Freedom from the Known

Book Description

Krishnamurti shows how people can free themselves radically and immediately from the tyranny of the expected, no matter what their age--opening the door to transforming society and their relationships.

Customer Reviews:

An eye opening experience.......2007-10-04

I found this book while looking through a bookstore recently and it has changed my life. It's going to replace at least 10 books on my bookshelf. K answers all of the things I've been asking for a long time, without answering them at all. The contents will turn your world upside down if you're open to it.

Why read Krishnamurti?.......2007-05-10

The point of reading Krishnamurti is not to argue whether he is right or wrong or to decide whether you agree or disagree. The point of reading this book is as a stimulus to your own thinking and questioning. The point of this book is to learn to ask better questions, not repeat Krishnamurti's answers. I have read a number of his books and find Freedom from the Known one of his best. Don't accept or reject anything that he says. Just read it, open your mind and grow.

Smacks you in the brain!.......2007-04-17

Underneath everything is what we are. With the help of Krishnamurti and this book (the first of his I've read), you'll find that what we are is nothing. Not a lonely "nothing", but the calm, amazing truth that remains when we "know" that we are only what we think we are...

Ahhhh, yes. This book and Krishnamurti do an amazing job of opening the eyes! Read it and really digest it. It will smack you...

What I ordered........2007-01-10

Gave me what I ordered on time. What else can you expect?

One of Krishnamurti's great books, but less accessible than some others.......2006-12-23

Krishnamurti was certainly a scholar who thought deeply on life and the complications that are inherent to life. He stresses avoiding relying on external authorities and favors inner exploration. In fact, one of his purposes is to encourage freeing yourself of conditioned thinking i.e. the scripts than run us unconsciously. He believes that in "choiceless" or pure awareness we discover our deepest self.

Krishnamurti believes we should be moving in an out of constant inquiry. While he offers no specific method, he attempts to reach truth by negating our unexamined assumptions. He refers to truth as a pathless land and deconstructs a lot of common arguments concerning the nature of life and living. This in itself is useful and leads one to a deeper connection to Being.

This is not one of Krishanmurti's easiest reads. However, if you are a fan of this type of book or Krishamurti in general, you will no doubt enjoy it.

The Basic Writings of John Stuart Mill: On Liberty, the Subjection of Women and Utilitarianism (Modern Library Classics)

Average customer rating:

good way to get all three works
The great defender of individual liberty
A bit dry, but worth the effort!
A must read for anyone interested in political ideology...
Liberty: The Basics

The Basic Writings of John Stuart Mill: On Liberty, the Subjection of Women and Utilitarianism (Modern Library Classics)
John Stuart Mill
Manufacturer: Modern Library
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Civil Rights & Liberties | Current Events | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Ethics & Morality | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Political | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Human Rights | Constitutional Law | Law | Subjects | Books

All 4-for-3 Deals | 4-for-3 Books Store | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0375759182
Release Date: 2002-05-14

Book Description

The writings of John Stuart Mill have become the cornerstone of political liberalism. Collected for the first time in this volume are Mill’s three seminal and most widely read works: On Liberty, The Subjection of Women, and Utilitarianism. A brilliant defense of individual rights versus the power of the state, On Liberty is essential reading for anyone interested in political thought and theory. As Bertrand Russell reflected, “On Liberty remains a classic . . . the present world would be better than it is, if [Mill’s] principles were more respected.”

This Modern Library Paperback Classics edition includes newly commissioned endnotes and commentary by Dale E. Miller, and an index.

Customer Reviews:

good way to get all three works.......2007-03-05

this isn't the highest quality paper, but it's an economical way to get three works. there is not much in the way of editorial content, but depending on your interests that may be fine.

The great defender of individual liberty.......2006-12-24

I read this book for a graduate class in Philosophy. Dr. Dale Miller who was the editor for this book was my professor. He is excellent and an expert on J. S. Mill. Recommended reading for anyone interested in philosophy, political science, and history.

John Stuart Mill, 1806-73, worked for the East India Co. helped run Colonial India from England. Minister of Parliament 1865-68 he served one term. Maiden speech was a disaster his second was great success. He was first MP to propose that women should be given the vote on equal footing with the men who could vote. He got 1/3 support, England gives franchise to women after U.S. He was a great Feminist, his essay "Subjection of Women" is written with great passion and prose. It was a brave position for him to take he was ridiculed for it. He favored democracy, and letting more men from lower classes the right to vote, but believed that people that are more educated should have more votes then less educated because they would make better decisions about what government should do. He would have wanted to extend education to the masses, so that all may have gotten 2-3 votes and so on. He didn't think it should be extended to where a small elite could carry the day on votes. The idea was that if the working class, and middle class, where divided on an issue, the people with more intelligence would have the power to tip the balance. Mill thought that people with more education would probably not only be better able to make political decisions, especially in terms of intellectually being able to see what would be best for the government to do, but that they would also be more concerned about the common good publicly then people in general. He was intensely educated by his father James. John could read Greek, and Latin at 6 yrs.; his Dad tutored him at home. Dad thought environment was everything. He was treated like an adult, never played games with kids; he had a very cerebral upbringing. He had a period of depression in his twenties, it changed his philosophy, and he recognized the importance of developing feelings along with the intellect, this is something that he stressed in his work. He read poetry to get out of depression; he became devoted to poetry and became a romantic. He fell in love with a married woman Harriet Taylor, was a platonic relationship, after her husband's death they married 3 years later and probably never consummated the marriage maybe due to Harriet having syphilis. His dedication to "On Liberty" is to her, very devoted to each other. Both buried together in Avignon France where they used to vacation.

Mill as a moral theorist subscribed to a theory we call Utilitarianism. It means---In some way morality is about the maximization of happiness. Whether actions are right or wrong depends on how happiness can be most effectively maximized. I say in some way, because there are allot of different kinds of Utilitarians. Allot of different ways of saying exactly how it is the maximization of happiness comes into morality. Therefore, happiness is clearly an important idea for Utilitarians. Mill has a hedonistic view of happiness, he thinks that happiness can be defined in terms of "pleasure in the absence of pain." What is distinctive about Mill in this area is that he believes that some kinds of pleasure are better than others are, and add more to a person's happiness than other kinds of pleasures. He believes in what he calls, "higher quality pleasures." These are pleasures, he says, that we get from the exercise of faculties that only human beings happen to have. So the intellect, imagination, the moral feelings, these are the sources of higher quality pleasures people use. His view seems to be that a certain quantity of intellectual pleasure just adds more to your happiness, and a given quantity of some lower pleasure like a kind we would share with the animals such as sensation, taste, sexual pleasure, etc. His "higher quality pleasures" in a way echo Aristotle's ethics. The idea of those things that make us distinctly human that are the real key to our happiness, that is in Mill also. It is not as limited to reason and intellect as Aristotle thinks. Mill recognizes the importance of the appreciation of beauty, aesthetic pleasure, and moral pleasure. He frankly owes a debt to Aristotle that he never properly acknowledges, never gives him proper credit.

"On Liberty" is Mill's is his most widely read and enduring work. It is an indispensable essay on political thought, which strenuously argues for individual liberty. He is defending what he calls the "liberty principle." It is a principle that guarantees individuals quite a bit of personal freedom. "That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant." These quoted sentences in John Stuart Mill's book, "On Liberty," embody the crux of his argument; that the power of the state must intrude as little as possible on the liberty of its citizenry. In essence, Mill was against using the power of the state through its lawmaking apparatus to compel citizens to conduct themselves in ways that society deems moral or appropriate. Mill thought that people had not only a right, but also a duty to develop their intellectual faculties, which is indispensable to maximize their happiness. He believed that society improved for all its citizens when they where left unfettered to the maximum extent possible, allowing them to use their imagination and intellect to improve themselves. Mill postulates a theory that societies usually institute laws based primarily on "personal preference" of its citizenry instead of established principles. This lack of clarity of opinion often leads to the government frequently interfering in the lives of its citizens unnecessarily. For Mill, there are very few times when the state can infringe on the personal liberty of others. Firstly, the state has the right to promulgate laws that prevent a person's actions from harming others. Secondly, the state must protect those citizens who are not mature enough to protect themselves, such as children. Thirdly, he exempts, "... backward states of society in which the race itself may be considered as in its nonage." In Mill's view, immature societies need a benevolent leader to rule them until they have developed to a point where they, "... have attained the capacity of being guided to their own improvement by conviction or persuasion ..." Mill said this third exemption did not apply to any of the countries in Europe. Mill believed that forced morality by the state on its citizen's liberties was destructive to their inward development, and could even lead to a violent reaction by them against the government.

There are different parts of his defense of this, different arguments that he gives. He has a long chapter on freedom of speech and press. He has some very specific reasons why he thinks those freedoms are important. Always in the background for Mill is the idea of development, and making it possible for more people to enjoy these higher quality pleasures. How do we help people develop their distinctly human faculties, in ways that will help them enjoy their higher quality pleasures? Because for him that is the way, we maximize the total amount of happiness that is enjoyed in the world, and that is the object of morality as far as he is concerned. Utilitarianists believe that maximizing happiness is ultimately, what morality is all about. That does not mean maximizing your own happiness that means maximizing the total amount of happiness that is enjoyed, not only by yourself but also by everybody else as well.

Roger Kimball, in his book "Experiments Against Reality" wrote, "On Liberty" was published in 1859, coincidentally the same year as "On the Origin of Species." Darwin's book has been credited--and blamed--for all manner of moral and religious mischief. But in the long run "On Liberty" may have effected an even greater revolution in sentiment.

A bit dry, but worth the effort!.......2005-01-19

I am interested in Mill's contributions to utilitarian philosophy. Utilitarianism holds that morals should be based upon those acts which promote the greatest good to the greatest number of people. Human actions which foster happiness are held to be right, while those which yield the converse are wrong. Mill defines happiness as intended pleasure with the absence of pain. Also, he maintains that intended pleasure and freedom from pain are the only things desirable as personal ends. Pleasure which employs one's higher faculties tends to give more satisfaction than baser pleasures, or mere sensations. Few humans would exchange their limited, fleeting pleasures for the fullest ration of the pleasures of the "lower" animals. Since a noble character is made happier by its nobleness, utilitarianism can only attain its end towards the multiplication of happiness through a general elevation of the nobleness of the character of the larger population.

Mill states that pleasures and pains have different values to the actor. Only the judgment honed by experience can assist us in assessing appropriate trade-offs in acquiring a particular pleasure at the cost of gaining a specific pain as well. This type of cost/benefit analysis advocated by utilitarians gives rise to the criticism that utilitarianism results in coldness and lack of sympathy towards others. However, Mill claims that the proof of the worth of utilitarianism, or any other moral system, lies in its ability to produce good results.

Although it is sometimes difficult to wade through the dryness of Mill's rhetoric, it is truly worth it for the philosophical insights contained. This book is a good survey of Mill's thoughts on utilitarian ethics and many other subjects of value.

A must read for anyone interested in political ideology..........2004-07-20

One of the main writers on liberty, J.S. Mill is often overlooked in introductory courses in Political Theory courses. I bought this books as a supplement in my class and it was a wonderful read that gave me an advantage. This book contains some of Mill's best work and the notes added by Schneewind give them an extra dimention and a few explanations that I am glad I had.

Liberty: The Basics.......2003-03-19

Not that Mill was ever obscure or inaccessible, but while Prof Schneewind's Introduction adds little value, the notes and annotations by Dale E Miller certainly renders this compendium transparent, even to folks like me who have been dumbed down by years of television debates as primary intellectual nourishment. He enlightens each of Mill's chapters with a short and easily assimilated introductory overview. Complementing this with text annotations, collected at the back of the book. The annotations appear to be very well selected, as they are never too numerous to make flipping to the back of the book tedious, yet they manage to illuminate every aspect or item I might have found even remotely confusing, ambiguous or otherwise incomprehensible in the modern idiom.

This text is an excellent starting point for reading JS Mill, and is very well suited to the armchair philosopher who wishes to get into the material with ease and without encumbrance. However, there may be too little in the annotations in terms of external references, or cross references to Mill's other writings, or background information to satisfy the more academically inclined.

Book Description

Collected here in a single volume for the first time, On Liberty, Utilitarianism, Considerations on Representative Government, and The Subjection of Women show John Stuart Mill applying his liberal utilitarian philosophy to a range of issues that remain vital today--the nature of ethics, the
scope and limits of individual liberty, the merits of and costs of democratic government, and the place of women in society. In his Introduction John Gray describes these essays as applications of Mill's doctrine of the Art of Life, as set out in A System of Logic. Using the resources of recent
scholarship, he shows Mill's work to be far richer and subtler than traditional interpretations allow.

Customer Reviews:

The great defender of individual liberty.......2006-12-24

John Stuart Mill, 1806-73, worked for the East India Co. helped run Colonial India from England. Minister of Parliament 1865-68 he served one term. Maiden speech was a disaster his second was great success. He was first MP to propose that women should be given the vote on equal footing with the men who could vote. He got 1/3 support, England gives franchise to women after U.S. He was a great Feminist, his essay "Subjection of Women" is written with great passion and prose. It was a brave position for him to take he was ridiculed for it. He favored democracy, and letting more men from lower classes the right to vote, but believed that people that are more educated should have more votes then less educated because they would make better decisions about what government should do. He would have wanted to extend education to the masses, so that all may have gotten 2-3 votes and so on. He didn't think it should be extended to where a small elite could carry the day on votes. The idea was that if the working class, and middle class, where divided on an issue, the people with more intelligence would have the power to tip the balance. Mill thought that people with more education would probably not only be better able to make political decisions, especially in terms of intellectually being able to see what would be best for the government to do, but that they would also be more concerned about the common good publicly then people in general. He was intensely educated by his father James. John could read Greek, and Latin at 6 yrs.; his Dad tutored him at home. Dad thought environment was everything. He was treated like an adult, never played games with kids; he had a very cerebral upbringing. He had a period of depression in his twenties, it changed his philosophy, and he recognized the importance of developing feelings along with the intellect, this is something that he stressed in his work. He read poetry to get out of depression; he became devoted to poetry and became a romantic. He fell in love with a married woman Harriet Taylor, was a platonic relationship, after her husband's death they married 3 years later and probably never consummated the marriage maybe due to his having syphilis. His dedication to "On Liberty" is to her, very devoted to each other. Both buried together in Avignon France where they used to vacation.

Mill as a moral theorist subscribed to a theory we call Utilitarianism. It means---In some way morality is about the maximization of happiness. Whether actions are right or wrong depends on how happiness can be most effectively maximized. I say in some way, because there are allot of different kinds of Utilitarians. Allot of different ways of saying exactly how it is the maximization of happiness comes into morality. Therefore, happiness is clearly an important idea for Utilitarians. Mill has a hedonistic view of happiness, he thinks that happiness can be defined in terms of "pleasure in the absence of pain." What is distinctive about Mill in this area is that he believes that some kinds of pleasure are better than others are, and add more to a person's happiness than other kinds of pleasures. He believes in what he calls, "higher quality pleasures." These are pleasures, he says, that we get from the exercise of faculties that only human beings happen to have. So the intellect, imagination, the moral feelings, these are the sources of higher quality pleasures people use. His view seems to be that a certain quantity of intellectual pleasure just adds more to your happiness, and a given quantity of some lower pleasure like a kind we would share with the animals such as sensation, taste, sexual pleasure, etc. His "higher quality pleasures" in a way echo Aristotle's ethics. The idea of those things that make us distinctly human that are the real key to our happiness, that is in Mill also. It is not as limited to reason and intellect as Aristotle thinks. Mill recognizes the importance of the appreciation of beauty, aesthetic pleasure, and moral pleasure. He frankly owes a debt to Aristotle that he never properly acknowledges, never gives him proper credit.

"On Liberty" is Mill's is his most widely read and enduring work. It is an indispensable essay on political thought, which strenuously argues for individual liberty. He is defending what he calls the "liberty principle." It is a principle that guarantees individuals quite a bit of personal freedom. "That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant." These quoted sentences in John Stuart Mill's book, "On Liberty," embody the crux of his argument; that the power of the state must intrude as little as possible on the liberty of its citizenry. In essence, Mill was against using the power of the state through its lawmaking apparatus to compel citizens to conduct themselves in ways that society deems moral or appropriate. Mill thought that people had not only a right, but also a duty to develop their intellectual faculties, which is indispensable to maximize their happiness. He believed that society improved for all its citizens when they where left unfettered to the maximum extent possible, allowing them to use their imagination and intellect to improve themselves. Mill postulates a theory that societies usually institute laws based primarily on "personal preference" of its citizenry instead of established principles. This lack of clarity of opinion often leads to the government frequently interfering in the lives of its citizens unnecessarily. For Mill, there are very few times when the state can infringe on the personal liberty of others. Firstly, the state has the right to promulgate laws that prevent a person's actions from harming others. Secondly, the state must protect those citizens who are not mature enough to protect themselves, such as children. Thirdly, he exempts, "... backward states of society in which the race itself may be considered as in its nonage." In Mill's view, immature societies need a benevolent leader to rule them until they have developed to a point where they, "... have attained the capacity of being guided to their own improvement by conviction or persuasion ..." Mill said this third exemption did not apply to any of the countries in Europe. Mill believed that forced morality by the state on its citizen's liberties was destructive to their inward development, and could even lead to a violent reaction by them against the government.

There are different parts of his defense of this, different arguments that he gives. He has a long chapter on freedom of speech and press. He has some very specific reasons why he thinks those freedoms are important. Always in the background for Mill is the idea of development, and making it possible for more people to enjoy these higher quality pleasures. How do we help people develop their distinctly human faculties, in ways that will help them enjoy their higher quality pleasures? Because for him that is the way, we maximize the total amount of happiness that is enjoyed in the world, and that is the object of morality as far as he is concerned. Utilitarianists believe that maximizing happiness is ultimately, what morality is all about. That does not mean maximizing your own happiness that means maximizing the total amount of happiness that is enjoyed, not only by yourself but also by everybody else as well.

Roger Kimball, in his book "Experiments Against Reality" wrote, "On Liberty" was published in 1859, coincidentally the same year as "On the Origin of Species." Darwin's book has been credited--and blamed--for all manner of moral and religious mischief. But in the long run "On Liberty" may have effected an even greater revolution in sentiment.

I read this book for a graduate class in Philosophy. Recommended reading for anyone interested in philosophy, political science, and history.

Liberty for all.......2005-09-12

It is surprising to me how many people assume that 'On Liberty' was written before or during the American Revolution - Mill was certainly influenced by the spirit of American liberty, which was variously romanticised and adapted in Britain and Europe during the nineteenth century. Published in 1859, 'On Liberty' is one of the primary political texts of the nineteenth century; perhaps only the writings of Marx had a similar impact, and of the two, in today's world, Mill's philosophy seems (please note that I only said 'seems') the one that is triumphant.

One of the interesting ideas behind 'On Liberty' is that this may in fact be more the inspiration of Harriet Taylor (later Mrs. J.S. Mill) than of Mill himself; Taylor wrote an essay on Toleration, most likely in 1832, but it remained unpublished until after her death. F.A. Hayek (free-market economist and philosopher) noticed this connection. Whether this was the direct inspiration or not, the principles are similar, and the Mills were rather united in their views about liberty.

'On Liberty' is more of an extended essay than a book - it isn't very long. It relates as a political piece to his general Utilitarianism and political reform ideology. A laissez faire capitalist in political economy, his writing has been described as 'improved Adam Smith' and 'popularised Ricardo'. Perhaps it is in part the brevity of 'On Liberty' that gives it an enduring quality.

There are five primary sections to the text. The introduction sets the stage philosophically and historically. He equates the histories of classical civilisations (Greece and Rome) with his contemporary England, stating that the struggle between liberty and authority is ever present and a primary feature of society. He does not hold with unbridled or unfettered democracy, either (contrary to some popular readings of his text) - he warns that the tyranny of the majority can be just as dangerous and damaging toward a society as any individual or oligarchic despotism. Mill looks for a liberty that permits individualism; thus, while democracy is an important feature for Mill, there must be a system of checks and balances that ensures individual liberties over and against this kind of system. All of these elements receive further development in subsequent sections.

The second section of the text is 'Of the Liberty of Thought and Discussion'. Freedom of speech and expression is an important aspect here. Mill presents a somewhat radical proposition that even should the government and the people be in complete agreement with regard to coercive action, it would still be an illegitimate power. This is an important consideration in today's world, as governments and people contemplate the curtailment of civil liberties in favour of increased security needs. The possibility of fallibility, according to Mill, makes the power illegitimate, and (again according to Mill) it doesn't matter if it affects many or only a few, people today or posterity. It is still wrong. Mill develops this argument largely by using the history of religious ideas and religious institutions, in addition to the political (since the two were so often inter-related).

The third section is perhaps the best known and most quoted, 'Of Individuality, as One of the Elements of Well-Being'. It is perhaps a natural consequence of Enlightenment thinking that individuality over communal and corporate identity would dominate. Our world today goes back and forth between individual and communal identities (nationality, regionality, employment, church affiliation, school affiliation, sports teams, etc.). Mill's ideas of individual are very modern, quite at home with the ideas of modern political and civil individuality, with all of the responsibilities.

Mill states, 'No one pretends that actions should be as free as opinions.' He recognises the increased limitations on individual liberty given that we do live in communal settings, but this does not hinder the idea of individuality and individual liberty, particularly as it pertains to thoughts and speech. Mill explores various ideas of personal identity and action (medieval, Calvinist, etc.) to come up with an idea of individuality that is rather modern; of course, this is political personhood that pre-dates the advent of psychology/psychoanalytic theory that will give rise to a lot more confusion for the role of identity and personhood in society.

The fourth primary section looks theoretically at the individual in community, 'Of the Limits to the Authority of Society Over the Individual'; the final section looks at specific applications. Mill discounts the idea of social contract while maintain that there is a mutual responsibility between individuals and community. Mill looks at the Temperance movements and laws as an example of bad laws (not only from the aspect of curtailment of liberty, but also for impractical aspects of enforcement); in similar examples, Mill looks at the role of society in regulating the life of the individual, calling on good government to always err on the side of the individual.

Mill puts it very directly -- Individuals are accountable only to themselves, unless their actions concern the interests of society at large. Few in the Western world would argue with this today; however, we still live in a world where 'thought police' are feared, and 'political correctness' is debated as appropriate or not with regard to individual liberties.

Mill wrote extensively beyond this text, in areas of philosophy (logic, religion, ethics). The particular text here includes other essays of interest: 'Utilitarianism', 'Considerations on Representative Government', and 'The Subjection of Women', and also has a useful bibliography and index. The essay on Utilitarianism is one of the more contentious works of Mill; the later two contain ideas well ahead of their time, and many parts can be seen at work in modern democracies.

This should probably be required reading in civics classes, if not in the pre-university years for students, then certainly in the early university years.

Triumph of the individual.......2005-01-12

This Oxford collection of four definitive essays by John Stuart Mill, arguably the most famous Victorian writer who could be called a philosopher, gives an excellent profile of a rigorous social reformer and political thinker. The subjects of these essays--liberty, utilitarianism, government, and women's rights--are interrelated to the extent that they reveal a man with a sharp sense of history and its impact on the methods and mores of contemporary society. Mill, after all, was of Charles Dickens's generation and therefore witnessed an era in which the British crown was inclined to manifest its power through tyranny in its efforts to maintain a costly worldwide empire.

Mill's basic concern is liberty, both social and civil. He identifies a difference between freedom and liberty--freedom is the state of being free, while liberty is the freedom that a government or governing body grants its people. Briefly a member of Parliament (the workings of which are described in great detail in "Representative Government") and heavily informed and influenced by Alexis de Tocqueville's "Democracy in America," Mill recognized that the most important (and perhaps the only proper) function of a government is to protect the liberties of its citizens. However, people generally get the form of government they deserve; if laws they allow to go unchecked become the tools of despotic powers, they have only their own ignorance or indolence to blame.

An enumeration of Mill's finer points may suffice as a summary of his ideas:

1. Freedom of the press and freedom of expression are essential rights of man. You don't have to accept as true what other people say, but let them say it because there's always the chance that they're right and you're wrong. Mill points out that even the Roman Catholic Church, most intolerant of religions (his words, not mine), allows a "devil's advocate" to offer repudiative evidence before it canonizes a new saint. He notes instances in which religious intolerance still rears its ugly head in the British Empire of his day.

2. Christianity does not have a monopoly on moral authority; literary history gives evidence of this.

3. Individuality should be fostered so that new ideas may flourish, but society, specifically the middle class, establishes the normative values that unfortunately tend to stifle individuality. You have an unlimited right to your opinion, but you are free to act only so far as you do not harm or molest others. Long before Orwell, Mill had the insight that institutional deprivation of liberty is effectively suppression of thought, for how can someone train himself to think independently when doing so could lead to persecution for heresy or treason?

4. State-sponsored education should restrict itself to teaching scientifically provable or reliably documented facts rather than push religious or political agenda. When or if polemical issues are raised, arguments for and against are to be presented as opinions so that students may draw their own conclusions.

5. The utilitarian principle states that actions that promote happiness (in its most obvious form, pleasure) are "right" and those that reduce happiness are "wrong"--in other words, utilitarianism is the opposite of puritanism. Consider how much better it is to be a dissatisfied human being than a satisfied pig, because the human has the potential for so much more happiness than the pig, whose breadth of experience is contained entirely between the trough and the slaughterhouse, could ever know.

6. Women deserve the same rights as men because the social and mental limitations attributed to women are for the most part a male-conceived artifice. Chivalry is a fallacy.

And so on. I'm not sure if it's correct to call Mill a libertarian in modern terms, but he was certainly concerned with the issues with which modern libertarians are concerned. Much of his discourse is relevant to today's world, even though he often draws upon the past for contrast in order to make his conclusions, the implication being that improvement comes with increased knowledge and experience. Anyone who is interested in nineteenth-century thought on democracy and individualism will find much to ponder in Mill's eloquence.

On "On Liberty...".......2004-05-15

Don't get me wrong. This book is quaint and it certainly has its merits. However, I was disappointed that the character on the cover isn't featured anywhere within. Who is the man with outsretched arms? Is he pleading for alms? Is he offering to pull someone out of a river? In fact, if you look closely he appears to be standing in a body of water which could support the latter theory. Who is he pulling from the river? Or is this a metaphor... do these essays figuratively pull one out of the river - the river of intellectual darkness? Perhaps not, which brings me back to my original point. Who is this man? Like all great philosophical questions... we may never know.

Liberal, Utilitarian and First Feminist. Essential reading........2004-03-31

JS Mill is rightfully so one of the most studied political theorists and philosophers. His radical ideas on women started a womens revolution during the Victorian era. His ideas about good government and freedom are applicable today, and obviously not being listened to in this neofascist age. His 'harm principle' for freedom remains one of the most enlightened theories out there, and it is with an open heart that I recommend his readings to anyone with an open mind, who is not afraid of change.

America's War on Sex: The Attack on Law, Lust and Liberty (Sex, Love, and Psychology)

Average customer rating:

THE MOST IMPORTANT BOOK FOR CLINICANS TODAY!
Review from a clinical sexologist
Great Book
FUNNY AND INFORMATIVE
America's Sexophobia Exposed

America's War on Sex: The Attack on Law, Lust and Liberty (Sex, Love, and Psychology)
Marty Klein
Manufacturer: Praeger Publishers
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Sex | Health, Mind & Body | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

ASIN: 027598785X

Book Description

"In our free society, people have the right to choose how they live their lives."-- President George Bush, June 3, 2006 So why does our government

want to censor what you read, hear, and see?

try to limit your access to contraception?

attempt to legislate "good moral values"?

try to brainwash your kids about "abstinence"? These are the kinds of questions Dr. Marty Klein asks--and answers--in his new book, America's War on Sex. With hundreds of examples ripped from today's headlines, he names names, challenges political hypocrisy, and shows the financial connections between government and conservative religious groups that are systematically taking away your rights. Dr. Klein isn't shy about it. He demands to know--as you should demand to know--

If 50 million Americans consume pornography, why does the government dare to regulate it without consulting any consumers? Why do Congressmen listen to "victims of porn" but not healthy adults who use porn?

Now that "abstinence-only" sex education has been proven a failure, why does the government still give it $200 million each year? And how can most of that money go to "faith-based" groups who tell your kids how God feels about their sexual choices?

Why do hundreds of American communities feel they have the right to eliminate legal adult entertainment, claiming "we're not that kind of city"?

Why do family courts have the right to judge the private sexual habits of each parent when making custody decisions?

How can licensed pharmacists and physicians claim they have the right to deny you legal medical care if it violates their "conscience"? Our glorious Constitution guarantees us the widest range of rights civilization has ever seen. Why are those rights systematically undermined and revoked when it comes to sexual expression? Is there a conspiracy to deny us our sexual rights? No, says Marty Klein: "It's worse than a conspiracy. It's a war. They're very open about it--it's a War on Sex." It's a war that threatens the very fabric of our secular democracy. The American Taliban, our own sexual jihadists, want to replace our government with laws based on the Bible, creating a country in which "normal sex" is narrowly defined and no one has the right to alternative sexual information, health care, or personal expression. America is fighting a war on terror to prevent the overthrow of our way of life by fanatics who want to base all law on their strict religious beliefs. It is completely unacceptable that a group of conservative Americans is trying to accomplish the same thing right here.

Customer Reviews:

THE MOST IMPORTANT BOOK FOR CLINICANS TODAY!.......2007-08-14

"The battle lines have been drawn, and it's not just the think tanks and advocacy groups that have stakes in this war. The sexuality of everyone is at risk, making America's War on Sex a must read for all citizens" says Bill Taverner, M.A. Co-Founding Editor, American Journal of Sexuality Education. Author Michael Castleman reports "America's War on Sex--the title may sound a bit hyped, but it's isn't. It's true: Social conservatives have truly declared war on sex, and no one lays out their agenda better than Marty Klein in this frightening and cogently argued book. Frightening because sexual civil rights are in jeopardy. Klein describes how the forces of sex-negativity are working to set up camp in our bedrooms.

Honored CAMFT (California Association of Marriage & Family Therapists -)member, Dr. Marty Klein is making people angry with his newest book, America's War On Sex. And rightfully so! Upon delivering this outstanding book the AASECT (American Association of Sexuality Educators, Counselors and Therapists) Best Book of the Year Award at a sex therapist conference in June, Dr. Joy Davidson stated that she was angry while reading this book and that everyone in America, especially therapist, should be too!

Why be angry while reading Dr. Klein extremely factual, and yet at times humorous, discourse on sex in America today? Because he is right! We, all Americans, are under attack by those who want to robe us of our sexual rights, freedoms and education! In this book Dr. Klein explains with great fines how abstinence only sex education is being promoted and funded by our government despite overwhelming evidence of its failure to deliver the results it has promised, how women's rights to purchase and own vibrators are being legally denied by an increasing amount of state legislators and how sexual mis-information is deliberately being promoted in an effort to take away rights from the GLBT communities!

The anger one experiences when reading this book is not limited to sex therapists or the general public either. It is vital that all psychotherapists read and understand the issues addressed in this book. Our clients come into our offices carrying guilt and shame for engaging in healthy sexual practices after being convinced by negative myths promoted to illuminate sex from our society. They struggle with issue around parenting stemming from fear based messages about children's sexuality. HIV, unwanted pregnancy and the lack of positive sexual expression is the result. We as psychotherapist have an obligation to know the facts about sexuality, to help our clients understand them, to debunk dangerous myths and to support our client's sexual education, personal development and positive sexuality within couples. That is why I say America's War On Sex is the most important book in our field today and is a must read by all clinicians!

Stephen L. Braveman, M.A., L.M.F.T., D.S.T.
Licensed Marriage & Family Therapist # MFC 28926
AASECT Certified Diplomate of Sex Therapy
AASECT Certified Supervisor and Certified CE Provider
Gender Specialist - Clinical Member of WPATH
Tantra Facilitator-Practitioner
AASECT Western Region Representative
CAMFT Past President - Monterey Chapter
Author:
- "Innovative Methods of Treating Patients with Sexual Trauma"
in "Innovations in Clinical Practice: Focus on Sexual Health, 2007"
- "CPR for Your Sex Life: How to Breathe Life Into a Dead, Dying or Dull Sex Life"
(Co-Author: Mildred Brown, Ph.D.), 2007.

Review from a clinical sexologist.......2007-04-21

What I like most about Dr. Klein and his new book, America's War on Sex, is that he's not afraid to battle the bullies and bigots who have hijacked our country. With facts and footnotes up the wazzoo, Dr. Klein's no holds barred, easy to read and humorous polemic is a must for any American who cares about their freedom.

Great Book.......2007-01-11

I had to read this book for a Human Sexuality class for a graduate class and even though the class is over and I did not finish reading the book I cant wait to finish it. The book is great at explaining topics such as teen pregnancy and sex education. A MUST READ!!!

FUNNY AND INFORMATIVE.......2007-01-10

I thought this book was very well written! It made alot of points that I wasn't aware of!

America's Sexophobia Exposed.......2006-12-12

Marty Klein's expert analysis of our sexually repressed society reminds me of H.L.Mencken's definition of a puritan as a person with the terrible fear that someone, somewhere,is having a good time. And with our born-again president insisting on funding nothing but abstinence only sex ed in our schools, we have the dubious distinction of having the highest teenage unwed pregnancy rate of all the industrial nations. It's a terrific, enlightening read.

Sex for Christians: The Limits and Liberties of Sexual Living

Average customer rating:

reccomended
Not for immature Christians!!
An open and honest view on sexuality.
The Joy God Means Us To Have
I actually give it a Zero.

Sex for Christians: The Limits and Liberties of Sexual Living
Lewis B. Smedes
Manufacturer: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

Look Inside Health Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

Look Inside Religion & Spirituality Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

All Amazon Upgrade | Amazon Upgrade | Stores | Books

Health, Mind & Body | Amazon Upgrade | Stores | Books

Nonfiction | Amazon Upgrade | Stores | Books

Religion & Spirituality | Amazon Upgrade | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0802807437

Customer Reviews:

reccomended.......2007-01-25

Lauren Winner reccomeded reading this book for Christians. Core message in this book is biblical, which doesn't change with culture generation to generation.

Not for immature Christians!!.......2006-03-13

If the utterly clique, tired, and EMPTY "Christian" modern teachings on sex that you usually hear has left you wanting, this book is for you. If you're looking to justify what you've already decided to believe...well then...this book, along with every book in existence, is not for you. This book cuts through all the moralism and legalism that sexually insecure Christians spew and gets straight to the heart of matters.

An open and honest view on sexuality........2005-08-03

This book is very straightforward about sex and its relationship to people. In college, this was one of our textbooks for an Ethics class, and I remember being impressed with its view of sex as a joyful, beautiful and SACRED part of a marriage. It seems that with media we get a "do it all you want/can" morality that leaves out the sacred/spiritual part of a person, so this book is a good balance to that view.
I plan to give this book to my eldest niece for her 13th birthday so that she has another perspective from which to view sex and to make her own decisions about her body and her sexuality.
I wasn't too keen about the view of homosexuality in this book, but I tend to be more liberal about the gay lifestlye than most of the fundamental Christianity camp.

The Joy God Means Us To Have.......2003-07-29

This is THE best book I've ever read on the subject. Smedes presents a biblically sound view of sex and in so doing allows Christ to bring joy and freedom to our whole person.

I actually give it a Zero........2002-08-10

I was rather disappointed when I read this book. What I basically got from this book was that it is okay to do sexual activities such as sexual petting, heavy petting, and all of the above...including sexual intercourse depending on your circumstance. I was disappointed. If this is the case then where does chastity and purity end and immorality and impurity begin? He contradicts himself by saying that (heavy) petting is ok but then says one mustn't confuse himself by thinking that he/she is chaste if he does decide to pet. Well then what is the point? There were many contradictions in this book.

The next problem I had dealt with the pornography section of his book. He states that it is ok for the husband to look at porn as long as he isn't comparing that porn to his wife and other things. I don't know a woman in the world that enjoys being married to a man who wants to view porn. (I'm talking about Christian women.)

I remember reading the book and putting it down close to the end out of disgust! I'm not saying his book is totally horrible. There are some things addressed in there that are actually good...however, these things are very few.

Book Description

Defenders of the free market argue that inequalities of income are "just" because they are deserved, and that they are what free individuals are entitled to. Far from supporting free market inequalities, this book argues that, when we examine the principle of "desert" and the notions of "liberty" and "choice" invoked by defenders of the free market, the conception of justice that would accommodate these notions calls for their elimination. The book will be of interest to readers in political philosophy, political theory, and normative economics.

Liberty, Property And Markets: A Critique Of Libertarianism (Ashgate New Critical Thinking in Philosophy)

Average customer rating:

Liberty, Property And Markets: A Critique Of Libertarianism (Ashgate New Critical Thinking in Philosophy)
Daniel Attas
Manufacturer: Ashgate Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Ethics & Morality | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

History & Surveys | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Nonfiction | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
ASIN: 0754652580

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Utility: Happiness in Philosophical and Economic Thought (St. Andrews Studies in Philosophy & Public Affairs)

Average customer rating:

Two scholars tackle "Happiness"

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Utility: Happiness in Philosophical and Economic Thought (St. Andrews Studies in Philosophy & Public Affairs)

Manufacturer: Imprint Academic
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Consciousness & Thought | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Psychology & Counseling | Health, Mind & Body | Subjects | Books

Look Inside Health Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 1845400526

Book Description

A volume on nature, ingredients, causes and consequences of human happiness by father and son team of Antony and Charles Kenny.

Customer Reviews:

Two scholars tackle "Happiness".......2007-03-17

"Happiness studies" is a new and growing field, but is also currently dominated by pop-psychology and some rather confusing studies based on surveys which try to compare across countries. This book by Anthony and Charles Kenny brings a serious scholarly perspective--actually, two perspectives that work surprisingly well together--to the subject matter. The book is a set of essays, each chapter alternately on the philosophy (written by Anthony, a former master of Balliol College, Oxford) and the economics (written by Charles, a noted economist) of happiness. Their approach implicitly reminds the reader that philosophy and economics used to be one and the same (a commentary in itself on the sometimes sorry effects of growing academic specialization). The book asks essentially two questions: What is happiness all about? And how is it related other things we are supposed to care about, like quality of life or wealth? The two authors weave together history with current debates and new evidence to give a rich account of the state of our understanding. And it's actually very readable, so don't let the imposing academic cover scare you off.

Average customer rating:

Ad "Emergency"
A Viable Politics?
A Full Case for Individual Rights
Not bad, but still leaves Rand's flaws uncorrected.
The Objectivist case for individual rights

Moral Rights and Political Freedom
Tara Smith
Manufacturer: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Civil Rights & Liberties | Current Events | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Ethics & Morality | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Political | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Human Rights | Constitutional Law | Law | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Nonfiction | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0847680266

Book Description

Seeking a way out of today's bewildering rush of rights claims, Tara Smith's "Moral Rights and Political Freedom" offers a systematic account of the nature and foundations of rights. The book carefully elucidates what political freedom is and demonstrates why it should be protected by rights. Smith's thesis is that rights are teleological: respect for freedom is necessary for individuals' flourishing or "eudaimonia." Smith illustrates how many alleged rights would actually undermine that objective. Her decisive refutation of the assumption that conflicts between rights are inevitable--demonstrating how such conflicts are theoretically incoherent and practically self-defeating--should go a long way toward resolving many contemporary disputes about rights.

Customer Reviews:

Ad "Emergency".......2007-02-22

"Scott Ryan", my favorite Amazon (and other places) Rand critic writes:

If I'm driving at ninety miles an hour toward a bridge abutment, am I not in some way obliged to avoid mowing down the little girl who wanders out in front of my car? If so, then my obligation to respect your rights is founded, at least in part, on something other than my own "choice to live."

Is our case for ethics based on this scenario? Further, do you have a right to end your own life? Third, in what *context* does a discussion about what rights (if any) anyone (if anyone) holds? Fourth, how does the concept 'rights' exist *between* individuals?

Tara Smith has written a solid book that I highly enjoyed. If one grants Smith some epistemological room -- she presents a great case for individual rights. Ultimately -- and I think the other reviewers here would agree -- Smith's account of rights and how they exist between individuals is based on Rand's epistemology. So, if its the case that Rand's epistemology is bogus -- than this account of rights, although interesting -- will fail to persaude.

A Viable Politics?.......2004-06-20

Tara Smith is a professor of philosophy and a follower of the ideas of novelist-philosopher Ayn Rand (called "Objectivism"). Prof. Smith offers a strong defense of individual rights based on an Objectivist conception of reason and human nature. (Curiously, while Rand is mentioned in the footnotes, she is never mentioned in the body of the text.)

There are a number of merits to this book. Prof. Smith is a clear writer who sets forth her arguments forcefully in jargon-free language. Unlike much Objectivist writing, she interacts with other traditions in a non-vituperative manner. Rather than give Rand all the credit, she indicates where she is indebted to others. Finally, she responds to potential arguments and counterexamples to her theory. Compare, for example, her section on "the ethics of emergencies" with Rand's article of the same name. Rand's article quickly descends into a screed against "altruism."

Prof. Smith argues that rights find their justification in man's need to advance his own life. Without rights, I can't exercise my reason and therefore can't live. Prof. Smith's argument, although fairly persuasive, runs into some obvious problems. Most importantly is the question of why one person should respect the rights of others. If, as Prof. Smith argues, rights have an egoistic foundation, then why should I respect someone else's rights? In fairness, to Prof. Smith, she realizes that this is a question that needs to be addressed, but I don't find her answer completely satisfactory. Finally, is the only justification for rights their role in advancing life? If I knew that I was going to die next week, would it be okay for me to cheat and steal?

Prof. Smith is also the author of a work on metaethics called VIABLE VALUES, which is quite good. A work that interacts with some of the topics covered by Prof. Smith is Roderick Long's REASON AND VALUE: ARISTOTLE VERSUS RAND (which, unfortunately does not reference Prof. Smith). Thomas Fleming takes on the tradition represented by Prof. Smith in THE MORALITY OF EVERDAY LIFE.

A Full Case for Individual Rights.......2004-03-29

Smith's book is a thorough defense of individual rights from an Objectivist perspective. She presents her case clearly, and, despite what other reviewers have said, answers the question of how it is always in my interest to respect the rights of others. Her argument hinges on the point that human action must be guided by principle, and, as this applies to rights, the principle is that reason, not force, is the only means to value.

She critiques (with devastating results) deontological and consequentialist theories of rights and offers a teleological view as superior. This is a unique perspective and is itself more than enough to warrant buying the book. Smith's book is good because of both its defense of rights from a teleological perspective and its criticisms of competing views.

Not bad, but still leaves Rand's flaws uncorrected........2000-04-07

The crucial question facing any theory of political"rights" is: why should _I_ respect _yours_? And despite atremendous effort, I'm afraid Tara Smith hasn't yet answered this question.

I'm happy to see her declare that the deontology-vs.-consequentialism dichotomy is a false one, and I even agree with her that the right approach is "teleological" (though for somewhat different reasons from hers). But unfortunately her own "teleological" approach fails to tell us just why one person is _morally_ obliged not to violate the rights of another.

Her essential claim is that rights violations are _never_ in accordance with the "telos" of rights, which has to do with the securing and promotion of life. But there are two objections which Smith never adequately addresses:

(1) The transition from "my rights promote my telos" to "_respecting_ my rights promotes _your_ telos" is never made clear, either by Rand or by Smith; each passes without acknowledgement from one claim to the other.

(2) And by "respecting my rights" I mean respecting them _as_ rights. I'm not persuaded that Smith has given an adequate foundation for rights _as_ rights.

For her foundation, ultimately, is that my respect for _your_ rights promotes my _own_ life. But are your rights not morally binding against me even if I have decided to kill myself? (Even if I am in the very _act_ of killing myself? If I'm driving at ninety miles an hour toward a bridge abutment, am I not in some way obliged to avoid mowing down the little girl who wanders out in front of my car?) If so, then my obligation to respect your rights is founded, at least in part, on something other than my own "choice to live."

Smith, like Rand before her, is at least in the ballpark. But I continue to think that the "Objectivist ethic" needs to be re-thought from the ground up -- a task that Smith has not yet performed.

The Objectivist case for individual rights.......1998-10-27

Prof. Smith does a wonderful job of giving a proper academic presentation of the Objectivist case for individual rights. She first presents a detailed moral teleological argument for why individuals should have rights. She then proceeds to argue against both deontological and consequentialist justifications for rights and makes the case that her teleological justification is the only proper one which has none of the weaknesses of the other attempts at justifying rights. Finally she takes on so-called "positive freedoms" or "welfare rights" and shows how recognizing such rights negates actual freedoms and thus that such positive rights are not proper rights and freedoms at all.

Book Description

This is the first comprehensive interpretation of John Locke's solution to one of philosophy's most enduring problems: free will and the nature of human agency. Many assume that Locke defines freedom as merely the dependency of conduct on our wills. And much contemporary philosophical literature on free agency regards freedom as a form of self-expression in action. Here, Gideon Yaffe shows us that Locke conceived free agency not just as the freedom to express oneself, but as including also the freedom to transcend oneself and act in accordance with "the good." For Locke, exercising liberty involves making choices guided by what is good, valuable, and important. Thus, Locke's view is part of a tradition that finds freedom in the imitation of God's agency. Locke's free agent is the ideal agent.

Yaffe also examines Locke's understanding of volition and voluntary action. For Locke, choices always involve self-consciousness. The kind of self-consciousness to which Locke appeals is intertwined with his conception of personal identity. And it is precisely this connection between the will and personal identity that reveals the special sense in which our voluntary actions can be attributed to us and the special sense in which we are active with respect to them. Deftly written and tightly focused, Liberty Worth the Name will find readers far beyond Locke studies and early modern British philosophy, including scholars interested in free will, action theory, and ethics.

Customer Reviews:

To Dr. Gideon Yaffe.......2000-11-16

Prof. (Dr.) Yaffe,

Your words have been inspirational to both my peers and I. Thank you for your insight and help in this complex philosophical world. Everyone should read this book. Dr. Yaffe has accompished the impossible and has answered the unanswerable. We're all waiting for the next one.

Jedi Master Yaffe Cleans Basement, Guides Tours with Locke.......2000-10-18

Do I have free will? And if I have her and I call her "Liberty," is she worth the name? To professor Gideon Yaffe of the University of Southern California, the answers are 'yes' and 'you bet, Huckleberry!' In Yaffe's latest tour-de-force, he offers up the intellectual key to open the door to the shoddy basement where Free Will has lain dormant in the philosophy mansion on Important Problems street. But although the key fits the Locke and the basement sorely needs cleaning, the door will not budge easily. Yaffe points out early on that this stubbornness is due to the rust brought on by decades of stagnant contemporary philosophy. In order to facilitate entry into this dark cellar of festering potential, Yaffe says we must anoint its door-hinges with a hefty dose of the old-school grease of John Locke. And here, in the greasing, is where Yaffe shines. As I, the reader, accepted the gentle overtures of Yaffe and Locke and descended arm in arm with these men into the darkness of Free Will, I could not help but feel I was being guided by docents of unusual perspicuity--perhaps even of the caliber of those at Graceland. As Yaffe flicked on his many lamps of insight, Locke pointed out the cracked walls of volition, the musty sweaters of self-consciousness, and the urine-stained mattresses of good conduct. Yaffe and Locke seemed to organize the room right before my eyes, their taut muscles rippling under the weights of their efforts.

The book includes most of the standard Yaffian literary tricks aficionados have come to expect--the inappropriate (yet deliciously naughty!) introduction of profanity to underscore a critical point, the thinly-veiled references to the author's ample manhood--but unlike in his other recent works (Yaffe's titillating but philosophically unsatisfying 'I Gets Mine' comes to mind) these ploys are not incorporated gratuitously. Many times I would bristle at Yaffe's use of the f-word to make a point, when a simple line drawing or mathematical equation would seem to have sufficed. But my discomfort would gradually melt into recognition, and then understanding, and, finally, I would become aroused. "Oh yes," I would sigh contentedly, "I am experiencing Yaffe."

Yaffe wields old man Locke like a jedi light saber against the modern philosophical Darth Vaders who would trivialize or oversimplify Locke's conception of free will. But, in the final assessment, is Yaffe the triumphant Luke Skywalker or the beaten, bodyless robe of Obi-Wan Kenobi? This reviewer unreservedly calls him Skywalker. All hail Gideon Yaffe, the Jedi Master who cleaned up the basement.

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books