Product Description
The Black church is often praised for its contribution to Black culture and politics. More recently Islam has been recognized as an important force in African American liberation. Anthony Pinn's new anthology By These Hands demonstrates the crucial, often overlooked role that Humanism has played in African American struggles for dignity, power and justice. Pinn collects the finest examples of African American Humanism and shows how it's embrace by a variety of prominent figures in African American thought and letters has served as the basis for activism and resistance to American racism and sexism.

Pinn uncovers little known treasures of African American Literature such as The Slave Narrative of James Hay, where an abused slave decides to rely on himself, rather than God, for deliverance from the horrors of slavery, and a letter from Frederick Douglass which scandalized his religious friends by proclaiming that "One honest Abolitionist was a greater terror to slaveholders than whole acres of camp-meeting preachers shouting glory to God." Essays by Zora Neale Hurston and Richard Wright demonstrate the profound influence of Humanism in the Harlem Rennaisance, and pieces by James Farmer, Amiri Baraka (Leroi Jones) and Huey Newton show Humanism's impact on the civil rights and Black Power movements.

Designed for classroom use, this radical reconsideration of African American history will be a must read for anyone interested in African American History, African American Religion and Philosophy, and American History.

Contributors: Norm Allen, Jr., Herbert Aptheker, James Baldwin, Amiri Imamu Baraka, J. Mason Brewer, Sterling Brown, Frederick Douglass, W.E.B.Du Bois, James Foreman, Duchess Harris, Hubert H. Harrison, Harry Haywood, Zora Neale Hurston, William R. Jones, William Loren Katz, Benjamin E. Mays, Huey P. Newton, Daniel Payne, J. Saunders Redding, William L. Van DeBurg, Alice Walker, and Richard Wright. ... Read more

Product Description
"I wish this book had been available to me in my salad days, that I had read it before immersing myself in the entire trilogy. That is now what I will say to those potential students of the philosophy of love and sex who ask me where they should start. First this book, then The Nature of Love."
—Alan Soble, From the Foreword

In 1984, Irving Singer published the first volume of what would become a classic and much acclaimed trilogy on love. Trained as an analytical philosopher, Singer first approached his subject with the tools of current philosophical methodology. Dissatisfied by the initial results (finding the chapters he had written "just dreary and unproductive of anything"), he turned to the history of ideas in philosophy and the arts for inspiration. He discovered an immensity of speculation and artistic practice that reached wholly beyond the parameters he had been trained to consider truly philosophical. In his three-volume work The Nature of Love, Singer tried to make sense of this historical progression within a framework that reflected his precise distinction-making and analytical background. In this new book, he maps the trajectory of his thinking on love.

It is a "partial" summing-up of a lifework: partial because it expresses the author's still unfolding views, because it is a recapitulation of many published pages, because love—like any subject of that magnitude—resists a neatly comprehensive, all-inclusive formulation. Adopting an informal, even conversational, tone, Singer discusses, among other topics, the history of romantic love, the Platonic ideal, courtly and nineteenth-century Romantic love; the nature of passion; the concept of merging (and his critique of it); ideas about love in Freud, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Dewey, Santayana, Sartre, and other writers; and love in relation to democracy, existentialism, creativity, and the possible future of scientific investigation.

Singer's writing on love embodies what he has learned as a contemporary philosopher, studying other authors in the field and "trying to get a little further." This book continues his trailblazing explorations.

Irving Singer Library ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Singer's New Book a Disappointments
I've read all of Irving Singer's books and was excited when I ordered this one from Amazon. As usual the book arrived within a few days, in excellent condition.But beyond the service, the book has nothing to recommend it. The slender volume offers inviting chapters that purport to be distillations of the ideas in Singer's magisterial 3 volume work on Love, which is well worth owning.The present book, however, never rises above a shallow summation of cliches written at a grade-school level.I was greatly disappointed!

Go back to the original trilogy
1.5 stars

As the title suggests, this book is a summing up of three other bigger works of the author on the philosophy of love. Yet, as a supplementary text, I don't see any new insights and amusing thoughts. I feel like I am reading the York notes of the trilogy. Why bother publishing this one? The references in the books are never cited. Readers therefore may feel lost if they are interested in going back to the original texts. Moreover, the structure of the book is another problem. Most of the time, Singer just rumbles on the subject matter without doing thorough explanation.

Inspiring
Moves pluralistically from analyses of various forms of love and their distinctions to the meaning of life and creativity. ... Read more

Product Description
An insightful and informative exploration of how sex and love have been perceived throughout history. Written by one of the most respected authors in the field, this volume offers readers an informative and engaging examination of the nature, ethics, and philosophy of love and sex. "The Philosophy of Love and Sex" looks at all aspects of how love and sex have been perceived throughout history, with a focus on how 20th-century thinkers in various intellectual traditions have looked upon them. Topics addressed include: the nature of sexual pleasure, desire, and activity; sexual ethics and their plausibility; the moral and social issues of pornography, prostitution, and adultery; and, the significance of love in sex. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Intriguing and very much enlightening to readers
What makes many of us tick and what continues the species, Sex and Love are two complicated things. Now in a significantly revised and expanded second edition, "The Philosophy of Sex and Love" by Alan Soble is a scholarly text tackling the philosophical and moral questions surrounding what's on the minds of many throughout the day. Questions on morality of many sexual practices, the psychological aspect of many of them, how love ties into everything, and more are discussed, to prompt many readers to put deep thought into one of humanity's most basic instincts. "The Philosophy of Sex and Love" is intriguing and very much enlightening to readers, highly recommended.

Not Soble's best
An interesting read, the book is very categorically divided into two almost unrelated sections: one on sex and the other on love. One would have expected such an expert dealing more specifically with the relationship between the two. As a general treatise, surely, I have read better works - even if considerably shorter - by Alan Soble. For instance, what Soble calls the "metaphysics of sexuality", and his very apt distinction between "metaphysical sexual pessimism" and "metaphysical sexual optimism", are practically absent altogether. The title of the book purports to be the (why not "a") philosophy of sex and love (together or separately?), but rather disappoints as a philosophical treatise. Notwithstanding, coming from such a brilliant expert on the subject, this book is not to be missed by anyone interested in the themes dealt with. It includes some very interesting discussions as well.

Thought you knew all about sex and love?Think again!
I was able to take Professor Soble's class this summer.As I was looking through this book in the University book store several of the chapter headings piqued my interest and I ended up reading the book even before class began.I found his writing to be clear and understandable, even with the occasional discussions of the love/sex life of the those poor confused individuals knows as x and y (I wish them luck in their search for exclusivity, constancy & reciprocity!) He often made his points with humor and even made me laugh out loud at his references to the World Series, things that are waved at the public during Mardi Gras and what provides an interesting distraction from grading exam papers! From Plato & St. Paul to Goldman & Nagel, Professor Soble's book takes the reader through the many questions asked throughout history about the nature of sex and love and does it in such a way that we can all understand it. ... Read more

Product Description
"It is a great pleasure to welcome Jim Herrick's book on humanism. His description of humanism is clear and concise, yet easy to read. It covers the important points in a sound manner without going into cumbersome detail."Professor Sir HERMANN BONDI, renowned British mathematician and cosmologist, King's College, Cambridge University, UK

"Jim Herrick insists that humanist optimism is neither blithely sanguine nor naively unrealistic--but rather, a sane and practical based upon a clear-eyed assessment and understanding of ourselves and the world....Definitely a book to own and certainly one to lend."NORMAN PRIDMORE, THE FREETHINKER

"A concise but comprehensive account of humanism, combing argument and defense with a wealth of factual information. A further merit of its comprehensiveness is that it avoids the narrow stereotypes of secular humanism as confined to dry rationalism. Whilst fully committed to rationality and the scientific worldview, Herrick successfully coveys that there is more to life and more to humanism, especially in his chapter on the arts."RICHARD NORMAN, formerly professor of moral philosophy at the University of Kent, UK, and vice president of the British Humanist Association

In this succinct, informative, and enlightening introduction to humanism--a philosophy that emphasizes the value of human life in all its creative potential within a secular context--Jim Herrick, a leading humanist advocate in Great Britain, provides a highly readable account of the guiding principles, history, and practice of humanism in today's world. Herrick surveys the tradition of humanism as it developed over many centuries, its skepticism toward belief in God and an afterlife, humanist values and arguments for morality outside of a religious framework, its attitude of tolerance toward different lifestyles and belief systems, its endorsement of democratic political principles, its strong ties to science, its evaluation of the arts as an exploration of human potential, and its concern for environmental preservation and the long-term sustainability of the earth. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (8)

Okay.....
This book is okay, but some-what boring.It isn't as insightful as I thought it would be.

A good starting point
I really regret paying $17 for this book, I should have looked at the number of pages before I bought it. I wouldn't really call this book an introduction. It's more of a starting point. It's like an outline, giving you bursts of breif information, very sketchy.
I will say, though, that its very objective and does make good points; its thought provoking.
What is really great about the book is that it lists many other works you can read for a more in-depth view of the specific topic. For example, it talks breifly about people that have had an impact on humanism throughout history, and if the few sentences about the person interest me, I can further research it myself. All of the names and novels are there to reference back on later.
But in general, if you're looking for an introduction that's a little more than an outline, I suggest finding another book.

A Great Overview of a Multifaceted Topic
Humanism is a term that often appears in the media but which is seldom defined."Humanism: An Introduction" by Jim Herrick could very well provide just about everything the average person would ever need to know about humanism.Short, succinct, and very readable chapters cover humanism plays its part in morality, religion, science, the arts, and even the environment.Chapters at the book's end tell of humanistic organizations' history and purposes.The chapter "Humanist Action and Humanist Living" tells how humanistic attitudes and values can be implemented outside the realm of academia.

A bit too sketchy, even for an introduction
Introductory books are difficult to pull off.On the one hand, you want to present the subject matter in a way that novices can comprehend.But on the other hand, you don't want to dumb-down what you're writing about.As anyone knows who's ever tried to write an introductory text, this isn't an easy course to navigate.

Jim Herrick ambitiously offer an introductory exploration of a huge subject in his Humanism:An Introduction.Although Herrick is a good stylist and clear author, the result is mixed.He's at his best when discussing the history of humanism (chapter 2), humanistic responses to religion, morality and politics (chapters 3-6), and humanism and the environment (chapter 9).But he seems out of his depth in his exploration of humanism and science (chapter 7), his discussion of humanism and the arts seems platitudinous (chapter 8), and his rundown of institutionalized humanism (chapters 10 & 11) is boringly skip-worthy and way too long (taking up a full one-fifth of the book).Moreover, even the better chapters are short on argument and long on declaration.Finally, the book lacks a bibliography to guide further reading, an essential for any introductory volume.

So although Herrick's book isn't awful, there are better short introductions to humanism.Paul Kurtz's terse What Is Secular Humanism? (2007) may be the single best place to start.It's accessible but rigorous.Corliss Lamont's The Philosophy of Humanism (reprint, 1997) remains a classic, although dated in some sections.Margaret Knight's and Jim Herrick's Humanist Anthology From Confucious to Attenborough (1995) is a decent collection of primary sources.Finally, for those with a taste for Continental approaches, Sartre's Existentialism Is a Humanism (reprint, 2007) can't be beat.

Offers an overview of humanism, but ...
it is one of the most boring books I have ever read.Perhaps that's why humanism is not that popular.What humanism needs is some mythic heroes :) ... Read more

Product Description

The most important work by one of America's greatest twentieth-century philosophers, Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind is both the epitome of Wilfrid Sellars' entire philosophical system and a key document in the history of philosophy. First published in essay form in 1956, it helped bring about a sea change in analytic philosophy. It broke the link, which had bound Russell and Ayer to Locke and Hume--the doctrine of "knowledge by acquaintance." Sellars' attack on the Myth of the Given in Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind was a decisive move in turning analytic philosophy away from the foundationalist motives of the logical empiricists and raised doubts about the very idea of "epistemology."

With an introduction by Richard Rorty to situate the work within the history of recent philosophy, and with a study guide by Robert Brandom, this publication of Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind makes a difficult but indisputably significant figure in the development of analytic philosophy clear and comprehensible to anyone who would understand that philosophy or its history.

Customer Reviews (5)

a difficult read, not recommendable to every philosophy student
The review is just on Sellars' essay. Rorty as usual hasn't said much about things. So if you know Sellars via Rorty, drop this one and read Derrida instead. Brandom is still quite interesting, but there are many others who want to talk about him.

From the first time I read the essay, I was wondering why Sellars's text is so ambiguous and incomprehensible. He studied mathematics before he came to study philosophy. But unlike Quine, you saw not even a vestige of mathematical elegance in his clumsy writing. His way of reasoning is just way too un-analytical. Soon I came to the conclusion that he knew very little of contemporary logic. Philosophy is a very funny discipline. Sometimes, the difficulty in understanding a philosophical argument points to the difficulty at the heart of the real philosophical problems and sometimes, it results from a confused way of thinking about matters. It takes time for readers to be able to determine from which the difficulty originates. Initially, I thought the difficulty in reading Sellars is a genuine one, but I found later that most of the time it wasn't.

In many cases, as one reviewer below says, he simply mis-reasons and in an awkward way. The way he construes regress argument in memory judgment is one such example.

Other times, he simply confuses himself or omits argument all together. In SS20 for example, after a long discussion on conceptual priority of the "is" over the "looks" , he proposes and defends conceptual holism against adverbial theory; which is a variant of epistemological foundationalism. Adverbialists such as Chisholm characteristically endorse the foundationalist thesis that there are some basic beliefs which justify all other non-basic empirical beliefs. They think perceptual beliefs of the kind "x looks R to me", "x appears R to me" are candidates for such basic beliefs. This thesis, problematic as it may sound too Cartesian, by itself doesn't lead them to commit to conceptual atomism. It only tells us that the belief statements of the form " x looks R" are justificatory prior to belief statement of the form " x is R". The thesis about epistemic justification doesn't tell us anything about the conceptual priority of one term over the other, so defending conceptual holism can be perfectly compatible with the position Sellars argues against. Sellars seems to conflate epistemological question with conceptual question here. There are mistakes of this kind here and there in this essay. In another place, he simply didn't argue well enough. He commits to a semantic thesis that a word's meaning is its functional role to defend his "psychological nominalism". This thesis which is now called "functional semantic theory" is itself a very controversial thesis and you need a book-length argument to just defend the view.( btw, which is what Brandom was trying to do in recent years) But Sellars simply sketched out the basic idea and did no defense on his claim.

Even though Sellars' original presentation is far from clear, the idea of "myth of the given" is quite interesting nontheless. The idea is roughly that any mental items (propositional or non-propositional) that play epistemically justificational role in justifying empirically significant statements couldn't be independently given. It depends for its justification on other propositions. No candidate of the given could serve the role it was meant to serve. So on this construal, not only sense-data can't be given, but judgments such as "it looks red to me" or "I have a pain in my stomach" can't be given as well. So his critique on the myth of the given is clearly broader than any arguments against sense-data theory and probably broader than private language argument. The problem is that it may be too broad. If you endorse Sellars' critique of MOG along with his psychological nominalism which states that any kind of awareness (conscious or unconscious) is linguistic affair, then you need to deny any awareness of pain on the part of creatures who don't use language-like systems like us. Not only that he also had to expel sensations all together from the realm of reasons, hence from objects of awareness. (he prefers to use the term "sense impression" or "direct experience" instead of sensation in this text) and thinks of it as "postulated" instead of "directly experienced". According to this view, then, phenomenal quality such as pain has obviously no place in our realm of reasons because it contains no propositional content, let alone linguistic content, but can we seriously claim that we are not even aware of them because all awareness is propositional in form?

Warning: The text doesn't include the footnotes Sellars added in 1960's. The added footnotes are significant enough for undertanding subsequent debates between Sellars and his critiques (Chisholm, Firth etc). If you want a full text of this essay with added footnotes, get "Science, Perception and Reality" instead.

Brilliant and rewarding
I have come back to this essay by Sellars again and again for over thirty years, and have never failed to impressed and inspired. Sellars can always get me to think at a deeper level than I'm used to. Second only perhaps to Wittgenstein in influence, Sellars is a philosopher's philosopher: understanding him requires a thorough grounding in the history of philosophy, and this essay in particular takes it for granted that you understand 20th century empricism and "sense data" theories pretty well. Even so, the writing style can be both dense and difficult, but reading it aloud can untangle any number of tricky passages. If you're not quite so well versed in history of philosophy, a similar critique can be found in J.L. Austin's "Sense and Sensibilia," which is more accessible but not nearly as profound. In the course of showing the futility of finding incorrigibile foundations for empirical knowledge in sense experience, Sellars simultaneously develops a strictly behavioristic psychology that legitimizes all the goodies, all the mental vocabulary, that folks like Skinner forbade. A tour de force unequalled in 80 years. Bob Brandom's explicatory essay is very helpful, and untwists several tricky knots in the text.

Cave!
I do not understand why it is always said that Sellars' language was sodifficult. I found his philosophical style quite straight-on.Unfortunately, Sellars' main work is punctuated by some passages ofsuperficial and/or incorrect reasoning, at which passages some may assumethat they do not understand Sellars' argumentation - though it "has tobe profound" (because of Sellars' reputation). The most importantissue in this essay is the impossibility of reporting sense impressionswithout using language (with all implications that come along with that),and the repercussions of this circumstance on the philosophy of logicalempiricism in its early stage (though Sellars obviously thinks his ideasimpact on all forms of empiricism, which is not true). Along that line,Sellars has many good points that should be considered in the philosophy ofscience and in common sense reasoning, yet his reputed final dismantling ofthe "myth" of the given never takes place; in Sellars intentions,maybe, but his arguments are a far cry from being a stringent refutation.They are simply too superficial and too colloquial for that. (Cf. Putnam'smodel-theoretic arguments against realism, for a contrast.) What is reallyunfortunate for Sellars' essay is that, in this edition, it is framed byRorty and Brandom. The philosophical humorist Rorty has contributed aforeword in an attempt to assimilate Sellars serious philosophical projectinto his radical-relativist historicizing outlook of philosophy, thuscompletely misleading the unknowing reader. The bright, but misguided,Brandom offers a study guide, which is no study guide, but an attempt todirect the reader at those aspects of Sellars' essay, which Brandom's owninferentialist philosophy is supposed to stem from. Unfortunately, theseaspects are exactly the most questionable. So, while Sellars' essay is aprofitable classic of analytic philosophy, the reader should be warned toread Rorty's foreword and Brandom's study guide cautiously and criticallyand to thoroughly consider, if these really reflect Sellars' essaycorrectly.

deep, difficult, essential
"Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind" is an essential epistemological text of the twentieth century. It is difficult: each sentence is difficult. Sellars is said to have shown the existence of a private language by writing in one. The guide by Brandom does not much clarify and simplify the argument of Sellars for two reasons. It is impossible to do this. And Brandom wants to and does contribute significantly to Sellars scholarship. Sellars writes for the professional philosopher. If you plan to be such, or if you want to encounter philosophy at its most profound, you should study the book.

A difficult, controversial work in philosophy
There are two areas to comment on with regards to this printing of "Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind" (EPM).The first is the presentation style and the second is the content.On the presentation:Rorty's introduction is very helpful in preparing one to read the book.The large print will be a welcome relief to anyone who has squinted at the pages of *Science, Perception and Reality* which also includes EPM.However, the omission of the footnotes Sellars added in 1963 is very odd.Also, the endnote markers are not superscripted but merely placed in parentheses which can be confusing since at other times a number in () is not referring to an endnote but rather to a numbered paragraph.Be forewarned that Brandom's study guide is not exegetical as one might hope.It is an interpretation of the work.On the content:This book is definitely not for beginners, and one can become quickly annoyed at Sellars' use of cliches as references to philosophical systems.Also, Sellars will make reference to specific philosophers without actually naming them, making it difficult to figure out just what specific advocation of a view he is rejecting (See for example Section 30).Other times, he will specifically mention who he has in mind, such as in Sections 8-9 when he brings up the name of A.J. Ayer.It should go without saying that the claims Sellars makes are by no means easy to grasp and they are even less easy to accept.A note on my low ranking of this book:I gave it a 4 mostly because of Sellars' difficult writing style, and not because of the shortcomings in presentation mentioned above. ... Read more

Product Description
This entirely new HUMANIST MANIFESTO is designed toaddress the problems of the twenty-first century and the millenniumbeyond.Providing a strong defense of scientific naturalism andtechnology, it is offered as a contribution to the dialogue among thedifferent cultural, political, and economic viewpoints in theworld. HUMANIST MANIFESTO 2000 begins by endorsing a humanistethics based on reason and a planetary bill of rights andresponsibilities.It then proposes a new global agenda, stresses theneed for international institutions (including a new world parliamentand regulation of global conglomerates), and concludes on a note ofoptimism about the Human Prospect.It is endorsed by a distinguishedlist of humanist intellectuals, including Arthur C. Clarke, AlanCranston, Richard Dawkins, Richard Leakey, Jill Tarter, E.O. Wilson,and ten Nobel Laureates. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (11)

It's not a book...it's a pamphlet!
Expecting a book that could justify the cost, was I surprised when I opened the box.This thing is tiny!It is 8 x 5 and a half inches, is only 3/8th of an inch thick and has all of 76 pages.And the type is, oh, about 12 point with lots of white space.I read this while going to the bathroom.

And that's about the best place I can think to store this pamphlet.That or next to the bed so it can help you get to sleep.What a bunch of Utopian crap!Clearly written at the end of the Clinton era, before 911, the gist of the argument is in favor of a World Government.Yeah, right, tell that to the Chinese...

I was very disappointed, as you can tell.This should sell for no more than a few dollars a copy and have a disclaimer that it is very outdated; the world has moved on.Even at the time it was written the idea of having the world run by a global entity was already out of vogue.If we humanists want to make the world a better place then let's first improve our own spheres of influence; we still have to deal with the creationist museum here in the U.S. before we start thinking of going global.

Save your money.The only reason I can think of to buy this book would be if you needed to write an essay about the history of the Humanist movement; in fact, I think that's what this is.I just bought someone's homework...

We Can Hope
Human ethics based on reason...what an idea! Well written, well-argued.(Also read "The End of Faith" by Sam Harris.) Let's hope we're evolving toward this.

Guidelines for the Future
The "Right" in America likes to use the word "Humanism" to describe the enemy. Humanists are described as atheists and as amoral more than any other way. This is despite the obvious moral relativity deviations including the invasion of Iraq under profoundly dubious premises. It is Humanists that are accused of having an "end justifies the means" mentality.

This Manifesto, signed by nearly 150 scholars worldwide, is a plan for an international culture of cooperation. It is futuristic including plans for the ecology, education, agriculture and manufacturing that includes all of mankind's participation.

This book reflects the thinking that a better world can exist once the greed of global business is tamed. In this regard it is utopian. That hope is unlikely to bear fruit in any of our life times. Yet, it needs to be stated. The world is guaranteed of no relief for starving and warring Africans, and underclass throughout the world or of the continued despoiling of our eco system without a statement like this Manifesto being made.

That being said, here are some things this book is not:
-An amoral screed designed to give people a reason to do what they wish. The Manifesto is replete with personal and national responsibilities for the betterment of all of us
-A call for Communism or Anarchy. There is no statement that is anti-capitalism only the run away corporate greed that provides us with the likes of Enron or bid less government contracts like Halliburton.
-Anti-Religious, the Manifesto calls for the end of all religious persecution and intolerance world wide.
-"Take from the rich and give to the poor", it requires all people to be given equal advantages and to return to society, the benefits of those advantages.

Some reviewers are criticizing
I am confused by some of the reviews.Many seem to think that their not agreeing with a philosophy is grounds to say that you should not read this book.I find that rather upsetting.I would not say that the Bible is a bad book just because I don't believe in god.Unfortunatly, now that I have said this, the same type of people who wrote the reviews I speak of will give me bad ratings because they do not agree with what I say, not based on the content of my review.
The bottom line is, if you are interested in learning more about Humanism, whether to defend or attack it, this is the book for you, it gives a good summary of the Humanist view of things, in a short and to the point pamphlet.But when you are reading, please remember, just because you do not agree with me is no reason to insult my character, and it is same with this book.

Nations represent the uniqueness of their people
Nations represent the uniqueness of thier people.Should all people of this world conform to one way of life?
also, consider the economic consequences ... Read more

Product Description
Philosophical work on the mind flowed in two streams through the 20th century: phenomenology and analytic philosophy. This volume aims to bring them together again, by demonstrating how work in phenomenology may lead to significant progress on problems central to current analytic research, and how analytical philosophy of mind may shed light on phenomenological concerns. Leading figures from both traditions contribute specially written essays on such central topics as consciousness, intentionality, perception, action, self-knowledge, temporal awareness, and mental content. Phenomenology and Philosophy of Mind demonstrates that these different approaches to the mind should not stand in opposition to each other, but can be mutually illuminating. ... Read more

Product Description
Politicians invoke grand ideas: social justice, liberty, equality,community. But what do these ideas really mean? How can politicians across the political spectrum appeal to the same values?

Political Philosophy: A Beginners' Guide for Students and Politicians answers these important questions. Accessible and lively, the book is an ideal student text, but it also brings the insights of the world's leading political philosophers to a wide general audience. Using plenty of examples, it equips readers to think for themselves about the ideas that shape political life.

Democracy works best when both politicians and voters move beyond rhetoric to think clearly and carefully about the political principles that should govern their society. But clear thinking is difficult in an age when established orthodoxies have fallen by the wayside. Bringing political philosophy out of the ivory tower and within the reach of all, this book provides us with tools to cut through the complexities of modern politics. In so doing, it makes a valuable contribution to the democratic process. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Excellent Intro, a little simplified
The book is an excelent introduction into some of the central themes of political philosophy and is enjoyable to read, which is always a bonus for this kind of book. On the other hand Swift fails to detail the positions of many major theorists, including Rousseau and Hobbes, in fact most thinkers are only occasionally utilised when needed to furnish a point. That said the book is intended as an introductio to the issues themselves, so perhaps this is understandable. The only other minor quibble is that the book takes an extremely simplified view of most issues and lacks depth, anyone who has spent time considering political issues of their own volition may well have though of many or most of the concepts introduced within, nonetheless Swift does a good job in formalising these into concrete terms. ... Read more

Product Description

How is love different from lust or infatuation?  Do love and marriage really go together “like a horse and carriage”?  Does sex have any necessary connection to either?  And how important are love, sex, and marriage to a well-lived life? In this lively, lucid, and comprehensive textbook, Raja Halwani pursues the philosophical questions inherent in these three important aspects of human relationships, exploring the nature, uses, and ethics of romantic love, sexuality, and marriage. 

The book is structured in three parts:

• Love begins by examining how romantic love differs from other types of love, such as friendship and parental love. It asks which properties of love are essential, whether people have a choice in whom they love, and whether lovers have moral obligations to one another that differ from those they owe to others
• Sex demonstrates the difficulty in defining sex and the sexual, and examines what constitutes good and bad sex in terms of pleasure, 'naturalness', and moral permissibility.  It offers theoretical and applied ethical approaches to a wide range of sexual phenomena
• Marriage traces the history of the institution, and describes the various forms in which marriage exists and the reasons why people marry.  It also surveys accounts of why people should or should not marry, and introduces the main arguments for and against gay marriage.

Features include:

• suggestions for further reading
• online eResource site with dowloadable discussion questions
• a clear, jargon-free writing style.

Product Description
This anthology of 40 readings combines both anextensive discussion of the major problems confronting women with anin-depth analysis of the alternative theoretical and practical means forresolving these issues.Covering a broad range ofconcerns, this book also proposes the means for addressing theseconcerns. It includes race-based critiques as a means of promoting atruly multicultural feminism. It also provides suggestions on furtherreading in each section. The second edition of FeministPhilosophy has been revised to include updated readings coveringissues such as date rape , sexual harassment, and new reproductivetechnologies. Adds new sections on Cultural Feminism and EcologicalFeminism as well as more accessible sections on Liberal Feminism andMarxist/Socialist Feminism. Incorporates a Cultural Invisibility sectioncritiquing contemporary culture. Finally, addresses men's responses tofeminism and related men's movements as a means of promotinggender-inclusive feminism.An essential resource forevery reader interested in this perspective of the relationship betweenwomen and men. ... Read more

Product Description
Informed by the philosophy of the virtual, Keith Ansell Pearson offers up one of the most lucid and original works on the central philosophical questions.He asks that if our basic concepts on what it means to be human are wrong then, what is this to mean for our ideas of time, being, consciousness?A critical examination ensues, one informed by a multitude of responses to a large number of philosophers.Under discussion is the mathematical limits as found in Russell, questions on Relativity, Kant's notion of judgement, Popper, Dennett, Dawkins and Proust.He brings into the rapport the concepts of Bergson and their explosive insights into the idea of time. ... Read more

Product Description
This is a survey of important and contemporary topics in the philosophy of mind. It provides explanations of theories and criticism, illustrated with everyday examples, and outlines the strengths and weaknesses of each position considered by combining exposition with critical evaluation and countercriticisms from opposing points of view. There is a non-technical guide to relevant scientific literature, including artificial intelligence, connectionism and semantic networks. Solutions are also offered to longstanding problems in the philosophy of mind - the book outlines an alternative nonreductive property dualist theory of mind in contrast to standard eliminative or reductive functionalist or materialist theories. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

fits body to reality and fits mind to body
I have enjoyed the cogency of the author's arguments in this book, after having appreciated his writing style and irrefutable logic in his more recent "Ontology." This is NOT a two star book and most definitely NOT "very bad philosophy" as the other reviewer claims.

The previous reviewer must have missed the part where Jacquette firmly grounds the emergent mind in explicit materialism. It is there on page 19:

"The idea is that nonphysical properties may emerge from or supervene on material substance if they achieve a certain complexity, in somewhat the same way that life emerges evolutionarily from or supervenes on certain kinds of properly organized material substances."

And then on page 96:

"The aboutness or intrinsic intentionality of thought, and the ability to think and imagine whatever we like, to project nonexistent intended objects and states of affairs for consideration, distinguishes thought, mind, and the mental or psychological from behavioral-material-functional systems and states considered only as such. It confers a dignity on mind that we experience as freedom of will and action. If the mind is intentional, and if intentionality is an ineliminable, irreducible, and mechanically nonreplicable property of mind, then the mind is a new category of entity in the material world. Mind emerges naturally from living matter in complex biosystems at a comparatively late evolutionary stage. But, because of its intentionality, the mind is qualitatively different from nonmental, purely mechanical things."

In my opinion, that is good philosophy. Very good, indeed.

Very bad philosophy.
I have read a lot of books, introductory and advanced, on the philosophy of mind, but I rarely review them. However, this book had some flaws that were just so evident that I felt I had a responsability to comment on them. But of course, I will not just shun the book and leave. Not everything that is flawed is useless. This book, far from being useless, is an adequate introduction to the philosophy of mind. But the author does not have this as his only goal, and also attempts to defend a property dualistic ontology of mind. He is also an emergentist, but here I have few objections. But emergentism itself is not incompatible with materialism, as the author seems to imply sometimes.

The book is short, easy to read, and covers the necessary ground for any begginer who wants to learn the generalso of philosophy of mind. There are chapters on the diferent types of dualism, materialism, philosophy of artificial intelligence and on intentionality. The author discusses classic and modern positions in all of these things, and makes it all clear and non-technical. The problem is that everytime he tries to attack some position or other, he simply does not seem to succeed. I mean, even Descartes's substance dualism is defensible form Jacquettes critique! Now to be more specific, I will limit myself to his main argument against materialism, for wich he concludes propery dualism is a better bet at expaining the ontology of mind.

The argument is roughly as follows (Pge 20): The mind has intentionallity. The body as such does not. Therefore the mind cannott be fully explained by alluding to purely physical (body) processes. Here the property of being intentional leads one to property dualism, according to Jacquette. Now anyone with any knowledge of philosophy of mind will quickly point out that the 2 premises can be attacked, as can the conclusion even when one accepts the validity of the premises. First, it is not clear why intentionality could not be explained physically. Jacquette begs the question in assuming that this is not possible. John Searle, for example, is a materialist, even though he accepts the importance of intentionality. So to say that the body as such can have no intentionality is begging the same question. And finally, the fact that mind and body might have diferent properties does not necessarily lead one to any kind of dualism, for the differences might be only in virtue of epistemistic access. That is, if one knows something by description instead of by aquaintance, one may believe one of these descriptions has a property that the other does not, even when they refer to the same things.(In fact, this is related to Jacksons knowledge argument, of which Jacquette talks inadequately). To illustrate my points, and to show to what extent Jaquettes discussion is incoherent look at this extract:

"conceivably...imput-output simulations of mind, in which physical syntax tokens casually interact with themselves in an apropiate...enviroment, might duplicate the brain's power to produce...intentional thought.." (pge 81).

Here the author accepts the posibility that intentionallity might be physically realizable after all! What happened to the intentionality argument?
The author gives no reason of why physicalism might be inadequate to explain the mind fully, and offers the worst defence of property dualism I have read yet. Nothing I have said can be taken to imply that physicalism is true, however. ... Read more

Product Description
Say your name aloud to yourself in a quiet room. Imagine peeling an apple in your mind. Take the subway without trying to get anywhere. The simple meditations in this book have the potential to shake us awake from our preconceived certainties: our own identity, the stability of the outside world, the meanings of words. At once entertaining and startling, irreverent and wise, this book will provoke moments of awareness for readers in any situation and in all walks of life. Enter the space of your favorite painting. Watch someone sleeping. The world won't look the same again. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (15)

Astonish Yourself- Astonishingly Bad
Duration:Just a few seconds.

Props:The "Astonish Yourself" book and a brick wall to beat your head against.

Effect:Mind numbing.

Imagine that you are a drooling idiot of a hippie and you have a few minutes to waste.Mission accomplished.

Not Very Astonishing....
Maybe if you lived a very sheltered life, and you have never done anything thoughtful or creative...this book is for you...but if you are a deep thinker, very into philosophy, and creative...this book will not help you one bit. These "experiments" are quite boring. I was expecting insight, and in turn got obvious "Experiments" which people do by themselves on an every day basis. I read thru the book and did not find 1...not even 1....experiment which was interesting or not obvious. I was very disappointed.

I'm still looking for blue food!
I actually dog-eared pages as I read for things I wanted to go back and try.I ended up with 41 bent pages and some memorable experiences.

"#94 Think about what other people are doing" was a favorite one as was "#22 Count to a thousand".

It is not life changing so much as simply life observing in a "stop and smell the roses" sort of way.I had fun reading it and think most people will be able to find something memorable if they actually try some of the experiments.

Important.
Is this book pretentious? Yeah, okay, I can see that. Maybe a little. But it doesn't matter.

This book makes me smile. When I'm feeling blah and down, especially on grey winter days that are so prevalent in New England, I run to my parents' house, take it out of my old bookcase, and fall into it, leaving the world for a bit. That said, it doesn't live with my other favorites at my apartment, a small selection consisting of only the books that have changed my life, made me stop breathing, turned the world on its head. It is, of course, not a novel, and difficult to compare in that sense.

But I do like it. It didn't really change my life, it isn't groundbreaking, but it is fantastic. Ideally, people should make their own collections of such thoughts, little silly ideas they can venture into when they're feeling a bit blah. But it's a jumping point. It brings you somewhere else. It isn't the say-all, be-all, but it lets you start your adventures into your own mind when you're feeling stuck.

A peculiar little book and we need more of them.
This book is so strange and esoteric that it almost borders on the occult. It reminds me ofthe wonderfulbook, "The Secret Life of Plants" for it's "out thereness". I tried a few of the experiments and one that was like a revelation to me was the one aboutchannel surfing AM radio late at night in the dark. People don't believe that there is more of a Art Bell-type world out there than previously thought.There are so many books on the market pretending to be relevant and informative, when basically they are trivia rehashed or made to appeal to Gen X and fringe/cutting edge pop culture. This one hits a home run because some of the experiments are actually very interesting. ... Read more

Product Description
Attacks nothing less than the currently prevailing world philosophy--humanism, which the author feels is exceedingly dangerous in its hidden assumptions. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

The Umwelt of Ehrenfeld
"The arrogance of humanism" by David Ehrenfeld isn't a stringent philosophical book (which I assumed), but rather a personal statement by the author himself - and perhaps his wife Joan. Nothing wrong with that, but the book feels a bit meandering and disjointed.

Ehrenfeld writes from a Jewish-Christian perspective, and frequently quotes rather unusual sources, such as "Lord of the Rings" or "The Silmarillion". He also has a crush on George Orwell, whom he regards as one of the few humanists who understood the problems of his own philosophy. To the author, "humanism" is essentially a religion, which replaces the belief in God, Nature or the supernatural with belief in Man, or rather the ability of humans to become more or less omnipotent (and, by implication, god-like). Secular readers might have an easier time appreciating the author's argument if "humanism-as-religion" is replaced with "modernism", "the current paradigm" or some such designation.

Ehrenfeld believes that *control* is at the basis of the humanist project: control over nature, society and ultimately over humans themselves. The author believes that such control is impossible, indeed that the very complexity of the technological-administrative apparatus exercising the control will tend to make the system break down. He discusses various absurd examples of the belief in complete social engineering, including a book which "discovered" that Black slaves in the antebellum South were really well off, a bizarre study attempting to predict (to the day, no less) when riots will break out in British prisons, and the dream of Artificial Intelligence. Perhaps inevitably, many examples of this Zeitgeist are mined from science fiction literature, including Skinner's utopian novel "Walden Two" and Asimov's "Foundation Trilogy" (Seldon's psychohistory). Other examples are perhaps outdated, such as the claim that MBD is a fraud.

The main chapters deal with environmental destruction, which the author (a biology professor) believes is connected to humanism. He is especially critical of the modern conservation movement, which attempts to save animals, plants or wilderness areas with the argument that they are somehow economically valuable to humans. Ehrenfeld doesn't deny that there are indeed endangered species out there which may have some previously unknown value as a resource, or that some areas are aesthetically enchanting to tourists, and hence boost the tourist industry. However, he feels that this is beside the point. There are species that probably don't have any particular value to man whatsoever: "An example of such a non-resource is an endangered amphibian species, the Houston toad, Bufo houstonensis. This lacklustre little animal has no demonstrated or even conjectured resource value to man; other races of toad will partly replace it when it is gone, and its passing is not expected to make an impression on the Umwelt of the city of Houston or its suburbs". Ehrenfeld's point, of course, is that we should adopt something along the lines of Aldo Leopold's land ethic, according to which all species have an inherent value to exist, regardless of their actual or potential use for man. Such a perspective requires a break with the religion of humanism.

Ehrenfeld takes on the dream of "clean energy" by pointing out that even if some kind of clean fusion can be invented, the real test comes later, when the energy generated is put to use. The author believes that "clean" energy will be put to the usual, destructive uses and simply speed up the process of environmental destruction and high-tech madness. Nor is he very optimistic about space colonies, pointing out that such complex systems will sooner or later suffer a break down, probably killing everybody onboard. And why do we want to move out to outer space, anyway? Because Earth have turned uninhabitable, perhaps...?

Other chapters deal with the relation between emotion and reason, misanthropy and the future of humanism. Needless to say, Ehrenfeld is pessimistic, and believes that the best we can hope for (short of a supernatural intervention) is a great depression which destroys most of the global financial and technological systems, throwing humanity back to a time of local self-reliance. Humanism isn't going to mend its ways voluntarily. Ehrenfeld makes a comparison to Frodo in "Lord of the Rings", who couldn't destroy the ring of power. It was inadvertently destroyed by Gollum, who was really under its spell. In the same way, humanism will be broken only by one of its products.

"The arrogance of humanism" isn't the most graceful book around, and you probably heard most of it before, if you are versed in deep ecological literature. However, as a personal statement of David Ehrenfeld's Umwelt, in Houston or otherwise, it may have some interest.

Neither balanced nor reasoned
The value of this book lies in its thorough portrayal of the views of an antihumanist. Beyond this, the book is little more than a long, monotonous harangue. The social, economic, and environmental evils addressed have little or nothing to do with either secular or liberal humanism. The direct criticisms of humanism are pale imitations of older, more scholarly works, for example "The Dialectic of Enlightenment" by Horkheimer and Adorno.

As a Humanist...
As a humanist, I realize the impact we have on the world.Al Gore and the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change won a Nobel in 2007. The Kyoto Protocol was initially adopted in 1997. David Erhenfeld published this book in 1981. David Ehrenfeld's visionary text, The Arrogance of Humanism, is a seminal book in the history of a environmental and socioeconomic movement that is finally being realized by the global population.Read it now, so you may understand what we face in the near future.

As a Humanist...
I myself am a humanist. Though I am immediately inclined to judge this book without reading it, I won't because of my humanist principles. I'll give it an average three star rating for now and try to find an e-book. the Arrogance of a $32.00 book!

Balanced and reasonable analysis of pressing issues
Dr. Ehrenfeld counsels a balance of emotion and reason, and models exactly what he advises, in a moving and intelligent analysis of much of what we face on a broad variety of fronts, in the environment, education and child-rearing, biotechnology and politics.His courageous review of all facets underlying our modern "unease" and his attempt to achieve wisdom, even beyond knowledge, is noteworthy and closely adheres to reality. The writing is eloquent and incisive, and evokes the highest capacities in the reader and thinker to join the dialogue with heart and mind open and awake.Thank you for a brave, powerful and important consideration of how to where we are proceeding. ... Read more

Product Description
Contemporary philosophers of mind tend to assume that the world of nature can be reduced to basic physics. Yet there are features of the mindconsciousness, intentionality, normativity that do not seem to be reducible to physics or neuroscience. This explanatory gap between mind and brain has thus been a major cause of concern in recent philosophy of mind. Reductionists hold that, despite all appearances, the mind can be reduced to the brain.Eliminativists hold that it cannot, and that this implies that there is something illegitimate about the mentalistic vocabulary. Dualists hold that the mental is irreducible, and that this implies either a substance or a property dualism. Mysterian non-reductive physicalists hold that the mind is uniquely irreducible, perhaps due to some limitation of our self-understanding.

In this book, Steven Horst argues that this whole conversation is based on assumptions left over from an outdated philosophy of science. While reductionism was part of the philosophical orthodoxy fifty years ago, it has been decisively rejected by philosophers of science over the past thirty years, and for good reason. True reductions are in fact exceedingly rare in the sciences, and the conviction that they were there to be found was an artifact of armchair assumptions of 17th century Rationalists and 20th century Logical Empiricists. The explanatory gaps between mind and brain are far from unique. In fact, in the sciences it is gaps all the way down.And if reductions are rare in even the physical sciences, there is little reason to expect them in the case of psychology.

Horst argues that this calls for a complete re-thinking of the contemporary problematic in philosophy of mind. Reductionism, dualism, eliminativism and non-reductive materialism are each severely compromised by post-reductionist philosophy of science, and philosophy of mind is in need of a new paradigm.

Horst suggests that such a paradigm might be found in Cognitive Pluralism: the view that human cognitive architecture constrains us to understand the world through a plurality of partial, idealized, and pragmatically-constrained models, each employing a particular representational system optimized for its own problem domain. Such an architecture can explain the disunities of knowledge, and is plausible on evolutionary grounds. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (9)

Pretty but not worth it
I'll give this to you--the cover of this book is designed very well: hip lower case type, mysterious empty chair, and all those pebbles make for an alluring product. But the content didn't stand up to the cover. At one point perhaps this was an important, necessary work--but now this is Sartre defending his philosophy against claims no one is making to people who are soaked in existentialism from a young age. This is not Sartre giving a great introduction to his philosophy--that was not his goal: he sought to defend existentialism from its detractors, not to explain the niceties of the theory to them. If you want a primer on Sartre's philosophy and existentialism as a whole you would be better looking at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy online (Sartre: [...]; existentialism: [...]).

What you're paying for here is a well-designed cover.

An overview
This lecture gave me a better overview compared to other books I've read on the philosophy. It's worth buying, although it is a little short.

The Clearest Statement yet of Sartre's Version of Existentialism
This short but extremely clear volume was one of the first opportunities after the war for Sartre to explain to a lay audience his version of Existentialism. It took place on October 29, 1945 when the then already very famous French philosopher was invited to the "Club Maintenant" to "promote literary and intellectual discussion." Sartre used this lecture as an opportunity to settle scores and to set the record straight by answering all his critics at once. They had, among many other charges, leveled the uncomfortable charge that Existentialism showed only the negative and pessimistic side of human nature, and therefore as a philosophy (concerned mostly with abandonment, anguish and anxiety), was thus itself very much devoid of humanity. Sartre took these charges rather personally and to better make his points, pitched the lecture to the least sophisticated of the audience. What results is a beautifully articulated and clearly translated formulation of Sartre's basic philosophy. He answers his critics with a biting flourish, in what is not only a clear exposition, but also a penetratingly coherent piece.

To wit: Existence precedes essence, and in any case is arbitrary. In this world, man is defined by the choices he makes and by his commitments to those choices. He does not define himself prior to his existence and exists only in the present, well beyond any concept of natural determinism. In Sartre's view, there is no human nature superior to that described here.

In short, there is no God; we have been abandoned to our fate. That point however should not be misconstrued as that Existentialism is only about Atheism. It simply affirms that even if a God existed, it would make no difference to our humanity. Human nature is not a self-congratulatory condition, but rather a fearful, uncertain, anguished and forlorn condition. Thus the real problem with our humanity is not with God's existence, but with man's own existence. Existentialism argues that man does not need a God so much as he needs to rediscover himself and to comprehend that nothing can save him from himself -- not even proof of the existence of a god. In Sartre's view, this understanding alone makes Existentialism, not only profoundly human, but also optimistic about human nature and the human condition.

But more to the point, according to this formulation, anyone who believes otherwise is actually acting in "bad faith." From the Existentialist's point of view, once man is abandoned to his own fate he can have only one true goal: freedom for its own sake. That is to say, he is abandoned to his own fate with freedom (and his commitment to it) as his only universal project. At the bottom of this project, choice becomes the root node of the human condition, and the very basis of his primary reality. And because there is no god, there can be no pre-determined good. Good, like meaning, morality, judgment and values, all must be constructed from scratch as an existential project. That is to say, these all emerge directly from having made the choice and commitment to be free. Thus man has another important choice to make: to proceed through his world in either "good, " or "bad" faith.

If he proceeds in "good faith, he will discover that life has no a priori meaning. In our quest for freedom we must make committed choices that result in the invention of meaning and values as we go. Life itself is nothing until (and unless) it is lived. It is we (and not our gods or our dreams and wishes) that gives life it's meaning. And values are nothing more than the meaning we ascribe to them through our actions.Thus proceeding in "good faith" means that things must be accepted as they are; one must learn to live an authentic life of action, taking responsibility for his own existence -- without the need for either crutches or excuses.

Proceeding in "bad faith," on the other hand, means living an inauthentic life, one based on fantasy, excuses, wishes, promises and mythology. According to this formulation, God is seen as the "grand executor" and "creator" of all meaning. And as a result, man's only responsibility (both to himself and to his god) is obeying God's will and edicts. From the Existentialist point of view this approach is a barren and a coward's way out, because it forces man to shrink from being responsible for his own existence. He chooses instead a kind of self-congratulatory fetishsized life of fantasized meanings.

The last chapter of the book also has a critique of Camus' "The Stranger," but I will leave that aspect for my own review of that book. Five Stars

A Great First Hand Introduction to Existentialism
This book is really good for anyone who is interested in getting a solid understanding of the French school of Atheist Existentialism from a firsthand source.If you are like me, you hate reading primers, and other secondhand attempts to interpret or reduce a philosopher's work to simple arguments.This is a simple straight forward explanation, straight from the mouth of one of the foremost figures of Existentialism.I highly recommend it for anyone interested in getting to know about Existentialism without having to read an Existentialism for dummies guide.Sartre gives a clear and concise argument for his theories that should be understandable to most anyone, with or without a background in philosophy.Sartre's whole speech only goes on for about sixty pages, so this is by no means a difficult mountain of a work.At the same time, if you are already pretty familiar with Existentialism and the work of Sartre, this might very well feel like it adds nothing significantly new to the debate.

Is Existentialism a Humanism?
Is Existentialism a Humanism?

"Is Existentialism a Humanism?" was the title of Sartre's famous lecture in October 1945 given to an overflow crowd and rapidly to become the talk of the left-bank cafes, then all of Paris and Europe.The talk started by proclaiming "existence precedes essence" which meant, he explained, that individuals create their own values because there is no moral order in the universe.This freedom is the ultimate value.The talk went on by echoing his book "Being and Nothingness".He gave the lecture to answer his critics among the communists and catholics.He needed to present a viable and relevant social philosophy in order to stand comparison with these two groups.He based his appeal on Kant's ethic of universal principles.He continued by arguing that we need a sense of responsibility for other people and society as a whole (which was different from his previous contentions).In asserting that Existentialism is a Humanism Sartre means that it places the human being at the center of its attention and at the apex of its value hierarchy. Our ultimate goal should be to foster the freedom of the individual.To read more about Existentialism see Thomas R. Flynn(2006) "Existentialism: A Very ShortIntroduction", Oxford University Press.
... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (1)

Death At It's Most Interesting
This is a great book- one which challenges areas of metaphysics which alltoo often get ignored in the rush to analyse the ethical issues surroundingdeath. Most of the articles are fairly easy reads and they develop theirtheses coherently; the layout of the book allows you to put them in theirbroader contexts, to compare argument and counter-argument.A fine work of(broadly analytic) Philosophy which makes a valuable contribution to ourunderstanding of Death. Also mercifully unmorbid! ... Read more