Read the enlightenment of esther reviews, rating & opinions:Check all the enlightenment of esther reviews below or publish your opinion.
100 Reviews Found
I LOVED THIS BOOK! Esther is the kind of person who i have known and loved as a mate in true life. She is warm and caring and clever and manipulative. She is a force of nature. The author brings her to life vividly. Her adventures leave one breathless. A amazing read!
GREAT BOOK!!! I recommend this book to Everyone I know!!!! Amazing Writer!! He brings life to all the characters in the book & I do mean characters!! lol!!! Amazing book!! Laughed so hard & could hardly place it down. You won't be disappointed reading this 1!! And I will say the same about his other book The Enlightenment of Angeline!!!
Joshua Berkov has quickly become one of my favorite authors. His stories of these beloved senior citizens will create you laugh, cry and reminisce about that unique loved one in your life who created an impact. Joshua, please continue to write these books as they bring so much enjoyment to the reader.
I loved this story. It brought to mind the amount of family secrets we hold from one another whether it be from love or fear. In the end it usually works out to create us ther is an opinionated old lady but she is able to hold herself in line. She is a amazing mate and is very generous to those in her life. The end of the story is quite explosive with is author makes me feel like I could be mates with the characters he presents.
Book two. If you read book one you are going to love this page turner. But be prepared you can’t place it down till it’s finished. So a lot of twist and turns. You think you’ve figured it out. Nope you will be shocked and surprised. Can’t wait till book three is ready.
i lost my cel phone and this application didnt download again on my fresh cel and so far neither google play or hay house take any responsibility nor does the web developer answer so if anything goes wrong youre on your own and have to pay the corporation again.
Are you looking to rethink everything about your life? No? Then don't listen to this amazingly insightful, clever, life-affirming series of conversations with couples and family members. I learned a lot about myself listening to these 6 conversations. I don't know how she thinks of the creative ideas she has for communicating with these couples, but I was definitely a beneficiary as a "fly on the wall." You can be, too, if you choose to listen.
I absolutely loved the writing style, Jaitara makes you feel as though she is speaking directly to your heart. I love the power of her story telling and explanation of the practices she has used to have her breakthroughs. A very profound and moving book!
What I call silence is what she calls love.I wonder if love in this sense is not a color that is applied. Silence I think is more lorless in this regard is equal to non-judgmental. What you could call love.I still prefer as a result, yes. Waves of love and waves of happiness are passing by in the silence.
This is a very attractive and heartful sharing of Jaitara's life journey, and the lessons she learned along the method which she shares, to enable those who are looking for info to benefit from her experiences and wisdom in this process! I have learned so much and am able to experience my life much more fully as a effect of this information!!!!
This book is still one of my favorite books to educate on spirituality. I do feel like it is missing more practices and understandings as told by Ra Un Nefer Amen in his book Metu Neter, but that book is quite massive due to those teachings. This book is personally the best introduction and Kemetic Yoga 101 &102 a person could ever find. Correlations and teachings of worldly religions are utilized to backup the points that the info of ancient Kemet is still known to humanity. The teachings and references are quite numerous and utilized perfectly by the author. I've given numerous copies of these books away to inmates on Rikers and its changed some lives.
Jaitara really opened her heart and reached deep into mine in this book. I feel now like I know Jaitara personally and have been by her side through her journey. Not a lot of books have that feeling of a deep private touch and trust. Jaitara shares a lot of valuable info in this book. I love how she takes you on a journey from animal spirits to ic creation ceremony. I feel like this book is a gem that I was so lucky to find. Such an inspiration to connect deeper with spiritual guides, to invite divine source into the love making, to expand ic energy and manifest sacred desires, whether with the partner or solo. I look forward to using practices and ceremonies from this book in my life. And one more thing I think is worth mentioning - I’m very lucky to not have any trauma but it looks like a lot of women encountered some form of abuse at some point in their life. This book is a miracle tutorial to healing.
J. Jennifer Matthews' book, INEXPRESSIBLE: REFLECTIONS ON THE HEART OF ENLIGHTENMENT, is a unbelievable follow-up to her first offering, RADICALLY CONDENSED INSTRUCTIONS FOR BEING JUST AS YOU ARE. Matthews has a method of taking the "subject" of non-duality, and making it accessible, and a joy to investigate. Her style is to-the-point, informative, and, at times, humorous. Using some easy teachings from the bible to point out our real nature, she shows how LOVE is WHAT we are, as well as WHERE we are. LOVE is also WHEN we are, since there is only NOW. This is presented in a easy enough fashion for the likes of -even- me to grasp! Her first book helped obtain me through a very cold, dark winter. This time, it's like visiting an old friend, and seeing what they're up to. Very enjoyable. I would highly recommend this book to anyone so inclined. My only suggestion would be to read RADICALLY CONDENSED... first. (though it's not absolutely important to do so) ...
Out of all of the books I have read on this subject of Enlightenment or God or Love...this one...really hit the mark...or rather nudged my heart in a really profound way. That is saying a amazing deal...considering the futility of language to describe or even point to any part of the indescribable or..."inexpressible". I am so grateful to you Jennifer....Your small inspirations and pointings are so easy yet so rich....just so grateful....jim from near Sedona Az. Much Love
Although he is wordy, and the introduction to his books are almost 50 pages, I still enjoyed the book. The goals which one should strive to achieve are reasonable to a others he has a very closed minded view of the darker path, which is off putting. At times, some of the info comes off sounding a small Christianish which irritated me. However I know that he has a powerful opinion about the light and that tends to leave him biased a small l in all, I did learn a lot of fresh info and he does very amazing research. I look forward to reading the next book in his series. I do have around 8 of his books and this is the first time I actually read one in its entirety. Totally worth it.
I enjoyed every min reading this book, just want my family would have been as close as these three sisters were even though they had to obtain through to Esther. My sister and I were as various as day and night, both her and my younger brother were our Mothers favorites,she wasn't shy saying it right in front of me.
This book (volume 2) is really a serious of biographical sketches supplemented with philosophical profiles. A highly readable and very enjoyable but selective acc in the ongoing ‘who done it?’ series of Western philosophical thought. For example, Berkley and Kant are not included but Pierre Bayle is – this seems odd but is in line with the overall theme of the book which is the increasing secularization of Western philosophical thought. I have setup this review to mirror the organization of the book, as a series of commentaries on each of the chapters with the temerity to add my own perspective and interpretive ysis. Anthony Gottlieb promises volume 3 beginning with Kant. But with volume 1, ‘The Dream of Reason’ being published in 2000 and ‘The Dream of Enlightenment’ being published in 2016, I hope that we will not have to wait until 2032 for volume 3. Perhaps we can play let’s guess the title, how about ‘The Dream of Modernity’? Or, maybe “The Nightmare of Postmodernity if we have to wait until 2032?Chapter 1: My Doubts about the Redoubtable Descartes:The first modern philosopher still had one foot in the Middle Ages. His way of philosophy was modern but his results were Medieval. His way was systematic and ytical but this took put fully within the ambit of Christian concepts, categories, methods, beliefs and assumptions. It was his way of formulating the issues and framing the questions that was modern. This led to valid reasoning but unsound results such as the existence of God, metaphysical dualism and the immortality of the soul. Theology was the basis (false premise) for his scientific understanding and philosophical reasoning. For Descartes, all knowledge still depended on God. This is why he never doubted himself or his own sanity or mental acuity in the process of doubting. Nor did he doubt logical thinking or reason itself. The greatest assumption never doubted by Descartes was in the rational order of reality because this was guaranteed by God. He regarded reason as self-sustaining and self-validating because God guaranteed time, space, casualty, reason and logic - the primary order of existence. It was only with these assumptions firmly is put that he engaged in ‘radical’ doubt.His work in physics was quickly surpassed by Newton and it was Kant who later labeled Descartes a rationalist as opposed to an empiricist based on his exaggerated reliance on ‘innate ideas’ and his own mental capacities. However, his mathematics was solid and is still with us today in the example of ytical geometry to frame and solve issues of zone and motion as often depicted in the form of the (x,y) coordinate plain and its Cartesian coordinates (ordered pairs), he also invented, or at least popularized, the use of superscript notation for showing powers as apter 2: The Very Model of a Modern Major Monster:The amazing departure from Descartes was the full, complete and thoroughgoing materialism of Hobbes. This left no room in the warehouse of existence for immaterial minds or spirits as mandated by Cartesian dualism. For Hobbes, all of nature was material and it operated as a machine, including human beings. Interestingly, and disappointingly, Hobbes did leave room for God. To have both God and full materialism meant that God had to be a physical being but this was such a challenge to conventional religious thinking that Hobbes was labeled as an atheist though strictly speaking, he was not an atheist as is conventionally believed to this day. However, for Hobbes, God may have really been nothing more than first cause.Having said this, what Hobbes is most remember for is his political philosophy. If Descartes was the first modern philosopher, then Hobbes was the first modern political theorist in that he took an necessary step in disentangling religion and government. However, for all of Hobbes’ modern materialism in terms of philosophy, he remained pre-modern in one aspect of his political ysis. He rarely acknowledged that the material conditions of life are the cause for civil strife and instead thought that mistaken political beliefs were the best casual explanation for political conflict, odd conclusion for a materialist even before the advance of dialectal materialism. Hobbes offered despotism as the cure for anarchy. Even though Hobbes never advocated totalitarianism as we think of it in the modern context, the only safeguard versus the abuse of absolute power offered by Hobbes was that it would violate the laws of nature and the sovereign authority had nothing to gain by violating the laws of nature – this is naïve at best. What is still useful from the Hobbesian political model is that it describes the current globe ‘order’, with no global government; the nations can be thought of as being in a ‘state of nature’ engaged in a “war of all versus all” whereby battle Hobbes meant a constant state of tension where there is no agreement as to what is right or apter 3: The True St. BenedictThe ‘Jewish Inquisition’ excommunicated Spinoza because he understood too much. He became a threat to the facile Judaism practiced by the newly empowered Jewish diaspora community now located in Amsterdam. Shockingly, he allow it be known that God was abstract and impersonal, even identical with nature. Spinoza has been described as being intoxicated with God because if God is identical with nature then God is in and of all things. But this was also a logical conclusion for Spinoza. That is, if God is one and infinite then it follows that there can be nothing distinct from God, thus God is nature, God is everything. In an ironic way, Spinoza, the so-called ‘pantheist’ was the ultimate monotheist in seeing nature and God as one in the same. What follows from Spinoza’s collectively exhaustive God is full casual determinism with the same level of causal necessity found in a proof of geometry, a kind of geometry gone mad. That is, the globe can be in no other method than it rictly speaking, Spinoza was not a pantheist, nor was he an atheist, he did not worship nature as if it were God. God was not in everything; God was everything in that God was the creative and active force of nature. This nuanced view, as with Hobbes, succeeded in getting him labeled as an atheist. With Spinoza, the simplistic orthodox believers could not come to terms with his expanded and nuanced view and had no other method of dealing with him or understanding his challenging alternative perspective other than to label him as an atheist.Spinoza understood, as we understand today, that the Bible says more about its authors than anything else; that Old Testament stories were invented to provide the tribal Hebrews with a sense of identity by encouraging them to adopt certain values and ideas. The same is real of the Fresh Testament. I can sum this up by stating that the Old Testament is ancient mythology and the Fresh Testament is literary fiction based on the ancient myology. The Bible certainly bears the marks of its lowly origin. His ‘Ethics’ was the first attempt in Western thought to provide an alternative to Biblical monotheism since it acquired its monopoly. Spinoza’s influence lived on through the poets of the Romantic period, but his perspicacity is shown best in that Einstein was his greatest inheritor in the 20th apter 4: The British are ComingLocke tells us that decisions are created and that beliefs are accepted in life based on reason and rational thought, not through the doctrines of religion except when it comes to the revealed truths from God which are above reason and in need of no proof. This is where Locke stumbles over his own principles. There is no distinction that can be created between beliefs that are unreasonable and those that are ‘above’ reason. Neither conform to reason or rational thinking and both should be rejected based on Locke’s own standard of the primacy of reason. A distinction between beliefs that are contrary to reason and those that are above reason is meaningless. By definition, neither can be said to be reasonable. It is simply collapses into capricious and arbitrary sophistry. For all this, like Hobbes and Spinoza before him, Locke was accused of atheism because his views were still unorthodox enough. Even in his Letter Concerning Toleration, this toleration did not extend to atheists or polytheists and pantheists, both of whom he equated with atheists. Toleration only extended to those within the orbit of tradition Christian doctrine which grudgingly included Catholics.Locke, like Hobbes, is best remembered for his political philosophy and his revival of the notion of the social contract to replace divine sanction or brute force as the basis of political authority. The scope of political power and religious (Christian) freedom became the central topic of his political thought. He hypothesized the dubious theory of consent to acc for political formation, one that is no more plausible than the divine right of kings. Ironically, while opposing the divine right of kings, Locke relied upon Biblical (divine) scripture to help his own moral and political theories. Still, the extent to which his thoughts on politics seem ordinary, and his ideas about government seem common place, it is a measure of how deeply ingrained they have become in our time as a set of common sense cultural background assumptions. In the arena of politics and government, Locke applied his standard of reason and rational thinking on a consistent basis with ironic results. Locke unwittingly became the philosophical defender of the right to rebel; his name was invoked in both America and France in the century after his death. Ironically, Locke was trying to provide a philosophical defense of property not rebellion and revolution. Locke saw the invention of personal property as the catalyzing force to society whereas Rousseau saw it as a regrettable distortion of natural human relations. Locke justified property, and the taking of property, based on one’s ability to mix their labor with unclaimed property and thus create it their own. Ironically again, this led to the justification of expropriation. For example, the colonists in America had the right to take the land from the native Americans because the colonists mixed more of their labor with, did more to develop, the land, than did the native Americans. The difficulty becomes one of just how much labor one must mix with nature to convert it into property. But by virtue of this effort, the colonists were entailed to acquire (take) the land and resources they found. Ironically, the expropriation of the land from the native Americans was a right that followed from commercial exploitation of the same land. That is, the colonists could place the land to more efficient use thus creating a greater amount of total wealth by which all members of society would benefit. This gave them the natural right to the property in a kind of proto trickle-down Neoliberal apter 5: Only Atheist can act Ethically for the Right ReasonsPierre Bayle was not an atheist himself, he would not even suspend judgment about the existence of the traditional Christian God, but he argued that a person of any belief system or non-belief can act wickedly or morally. This is because people act consistent with their own experiences and in accordance with their own inclinations rather than in deference to an official belief narrative. My contention is that only an atheist can act ethically, do ‘the right thing’ so to speak, for the ‘right reasons’. Too often, a religious believer, e.g., a Christian, will act ethically because they feel it is needed of them by a higher power and this higher power can either reward them of punish them. Thus, the motivation for acting ethically is to earn a reward or forgo a punishment. Whereas an atheist can only undertake an ethical act because it is the ‘right thing to do’ for no other reason that is right under the llowing from Hobbes’s ‘Leviathan’, Spinoza’s ‘Tractatus’ and like Locke’s ‘Essay’, Bayle argued for religious tolerance in his ‘Philosophical Commentary’. The fact that human beings possess a God given conscience must mean that God intended for people to act according to their conscience provided it was the effect of an honest and careful find for the truth, otherwise why do humans possess such a God given characteristic? Therefore, nobody should be prosecuted or persecuted for honest beliefs, no matter how apter 6: Dr. Pangloss & Mr. Leibniz:Aristotle, Mr. Leibniz - the list stops there in terms of polymaths with near universal breadth and almost incomprehensible depth. To say that he developed calculus with the notation that we use to this day as well as the binary number system by which we program digital computes as well as the first pioneering steps in modern mathematical symbolic logic is to only ‘scratch the surface’ at best. He possessed a drawing board of a mind and produced a lot of grand plans and designs but a lot of forever remained on the drawing board, add to this his habit of moving from project to project often leaving a wreckage of incomplete projects in his feverish wake and we have parallel to the polymath Leonardo da Dr. Pangloss, he maintained that the world, no matter the state of misery and suffering, is the best of all possible worlds because God made it and God is perfect. To claim that the globe is not the best that it can be, it must follow that God could have done better which implies that God is not excellent and this contradicts the idea of God - which is perfection. This is an example of how Christianity can create even the most smart people say the stupidest things. However, this giddy optimism has its roots in the ancient Stoics who counseled acceptance of the globe as it is found because it can be no various and no better than the we search is difficult to reconcile the enchanted metaphysics of Dr. Pangloss with true scientific genius of Mr. Leibniz. In a project of universal reconciliation, in an attempt to satisfy everyone, what was superfluous for the physics of Mr. Leibniz was essential for the metaphysics Dr. Pangloss. Physics, philosophy and theology were connected in his mind. His goal was to use these tools to prove the existence of God, the immortality of the soul as well as defend the Christian ver of these ideas. Again, another early modern thinker who could not fully step away from the Medieval apter 7: At last, True Hume-anism 😊At last, Hume the amazing humanist or of I may, the amazing ‘Hume-anist’. Brilliant and unsettling. The greatest prose stylist in English language philosophy. With his atheism, I take him to be the first truly modern philosopher in this book, relevant today because he was ahead of his time. But of course, Hume is best remembered for the inhuman destruction of inferential reasoning by pointing out what is now known as the issue of induction. Hume only meant to present with this issue that our knowledge is based upon limited experience and we should thus be modest in our claims to knowledge. Hume never disputed that the we infer general knowledge and come to general conclusions based on our finite observations. He only cautioned that any such knowledge should be treated as re properly, the ‘problem of induction’ is: what proves that induction itself is a valid form of reasoning other than induction itself? A circular argument. From here, Hume goes on to replace the powerful notion of cause and result with the much weaker notions of successive events, or constant association which further depend on assuming the uniformity of nature over time. Thus, there is no absolute proof of the empirical knowledge that we most often rely upon in life and in science. Our expectations are found to be fallible. Worse, our only ‘proof’ for the uniformity of nature, that successive events, or constant associations of the past will remain real in the future, is that in the past the future has to past associations and successions of happenings – not a very powerful argument and again circular. We are left with custom and habit, not much more. Yet, inference works for science and life even though we cannot establish a powerful case for why it e obvious implication of Hume’s very human theory of knowledge was that theology and metaphysics were utterly and summarily dismissed as sophistry and illusion. Hume’s Fork was the notion that to qualify as knowledge an idea had to relate to ideas (math, geometry, logical deduction) or it had to relate to experience (the observations, experiments, testing and verifiability found in the natural and social sciences). The next implication is that if our knowledge is ultimately based on custom and habit, then so is our ethics. Ethics is based on what we know. Ethics is based on the concrete realities of human existence rather than ethereal abstractions. That is, religion, theology and metaphysics are the latest things that should play a role in ethics or morality. For Hume, religion played no role in ethics. For me, region plays a pernicious, retarding and damaging counterproductive role in ethics. But Hume was, and had to be, diplomatic in his approach to religion. In fact, this approach most likely worked to his rhetorical me gave us some of the first and most strong arguments versus God, religion and miracles. What is awesome is that we still need to marshal these arguments today to combat religious fundamentalism. The simple try for prophesies and miracles that Hume developed was that a miracle should be considered real only if the miracle being false would be more extraordinary than the miracle being apter 8: Voltaire Almighty and Rousseau AlrightyMuch like de’ Tocqueville, both Voltaire and Rousseau had a cynical belief in God; that such belief was important for the uneducated masses in order to prevent anarchy. Ironically, the two thinkers most often thought of as preparing the method for the French Revolution both thought that God and monarchy were suitable for France and would very likely have opposed the regicide of Louis usseau, an early thinker of The Enlightenment, was the first critic of The Enlightenment. Whereas thinkers such as Voltaire, Diderot, and d’Alembert gloried in seeing their generation as literally living in an age of enlightenment, Rousseau grumbled. The Enlightenment is so broad a category as to become almost meaningless. We can heap any and all virtues and vices onto The Enlightenment or The Age of Reason. The period of time we know by the shorthand of The Enlightenment or The Age of Reason was not an era of unmitigated agreement as to the nature of progress or the course it should take. It was a time of reflection, criticism, doubt and disagreement. It was a time of diverse thinking and this included the enthusiasm of Voltaire and the criticism of Rousseau. Form all the vaunted hopes from The Age of Reason, we have had to settle for simply being a bit more reasonable and a small less ignorant.
“The Dream of Enlightenment” by Anthony Gottlieb It seems that much of what is worth remembering in Western (European) Philosophy happened in two spurts of about 2 centuries each---the Athens of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle (550-400 BC) and the Enlightenment of Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, Locke, Newton, Leibniz, Voltaire and Hume (1600-1800). This second period is the topic of this outstanding book (the same author also summarized the first period in his “A Dream of Reason”). The wisdom of the “ancients” of the first period held sway during the intervening period until the 17th century when Francis Bacon (1561-1626), Blaise Pascal (1623-62) and others who believed (in Pascal’s words) Those whom we call the ancients were really fresh in all things, and properly constituted the infancy of mankind; and as we have joined to their knowledge the experience of the centuries which have followed them, it is in ourselves that we should search this antiquity rather than in others. Bacon’s insistence that all old ideas were suspect and that a Philosopher’s time was better spent finding the facts in the globe about him than in dusty libraries motivated others to do just that, although Bacon himself dismissed the results of Galileo (1564-1642) and Johann Kepler (1571-1630) because they were tiresomely mathematical and did not think much of Copernicus’ heliocentric model for the universe.. Renee Descartes (1596-1650), who had invented ytical geometry to solve then-modern physics issues about zone and motion, undertook the development of a comprehensive mathematical “mechanical” theory for motion of bodies in terms of their interactions with other bodies to replace the ancient Aristotlean theory. His theory of motion was for a short time a rival to that developed somewhat later by Isaac Newton (1642-1727), and he also applied his mathematics to the design of lens for telescopes. He distrusted the senses and thought that all wisdom was to be found by rational thought, a process which led him to several deductive proofs of God. He is remembered mainly as a mathematician and an abstract thinker who created the basis of knowledge the most primary question of philosophy. The work of three very various Englishmen--Thomas Hobbs (1588-1679), John Locke (1632-1704) and David Hume (1711-76), a Dutch-Portugese Jew---Baruch Spinoza (1632-77), a German polymath---Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716), and two French intellectuals--- Francios Voltaire (1694-1778) and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-78), completes the author’s discussion of the Enlightenment. It may seem strange that Rousseau is included in this pantheon of philosophers, because he was definitely not reconciled to the civilization of his day, nor to that of any other. The Enlightenment is generally credited with the ideas that led to the American Declaration of Independence and the French Revolution. It is also frequently credited with the ideas that led to the reign of terror following the French Revolution and to the Russian and German dictatorships of the 20th century. According to the author, the case for the Enlightenment is on its firmest ground when we point to the waning power of religious authorities to interfere in and even end people’s lives, to the toleration of religious dissent, to scientific progress, and to the gradual dismantling of political institutions that were too close to feudalism and too far from democracy.
Unfortunate to see this kind of thing published. One has to wonder why Gottlieb even bothered to write the book at all. His tone is breezy, bordering on arrogance toward those who have played a profound role in Western thought and society. He gives us the dime-store ver of Western thought. The book plainly does not measure up to the work he so freely and vaguely dismisses. It's like the high-school child in the back of the class berating the topic matter which he hasn't understood. It is rife with cynical references such as "the divine insurance plan." He urges speculation about how faulty these thinkers were--"one can barely imagine what he would have said privately about this pope." Is that supposed to be entertaining? It's boring, question-begging, and shouldn't even be published. From the author's superior insight, pray tell, what should these authors have said in their time? Or what would he propose in lieu of what they said? Apparently nothingness.
"The Dream of Enlightenment" discusses the key figures in the second amazing flowering of Western philosophy, in seventeenth and eighteenth century Europe. It follows Gottlieb's earlier work, "The Dream of Reason", which covered the first flowering in ancient Greece. A third volume which will bring the series up to the present. "Enlightenment" is a worthy successor to "Reason", which is high praise indeed. Both books have a lot to teach the reader, and both do so in an eminently readable manner. Gottlieb's prose is crystal clear and frequently witty. The structure of the book -- in which key philosophers, starting with Descartes and ending with Voltaire, are discussed in the context of their times -- carries the narrative along. That presentation in historical context is amplified by brief biographical sketches and by some discussion of what contemporaries had to say about the personality of the philosopher in question. That was particularly valuable to me, because it gave the ideas under discussion a depth that they would lack in a contextless listing. A very valuable book: I look forward to Volume 3.
The author gives a concise history of philosophy from Descartes to Voltaire, by a circuitous route that contains Leibniz, Newton, Locke, Hume etc. He provides a amazing description of the periods these people lived in and the challenges they faced when trying to publish their work(s). The book is enjoyable to read and one wished that there was more to absorb from such an necessary period of history.
I found The Dream of Enlightenment to be finest commentary on the history of philosp[hy that I have ever read. The reaction that the Critics predicted. Gottlieb not only renders clarity and simplicity to the complexities of the topic matter, but a width and depth; then tops this off with but the storyteller's fondness for anecdotes and a bit of gossip. If I were still teaching Humanities the book would be a must read for the students. It reads like a novel is the cliche I cannot support repeating.
Gottlieb’s fresh acc of the enlightenment is a pleasant and simple read. The thought of major philosophers is balanced with their biographies and an overall sense of the enlightenment program (challenging the hegemony of the church and aristocracy by the advocacy of science and reason) comes through in a lucid e title is, however, somewhat misleading. The book principally concerns philosophy rather than science and the empirical method. The latter are discussed, of course, but the chapters cover Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, Locke, Bayle (surprisingly), Leibniz and Hume, where one might have expected extended discussions (there are brief discussions) on Bacon, Newton and, e.g., the Dutch physicians/Newtonians who helped spread news of English science to their continental e in the book (p. 196), Gottlieb comments that “there are few avowed Leibnizians, Lockeans or Hobbists today.” He refers to a 2009 poll of philosophers “who were asked to pick the dead thinker with whom they most identified.” The top four: Hume, Aristotle, Kant, Wittgenstein. Fair enough, but why does Gottlieb’s survey of enlightenment philosophers end with Hume rather than with the equally influential (in all honesty, probably far more influential) Kant? Kant not only completes and extends some of the most necessary philosophic threads of the eighteenth century; he is a crucial bridge to the Romanticism which followed.We all have our favorites, of course, but I am surprised that Berkeley is not given far more attention, not just as a bridge to Hume, but as an enormous influence on such literary figures as Blake. If one looks at the book baldly it is essentially an acc of seven philosophers. The final chapter “What Has the Enlightenment Ever Done for Us?” (a clever play on Cleese’s question concerning the Romans in Monty Python’s Life of Brian) attempts to pull all of the threads together in 13 tidy pages. Unfortunately, the enlightenment is far more complex than that and a book which at first appears to be a grand synthesis turns out to be a fairly primary e “Suggestions for Further Reading” (p. 281) include a spare eleven titles and Peter ’s magisterial study of the enlightenment is not among them. Gottlieb’s enlightenment is also essentially French, a kind of dual between Voltaire and Rousseau. Hume is not seen as part of the Scottish enlightenment or, indeed, as part of a larger British enlightenment. Johnson, e.g., is mentioned briefly and is contrasted with Hume, though Johnson explicitly said once that all of Hume’s ideas had passed through his own mind. Gottlieb catches the more moderate aspects of the British enlightenment (Hume scoring religion but in a reverent manner) and he appreciates the fact that the enlightenment begins in England—and Voltaire’s recognition and praise in that regard—but he fails to see how necessary these distinctions are. Hume makes a crucial and obvious (but somehow easily forgotten) distinction between faith and reason. Faith is, by its very definition, closed to rational attack. Thinkers who have that faith, Johnson, e.g., are still capable of embracing the amazing mass of the enlightenment program. At bottom, the enlightenment is an extremely complex set of ideas and debates whose ultimate contrast now is not with the church and aristocracy but with the romanticism(s) that replaced it. On another level it highlights the conflicts between science and philosophy which were of such deep concern to the Anglo-American mid 20th century. Gottlieb gives us some unbelievable tips of this on p. 77: “Both [Locke and Hobbes] maintained that some traditional puzzles are merely confusions masquerading as problems, which appear to be substantive only because people do not pay enough attention to how words obtain their meanings. This idea was far from fresh in the history of philosophy—it is found in Plato’s time and in every subsequent period—but Hobbes created much more of it than most, and Locke followed his example.”Yes, indeed. And that is why Wittgenstein makes the list of the top four philosophers with whom contemporary philosophers associate themselves. The most necessary questions are, as he argued, those of which we cannot speak. Hence the importance of the British enlightenment’s figures of faith (Newton, Boyle, Johnson, et al.) for our understanding of the total picture. Gottlieb gives us glimpses of these problems but does not pursue them to the degree that one might tom line: a lucid and workmanlike exposition of the thought of a handful of enlightenment philosophers that is very light (but occasionally quite suggestive) on the overall patterns that constitute this era in Western thought.
An engaging read. Indeed, the reader will perhaps be left with the searching question: "should not the philosophers of 'the Enlightenment' be an obligatory and worthy course for the text-messaging but semi-feral kids of today ?" Is there a growing need to revisit the original ideas behind a "social contract", in a modern globe now doubly threatened by both a Hobbesian egotism and a regression into superstition ? Further, would the unthinking mercantilists and Brexiteers of today benefit from a refresher course in the legalistic and progressive social thinking of John Locke and David Hume ?For certainly very small has changed in the inner nature of homo sapiens since the brief period somewhat pompously referred to as "the Enlightenment", although there can be no doubting the large and ensuing benefits of the years 1630-1800, whence Gottlieb describes humanity as first undertaking "a cold bath of scepticism". Ironically, the provocative Hobbes was the first leviathan to emerge from this bath - but there were perhaps other worthier philosophers to would no exaggeration to state that much of the modern word owes its show advanced cirtances to the intellectual enquiry and methodology of Descartes, Newton and Leibniz, who in turn had returned to Euclidian geometry as a starting point for their investigations. Indeed, it is altogether impossible to conceive of a modern globe functioning without the use of Cartesian coordinates or differential calculus. The progress achieved by the scientific methods of these three geniuses of the Enlightenment setting the very template for the rest of humanity to follow, after centuries of blind dogma and intellectual repression. How was it achieved ?It seems to me that Gottlieb divides the Enlightenment into a movement of three broad fronts: the large intellectual seduction of Locke and Hume and Voltaire in the field of human nature; parallel to that, the substantial progress created Newton, Leibniz and Descartes in the field of science; and then, lastly, the social, political and even the revolutionary upheaval that followed the realization that man could indeed come to master the very mechanisms at work in the natural globe around him !Unshackled as they finally were from the globe of Neo-Platonist theology, the Enlightenment thinkers were set loose on a course that humanity is still following today: "the break with superstition !" There is perhaps still a surprising and vague deism lingering in the forma mentis of the enlightenment philosophers, but it does not crucially seem to hamper their use of and recourse to the principles of reason. A fresh methodology has asserted e advent of "freethinking" and the methodology of reasoned enquiry is all the more startling in its sudden reemergence, after centuries of received dogma and seeming lack of any intellectual enquiry. Thus, Gottlieb's inclusion of chronological timetable of all the European thinkers involved in this movement brilliantly and helpfully serves to illustrate just how rapidly humanity was beginning to emerge from its long, long sojourn in "the kingdome of darknesse".Also addressed are some of the more foolish aspects of the Enlightenment, as inadvertently purveyed by Hobbes and Rousseau, and their later spiritual children. It is indeed difficult not to link some of their more intoxicating ideas to the later catastrophes of National som and the later lack of any social contract, although Gottlieb does go to some lengths in explaining that the Enlighenment did not necessarily spell the end of human folly !Although the cult of Rousseau's noble savage and even the blonde beasts of Nietzsche are mentioned as a direct by-product ( as the possible nightmarish side to the Enlightenment), it is to thinkers with a moral compass like Immanuel Kant and the later reformers of the Utilitarian movement - and the latter day teachings of a philosoper like John Rawls - that Gottlieb keeps returning to as setting the defining tone of the l in all, a quite worthy philosophical study of a most remarkable period of human history. I cannot support thinking that the progressive social ideas of these brave philosophers, based around their struggles for a valid theory of knowledge, is a period in human history that will continue to act as a beacon to future generations of free thinkers. As such, Gottlieb does a fine job of conveying their importance.
This is a delightful book. Gottlieb's "The Dream of Reason" is a lucid, very well-written discussion of philosophy from the pre-Socratic philosophers to about the 17th Century. "The Dream of Enlightenment" takes up the story and covers the extremely necessary period from Descartes to Rousseau. As with "The Dream of Reason" this is a remarkably well-written book that provides clear, perceptive discussions of some of the most necessary thinkers in human history. Mr. Gottlieb has a real bonus for taking very complex ideas and presenting them to the reader in a method that is remarkably simple to understand. I'm beautiful familiar with the philosophers discussed in "The Dream of Enlightenment," but, as I discovered while reading "The Dream of Reason," there are a lot of things I thought I knew which were, unfortunately, wrong. I've learned and unlearned quite a bit from reading these two books. In particular, I have always found Hume to be a difficult thinker to understand. I found Gottlieb's discussion of Hume to be extremely useful. I now intend to go back and re-read Hume's major works because I am now in a much better position to understand them. I also discovered, while reading "The Dream of Enlightenment" that I did not truly understand Rousseau correctly. I had underestimated Rousseau as a thinker, and thanks to Mr. Gottlieb, I now know better. The preface to this book indicates that a third book will follow that will take up the discussion from Rousseau up to our times. I look forward to the final book of this outstanding trilogy and have no doubt I will be delighted with Mr. Gottlieb's discussion of such necessary thinkers as Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, and Sartre. It ought to be fun. And speaking of fun, both "The Dream of Reason" and "The Dream of Enlightenment" are wonderfully witty. (I'm beautiful sure that no previous discussion of Western philosophy alludes to Monty Python's "Life of Brian"!) If the third book in this series comes close to being as useful and lucid as the first two books, Gottlieb's trilogy will be a classic that will delight and inform generations of readers well into the future!
Unless you're studying for a advanced degree in philosophy, I'm afraid reading the items is much like panning for gold: a amazing deal of effort for a very occasional nugget of insight. But this book - wow! You really obtain inside the head of these revered icons via Gottlieb's narrative. He provides all the goodies: historical context, hero description, incidental correspondence between philosophers, high praise or, sometimes, puerile criticism by one philosopher of another., etc., etc. It is refreshing to encounter a very readable, well explained summation of the different philosophies of these iconic figures without endlessly test to slog through their sonorous screeds. This is the first book on philosophy I've had problem putting down. I can't wait for Gottlieb's next one!
This religious movie is a moving, epic biblical story about a Jewess orphan who, through an odd twist in events, ascends to royalty in the ancient Persian empire, and ultimately saves the Jews from total annihilation. Queen Esther and Mordecai, her male guardian who raised her, are the unforgettable heroes, and their story is well told in "The Book of Esther." The characterization is well done; the storyline flows well; and the dialogues and interrelationships are entertaining. Gentle humor is often employed in its scenes, as the plot thickens with the destructive plans of the wicked Haman (may his name and memory be erased). This film portrayal of the biblical book of "Esther" also explains the origins of the Jewish holiday of Purim. For biblical film buffs, I highly recommend a viewing of this perfect film!
Outstanding movie, it comes across as a play, everything is perfect, no hollywood here, acting is great, scene settings perfect, you feel like you are back there with her, and it sticks to the bible story, except for the name of the King. In the film he's King Xerxes and in the bible he's King Ahasuerus.
All three films are great. Esther and Ruth were very close to Scripture with only a little amount of artistic license used to create the films flow smoothly. Peter was perfect with quite a bit of artistic license but completely scriptural. All three films were very well done. I enjoyed them all.
Overall - low budget productions but mostly faithful to the e book of Ruth is amazing because of the little cast in the story. The scenes are well acted, but more cultural knowledge of the times would have helped. The people wear the same garments throughout the whole movie. Boaz wears purple which was definitely not the case since purple was extremely expensive and very rare. There is a contradiction in the text with the implementation of a few short chop scenes with David at the beginning and end. The show David is not knowing how to use the sling, but then do mention that he already killed a lion and a bear with it. An odd contradiction. But overall, this portion was well done in my Sunday school class enjoyed e book of Esther is a total washout because of the obvious low-budget production. The actors are all fine and do a amazing job but otherwise the film does not match the scriptural text. For example in chapter 1 of the biblical book, the Persian King calls over150 provincial princes, and their servants and bodyguards, and has a amazing feast lasting for a long time. The film has about a dozen characters max for the banquet. What's up with that? There is a much better presentation – One Night with the King.I haven't watched the section on Peter yet
I've only watched the first movie, so far, but it's excellent. It added somethings to make more of a story line, but seems to be extremely accurate to scripture and very well place together. If you have fun this one, I strongly recommend the book of Daniel by the same producer. Perfect biblical movie!!The Book of Daniel
Though the acting is amazing and they create a amazing storyline it veers off from scripture so much that it annoying. Will continue to watch but I would never recommend this to anyone whom do not know the Biblical acc enough to tell what was added for a story line and what is scriptural. Very disappointed
3 stars because they veered off from the Bible! Idk why that bothers me so much but I truly don’t think it’s that difficult to stick to truth! Why feel the need to change anything? More than just poetic license, now that, I can handle! Read the book of Esther, it’s not that long and see the comparison. The real story would have created just as amazing a movie!!!! The film alone is amazing but it’s false and I seek truth. Hopefully folks are reading the word and not relying on any biblical films for teachings 😕
We have watched this Book of Esther film a lot of times. It doesn't follow the Bible narrative exactly, but the producers allow you know that before the film begins. The primary story is intact, though. It's very enjoyable, especially if you love history and romance. Heh, it's from the Book of the greatest stories ever told!
I really liked this movie. Was it 100% Biblical? No, but it got the primary story across. Don't be discouraged by all the negative reviews, watch it and judge for yourself. They had to create this story into a movie, that is easier said than done. I fear that these days people simply like to be contrary and fail to see the amazing in anything...they just fixate on what they feel is lacking. The acting was very amazing in my opinion and overall I felt it was an acceptable attempt at telling this very necessary story. Allow me place it this way, it was FAR more accurate than the 1956 Ten Commandments and with far less budget.
This is an perfect book on Qigong that explores the biological aspects of Qigong in relationship to breath and the cultivation of internal energy. The author does an perfect job of sharing detailed info about Qigong. I felt like the book filled in a couple of gaps and helped me understand the internal cultivation of energy even better. There are also some useful exercises you can do in the book that will support you apply the concepts to your life. I highly recommend this book if you wish to understand and implement qigong in your life.
I've struggled with truly understanding what qi is with my western background, but really believed in the power of qi. It's not until i read this book that i am really motivated and inspired to learn more about qigong. There are so a lot of questions that i used to have, and this book does a amazing job in helping a beginner like me understanding all the possibilities of qigong and describing all of the steps very well and simply.I would recommend this book to anyone that's looking to learn about qigong, or was ever curious about the power of qi, and what our mind body and spirit can achieve together. I'm of asian descent, but like most second generation kids, the western education doesn't really understand qi and eastern philosophies. This book has helped me bring the two together to support me understand how the two philosophies and cultures can come together to better understand the human potential.
This is a true master piece highly recommended for all those interested, to know more in detail what is Chi or Qi, and how to improve its performance in our body to know the Secrets of anks to Dr. Yang Jwing-Ming
I thoroughly enjoyed his presentation of qigong and his interpretation of Qi went deeper than any other explanation that I have heard. The diagrams for the qi channels could be flushed out as I feel some points were either unmarked or left out.
Provides a amazing basis for understanding the history of Qigong and a nice discussion on the different schools/styles of Qigong. Their is a amazing collection of research including discussions about the problems involved in researching. Yang ends the book with a list of extensive questions that researchers could potentially work on.
I have a few of Dr. Yang's books and this one is the book everyone should read first. It arrived on time and in immaculate condition. It covers a ton of informatIion you would wish to know about qigong even if you have studied for years. Dr. Yang explains the facts, science, myths, and theories of Qigong in a method that allows the reader to go on a journey of self discovery with every chapter.
In the past I've purchased other books on Tai Chi and Qigong that I never finished. Recently I became interested again and took a class and then purchased this book to learn more in depth info (it was recommended by the instructor). Love it. It is very informative and clearly describes Qi and Qigong so that anyone can understand it. I haven't finished reading it yet because I only received it a few days ago, but I know I will because for the type of book it is, it is really holding my interest.
This book is filled with the pure wisdom of Shakyamuni himself, unbound by tradition and apter 1 teaches the path that Shakyamuni took to reach Enlightenment. After discovering the mistaken ways of the respected local religious leaders, Siddhartha developed his own method of meditation and living. After countless hours, he defeated the devil and attained ter this chapter, the remaining one's speak to the valuable teachings of Buddhism. It takes the reader through the Eightfold Path, the Six Paramitas, the Void, and the Law of Cause and Effect. These teachings add light to human life, making it shine e final chapter delves into the deep Truth of the spirit world. It describes the purpose and meaning of our lives through eternal soul-training and reincarnation. It puts true numbers to the infinite path towards Buddhahood, as we rise through the dimensions. It is beyond this world.
Since I'm a frequent visitor to the perfect CSS Zen Garden web site, I purchased this book hoping that it would enlighten me regarding the technical implementation of some of the more advanced CSS designs. Unfortunately, I think the book just misses the mark. What you obtain is a brief six page explanation of a particular design concept for each of the 36 included designs. This is all good, but I was hoping to see at least a few of the very advanced designs completely dissected in explanation, from beginning of the source to the end. Intermediate CSS coders will undoubtedly pick up a useful technique or two. Still, it's a amazing book that could have been great.
This is much more than an ordinary book. I hate reading programming or web books, yet I loved this book.I am a web developer with a programming background, more interested in usability than looks. I had traditionally used CSS for fonts and that's all. Recently I started exploring the real power of CSS and becoming more interested in color and en I stumbled on the CSS Zen Garden book and web site. Together, they opened my eyes to web design as an art. It taught me principles of light, color, fonts, and layout with CSS. It helped me realize that I can have amazing web sites! I have gone on to learn Image and discover my own eye for amazing design. Armed with fresh knowledge, I look forward to working on my own design for the Zen Garden.
This extraordinary, attractive and awesome book explains, in detail, the designs illustrated on the Zen Garden web site. This is a book to read, to savor and to come back to. It is part tutorial, part reference book and part one who is doing web development can afford to ignore CSS for long, and this is the book that takes you beyond CSS as a easy tool for design and brings you to CSS as the missing third leg in creating world-class web applications: [..]for server side technology; Ajax for client side responsiveness and enhanced customer experience, and CSS for separation of data from presentation and layout. An astonishing book. Highly recommended.
Likely, Dr. Yang's exploration into the depths of Chinese QiQong will be understood within the context and at the level of experience that the reader brings to more. No ere is verification of what one already knows. And, there are foundation "seeds" of learning (aha!) for one's Path and growth as you study further and train diligently and sincerely.Dr. Yang's lectures on Tai Chi and Chi Kung practice, as well as his books, are an outstanding adjunct to one's training and study. Like 3 wheels on a tricycle. Knowledge, Practice/Training, Guidance (personal), from someone that has already travelled the Path. Thank you Dr. Yang.