see pages, I will take it all back.
The ideal is to take Sandel's highly sought after class at Harvard, "Justice," which you can do online. It's amazing. The book offers a terrific method to continue pondering the vexing dilemmas that he offers for our contemplation. The "position" from which he presents the problems is neither completely relativist nor absolutist, and he forces in the most smart method to consider the sticky variables surrounding moral is a fabulous book for lay people who are overwhelmed by philosophy's jargon and overly headiness. Sandel is brilliant.
In this book prof. Sandel explores three approaches to justice. The one that justice is the maximizing utility or welfare, the second according to which justice means respecting freedom of choice and the third (which author himself favors) that the justice involves cultivating virtue and reasoning about the common good. The book includes a lot of history of political philosophy. I combined the book with author's video lectures at Harvard where a lot of moral dilemmas were discussed with the students. This book makes you reexamine some of your views on moral questions from a more analytical point of view.
This is a very interesting book that goes into various philosophies of justice. Sandel starts with an explanation of the utilitarian and libertarian views. His exposition on these is rather too brief, even half-hearted. It is obvious that he disagrees substantially. He goes on to give a very amazing explanation of Immanuel Kant's philosophy of justice. His description of Rawl's and Aristotle's views is also useful. I can see amazing scope for developing Sandel's favoured approach of the narrative, identity in community, and moral engagement. The thoughts that he puts forth are promising, but have yet to be fully e book is written and illustrated with examples (hypothetical and real-life) that are simple for a lay person to understand. It is recommended for any reader who is interested in justice in modern politics.
I will divide my (short) opinion about the book in two parts: firts, the content of the book and second, the material of the book.1.- Content: I have been using the book for a month and I can say that the book is unbelievable whit the content that it provide about Justice. In the book there are a lot of differents authors that talks about the justice whit their respective examples, ideas, opinions and definition about Justice and more. I search that the book is not so complex at all, maybe the part when Sandel (the author of the book) thanks about Kant can be a small confusing, but besides that, its not hard at all to understand the book. In conclusion, the book is really good, not hard to understand it and provide the basis for understand the concept of terial: I found the material of the book a small fragile and delicated, but I could see that coming because of the price and the color of the book, white. In the second weak the book got dirty in the left side whit some kind of black material. I don't know what it is, but the point is that the book can obtain dirty very simple and it's difficult to clean it up. In the back of the book (also in the left side) it got a small creased only by passing the pages of the book. Again, I don't know what nlusion:- Content of the book: 10/10- Material of the book: 9/10- Opinion: 4.5/5
I can't quibble with the author's analysis of the limitations of the "liberal" justice theories of Kant and Rawls. I haven't studied them to any degree. However, it does seem to me that the principle of the "dignity of the individual" as an end, never merely as a means, has more substance than the author appears to credit it. He says it provides a foundation for "respect," meaning not to do another harm. But not necessarily any more than that, i.e. not specifically to seek the amazing of others or even the common good. Perhaps that is right in a minimalist view. The Hippocratic oath states "First, do no harm." One might say that is the first word about justice. But the implications of understanding others as having a fundamental dignity equal to one's own, in result being a family of man, goes well beyond not doing e "good" advocated by Aristotle appears by the author's own description to be premised on building up the "common good" which implies, first of all, the dignity (if not equality) of persons for whom pursuit of the common amazing is the purpose. The author also emphasizes Aristotle's focus not on prescriptions or rules about the "good life," but practical wisdom that uses judgment about particular situations. That approach fits the author's argument for seeing the identity and nature of persons through the "narrative" rather than "voluntarist" is kind of empirical evaluation of our concrete interdependence, horizontally within our society and vertically deep into our past, strongly suggests (if not dictates) the conclusion that the fundamental dignity of each human being implies a duty, Kant's categorical imperative, to our neighbor beyond doing no harm. In fact to act for his or her good. If people are not to be treated as mere means to another's private ends, then in concrete situations we will always be faced with choices about how to orient ourselves. Do we act in a method that is above all self-interested but in which there is at least no intended hurt to others? In that case, even if they are not in fact (unduly) harmed they are nevertheless being used as means to our ends.Kant's logic supports the notion that the dignity of other persons as ends in themselves demands that we must always act in such a method that we are not indifferent to the amazing to others that may be effected through our actions. After all, in a lot of concrete situations there is no bright line of demarcation between amazing and hurt our actions may visit on others. We may suppose that most often if we pursue our self-interest with an eye only to clear and show hurt to others, we will err with responsibility for latent and unintended harm. The Golden Rule, said to be dismissed by Kant based upon its uncertainty in relation to how one wishes to be treated by others, at least can stand for the proposition that we would always wish others to take acc of our well being in the decisions they create for themselves. We would always wish others to act in a practical method as much as possible for my benefit consistently with their own, if not actually making any private sacrifice to their detriment to result my e upshot is that the rationale behind each theory of justice discussed by the author, insufficient and distorting by itself, may be seen as complementary as a corrective to each of the others. For example, the utilitarian model, problematic for failing to insist on fundamental rights, offers a perspective of pragmatism that the author admires in discussing Aristotle's emphasis on practical wisdom. Utilitarians simply carry the pragmatism principle beyond its capability, ignoring fundamental rights and the limitations on our knowledge of weighing consequences. Liberal justice theory arguably corrects for this by insisting only on proscribing the clearest cases of hurt (to fundamental liberty interests). The author in fact argues for a middle method that treats fundamental rights as a foundation of private human dignity (first, do no harm) but insists we go beyond that to address the higher purposes for which we live. Implicit in this approach is a recognition that human dignity which demands respect for primary rights also is the foundation for identifying the higher purposes which in principle must encompass the common good. Individual actions and decisions are always taken within a context of social responsibility.
As an introduction to justice, this book is unbelievable and has inspired me to dive into basic sources (e.g. Rawls, Nozick, Sandel's other book Liberalism and the Limits of Justice).The author begins by establishing 3 views of justice:1) Welfare-based views (utilitarian)2) Rights-based views (libertarian & egalitarian)3) Moral/virtue-based views (communitarian)The author then works through utilitarian, libertarian, egalitarian, and communitarian schools of justice, showing how each responds to perceived shortcomings of preceding e author clearly articulates the salient points of each view. In addition, the author demonstrates each view's strengths and shortcomings via well-chosen situations and reflections.Unlike some reviewers who objected to the author's focus on Obama and Kennedy, I found the recent chapter to be an effective conclusion to the entire book. The theme of the final chapter was, contrary to what I expected having read those reviews, a critique of the liberal egalitarian view of divorcing morality and justice. And I found it te: the book covers much of the same ground as the EdX class, but I consider them to be compliments. The book goes into more detail than the class, though any book can't replicate the discussion forums show in a MOOC-format class.
Isaac Asimov was a brilliant thinker and writer. His 'Foundation' series has been on my to-read list for a long time. I can see why this book invariably winds up on so a lot of all time amazing lists. His themes incorporate religion, war, psychology, politics, and so e book jacket summarizes this 66-year-old book well. It stands up well to the passage of time. The twists and surprises take the story in unexpected and interesting directions. Asimov does not waste much zone developing characters. In fact, it seems to me the characters in 'Foundation' take a distinct back seat to the story direction and underlying themes. If you like action-packed Sci-Fi, this book may not be your cup of tea. But if you like huge human ideas,themes, or morals; you might wish to read this one.
First and foremost, although Foundation had it's flaws, I have to give it five stars. The amount of influence this book and the series have had on science fiction is far-reaching and undeniable. As I was reading it for the first time, it at once felt familiar. This is probably because it has been ripped off so a lot of times! That said, it wasn't the easiest book to read for a few reasons.1. It was originally short stories which were later collected into novel form. This means that the scenes feel like they jump around a bit. Sometimes necessarily so (the series spans over millennia, so Asimov can't dwell too long on any particular area).2. Because of the points mentioned above, it's hard to identify with some of the characters. In general, characters aren't given long to be developed because Asimov needs to move on to the next time period in the history of the Foundation. Just as you're starting to understand a character, their motivations and quirks, they are seldom mentioned spite this, when stepping back and taking a 10,000 foot view of the series, it's still quite an accomplishment and undeniably transformative for the genre. I have heard that the kindle ver is a bit watered down compared to the original, but without a frame of reference it's hard to tell. I'm not a fan on censorship in any form, so it makes me wish to seek out the originals as I continue the series.
Isaac Asimov's Foundation is a classic within the sci-fi genre. Published before there awards for the genre, Foundation remains one of the most read and most recognized stories that served to define and demonstrate the scope of the field. The tale is set thousands of years in the future when mankind has settled much of the galaxy. At this point, the "empire" is in decline much like the Roman Empire and like Rome, few noticed what was happening. Into this mix comes Hari Sheldon who made the field of psycohistory that is mathematically based in terms of plotting and predicting social evolution and its future. He bands together a little group on the fringe of the empire as a ray of hope to shepherd humanity through a period of "dark ages" that will only latest 1000 years, rather than the 30,000 he calculates from doing nothing. The tale tells their story through the first several generations as they navigate successive crises that Sheldon had predicted, predicated on the civilization collapse that is imov has interstellar zone travel, along with nuclear power as commonplace. He also introduces engineering marvels such as force field and blasters, but the true draw is the focus on social and political changes occurring with the almost imperceptible decay of civilization. Technology continues to operate, but the knowledge of how and why is gradually lost. As each scene reaches crisis level, the successful resolution of that crisis requires a non-intuitive solution by a fresh generation with various ideas and various approaches that becomes the recurring theme for shortening the inevitable interregnum period.
I'm giving this book 3 stars because its probably great, but I didn't have fun the overall composition. While I think it is technically amazing it just might not be your thing, like it wasn't my thing. Asimov is a amazing author after all... I think objectively its a 5 star read though. I mean, I love sci-fi, I've read other works like the Urth series which is drastically more vague, complex and tells a winding story. This book I came into blind. The story is spread over several various perspectives which I didn't really have a issue with at first. At the end of the book, I did have issues with it. The first hero we read about seems interesting and I was super interested in the whole plot with him, the next couple characters aren't as interesting. We go from someone in power, to someone really in power, to someone not really in power. The point is to give you various perspectives on the main point of the story: the setting. Yet these various perspectives were initially written separately and then later bound together by the author, and I think the disconnect is apparent.But here's the deal. I just don't care about these characters enough to go beyond that and begin caring about the world. In fact, the initial globe of Trantor was vastly more interesting than anything else in the book.Hey, maybe I just didn't obtain it.
Asimov's classic! The first 3 books are short and rather simple to read. The Foundation books written are after the initial Foundation trilogy are unbelievable and very interesting. I would recommend reading the Robot novels after the Foundation trilogy and before the other Foundation books.
If you can look past certain technological anachronisms like paper still being a medium for the storage of info in a technologically advanced civilization with FTL travel or archaic cultural limitations on women (I didn't see a single female hero that wasn't a secretary or wife, and these were throwaway roles), then this classic sci-fi novel (and later series) from the 1950s still merits reading (assuming you haven't done so already).At this point in the series (several novels were written that take put before this one, although they were published later), the Galactic Empire has begun to decline, though there's small visible evidence for it. Hari Seldon, the leader of a group of psychohistorians, has declared that the empire will crumble, leading to a galaxy-wide dark ages that will latest for thirty millennia. Seldon's scientific work leaves him without a doubt that the collapse is inevitable, but the recovery period doesn't have to be nearly as long. His plan involves the creation of a foundation that will work to preserve the empire's knowledge and minimize the hurt from its e book is broken up into five sections. The first, the Psychohistorians, deals with Seldon's announcement and subsequent arrest. He's place on trial for treason and must successfully argue his case or face the death penalty. Although modeled after the Roman Empire, I found an interesting parallel to Seldon's argument about the eventual collapse of the empire in 500 years time and those individuals, most notably James Hansen, warning the American government and the globe about climate change. Just as too a lot of people have a issue envisioning how climate change is event or that its effects will be more severely felt decades from now (or wish to cover it up by discrediting the messengers), the Imperial government denies that the empire is crumbling, can't see the cracks that will take centuries to manifest, discredits Seldon's work, and seeks to silence him permanently. After all, who wants to hear that their method of life is having a deleterious result upon the globe (galaxy) around them?From here, the remaining sections deal with pivotal moments in the Foundation's early years. These are dubbed "Seldon crises." In each one, the protagonist is a man who sees that the current political environment, if not handled correctly, will lead the Foundation down the wrong path. Sometimes the system needs to be overthrown; sometimes it needs a steady hand. Each one uses his wits rather than brute force to conquer his opponent. Like all successful chess players, he's able to see his enemies moves several steps in advance and plans accordingly.While I wouldn't say it's an exciting work, it nonetheless makes for an entertaining read. Despite the aforementioned anachronisms, its influence is widespread and can be seen throughout sci-fi. When people as far apart on the ideological spectrum as Newt Gingrich and Paul Krugman cite it as an influential work, it bears looking into.
Foundation by Isaac Asimov is the first book in the Foundation trilogy, set about 50,000 years in the future. The second and third volumes in the trilogy are Foundation and Empire and Second Foundation. With many, a lot of reviews describing the books, there is small need for a description of the plot here. Instead, I'll give a few incidental notes on the SciFi ideas embedded in Foundation trilogy and my recommendations for potential readers."Foundation" is from the 1940's, when some of the ubiquitous ideas of modern science fiction were born. In the 1940's, it was already clear that the universe was a very huge and complex put (though it is even larger and more complex now than was known then!). So, writers, including Asimov, invented the devices of transport and communication faster than the speed of light. This brought the stars within "reach" and opened wide horizons for imagining how the future might develop if such technologies existed. "Foundation" and its original trilogy brought forth one of Asimov's special contributions to the imagined future of science: "psychohistory." The concept of psychohistory is that large-scale social and political happenings can be mathematically forecast in the form of happening probabilities. Asimov's different writings use these assumptions to write stories dealing with social, political, and individual challenges of an imagined future. Asimov adroitly mixes the large- and small-scale human happenings into richly entertaining stories. "Foundation" and other novels of the trilogy are composed of similar vignettes, reflecting their original publication in serialized form. I search this style works well for these and other Asimov books, with small-scale stories adding together to convey a sweep of events. The whole adds up to more than the sum of the r readers who have small experience with SciFi novels, I think "Foundation" would be an perfect put to start. The writing is direct, crisp, and clear, and is fine for YA or adult readers. The original Foundation trilogy is almost completely free of profanity and sexual themes. Violence is limited to the occasional murder and battles at a distance.If you are already a SciFi fan, and have not read some of Isaac Asimov's work, this is an perfect put to start, although it is not the "beginning". A semi-rational path for readers fresh to Asimov would be "Foundation", followed, if you like it by the two other members of the original trilogy, "Foundation and Empire," and "Second Foundation". From here, if you wish a small more, test either the Robot series or the expanded 7-book Foundation series. If you are android game for a lot more, and wish to see Asimov's "future history" in a roughly (future) chronological order, I'd suggest looking at Asimov's main set of future history works that comprise the Empire series, the Robot series, and the expanded Foundation series.I'd rate "Foundation" as Must Read for all except those who are severely SciFi-phobic!!
After getting bored with Prelude To Foundation I been told to begin off with the original Foundation series first before reading the prequal novels. And when I started reading Foundation I message a huge difference between it and the prequal novel and it failed to interest me any further.Unlike Prelude To Foundation the first novel doesn't have much detail and it doesn't tell the reader what the hell is going on. It just throws you with some guy named Gaal who is suppose to meet Hari Seldon the person who made "Pyschohistory" and yet doesn't know where to go or where Hari is. After getting a hotel room and going to meet him which a person tells Hari isn't here but bumps into Hari waiting at his hotel room. Hari shows Gaal his Pyschohistory which is a cube and pressing some buttons with a bunch of red symbols popping out and states poor things are going happen.I hate it when the author starts a novel off with a rushed beginning! Hardly any detail for me to picture what's going on in the story which bores me. The prequal novel had more detail but failed to obtain interesting the more I read it. I'm done with this series.
Asimov's Foundation comes off as a collection of short stories. Each of these short stories (there are five of them) is set about five years to a decade apart in time... He introduces thought provoking ideas such as religion as a tool to control the masses, trade battles as a mechanism to exert power and influence etc. The info around hyperspace travel and colonization of the entire galaxy is a treat! This book however does not focus on continuous hero development since it provides snippets of the future in five chapters as the fall of the Galactic Empire progresses - just a various style of writing. I am looking forward to reading the sequels in short order.
I chose to read this book because I knew Asimov by reputation, but I had never read any of his works. It was time we'll spent, but the treatment of the topic matter is perhaps somewhat outdated. Granted, the concept of time travel across galaxies in short intervals of time has not yet been realized, the settings involving the main characters making key decisions in smoke-filled rooms is definitely an outmoded concept. In addition, our show day exposure to futuristic scenarios made by filmakking's modern technology makes Asimov's view of 10,000 years into the future severely outdated. While Foundation was a pleasant diversion, it does not motivate the reader to delve deeper into the author's vision of the future.
I love loose leaf books for school and test to buy them when I can. One hint I used for these was I separated the chapters in a binder with dividers and then place my notes with that chapter. It created studying really easy!