Amazon.com
The Condition of Postmodernity is David Harvey's seminal history of our most equivocal of eras. What does postmodernism mean? Where did it come from? Harvey, a professor of geography and a key mover behind extending the scope and influence of the discipline of geography itself, does a thorough job here delineating the passage through to postmodernity and the economic, social, and political changes that underscored and accompanied it. As he clearly states, the rise in postmodernist cultural forms is related to a new intensity in what Harvey terms "time-space compression," but this new intensity is a qualitative rather than quantitative change in social organization, and it does not point to an era beyond capitalism as "the basic rules of capitalistic accumulation" remain unchanged. Unlike Fredric Jameson (whose equally rewarding Postmodernism stands as the twin pillar to Harvey's critique), who explicitly relies on Ernest Mandel's periodization of late capitalism, Harvey eschews a narrowly economic focus, the limits and contradictions of production that have led to the rise in the service sector, and takes a more multidisciplinary approach to his history. As comfortable discussing Manet as he is labor markets, Harvey is an excellent writer, and The Condition of Postmodernity is an exceptionally informative and enjoyable read. --Mark Thwaite, Amazon.co.uk
Book Description
A great deal has been written on what has variously been described as the post-modern condition and on post-modern culture, architecture, art and society. In this new book, David Harvey seeks to determine what is meant by the term in its different contexts and to identify how accurate and useful it is as a description of contemporary experience. But the book is much more than this: in the course of his investigation the author provides a social and semantic history - from the Enlightenment to the present - of modernism and its expression in political and social ideas and movements, as well as in art, literature and architecture. He considers in particular how the meaning and perception of time and space themselves vary over time and space, and shows that this variance affects individual values and social processes of the most fundamental kind. This book will be widely welcomed, not only for its clear and critical account of the arguments surrounding the propositions of modernity and post-modernity, but as an incisive contribution to the history of ideas and their relation to social and political change.
Customer Reviews:
Good lord.......2005-09-16
Wow, this book is about as dense as the crust of the earth. It takes at least a few reads over to understand what the arguments are. While the arguments in this book are very well articulated, I found myself wanting to shoot myself in the face sometimes while reading this book. It can be really boring, but brings up some very interesting ideas of 80's culture and society.
Po-Mo Schmomo?.......2003-03-04
Ask ten academics about what to call our present fin-de-siecle epoch and you'll get ten different labels, but "postmodernism" seems always the default term. Although it's twelve years old, Harvey's book is the best I've read about the pluralistic fabric we daily inhabit. It's edifyingly reader-friendly (especially compared to some of the Franco-drunk rhetoricians out there trying to get a handle on our current world). In precise prose Harvey outlines the shift to our information-as-capital paradigm since the mid-sixties, and the causes of the growth of the temp sector and "just-in-time" production capabilities. Harvey traces the arrival of "flexible accumulation" to the collapse of Fordist production practices in the 1966-73 waves of recession, but covers far more than just economic factors--architecture, art, literature, cinema--without any self-conscious Neo-Marxist whistling-in-the-dark. In his project to articulate a new (meta?)narrative, Harvey's book will probably give post-structuralists a new constellation of ideas to obfuscate with hip terminology and dense prose...
Manuel Castell's "The Rise of the Network Society" is another good book along these lines.
Best overview of modern/postmodern condition I have found.......2002-08-22
This is a great overview of concepts that are, by definition, very fractured. Harvey clarifies and pulls together a number of seemingly disparate elements in a masterful manner. Though this book could work as a good introduction to these concepts, I think readers with some background in the major writers of modernism and postmodernism will get more out of it. Dogmatic postmodernists may be put off that Harvey has the "temerity" to suggest that postmodernism might be an extension of modernism or that he finds some good in modernism and some excesses in postmodern approaches but, they should get over themselves and realize that their insistence that "all meta-narratives are bad" is their own meta-narrative. Overall, Harvey manages to convincingly express his ideas while maintaining a remarkably evenhanded approach. I especially enjoy the fact that he avoids the postmodernist tendency to ignore the complexities of modernism and, thus create a postmodern meta-narrative about the modernist project.
Excellent overview of modernity and post-modernity.......2001-11-27
David Harvey's "Condition of Post-Modernity" provides excellent representational cases to show the differences between modernity and post-modernity. Although sometimes difficult to follow (I had problems with the chapter pertaining to architecture), Harvey uses enough examples (i.e., economics, art, cinema, etc.) to make sure one understands the differences between post-modernism and modernism. The economic chapter, "Fordism and Flexible Accumulation" is particulary good and shows the gradual transformation from a modernist to a post-modernist economy and society. I was disappointed, however, that Harvey didn't have a complete section focused towards the differences between modernist and post-modernist lit.
Excellent overview of modernity and post-modernity.......2001-11-27
David Harvey's "Condition of Post-Modernity" provides excellent representational cases to show the differences between modernity and post-modernity. Although sometimes difficult to follow (I had problems with the chapter pertaining to architecture), Harvey uses enough examples (i.e., economics, art, cinema, etc.) to make sure one understands the differences between post-modernism and modernism. The economic chapter, "Fordism and Flexible Accumulation" is particulary good and shows the gradual transformation from a moderninst to a post-modernist economy and society. I was disappointed, however, that Harvey didn't have a complete section focused towards the differences between modernist and post-modernist lit.
Customer Reviews:
Hume at his best.......2005-10-10
David Hume was perhaps the leading light in the Empiricist movement in philosophy. Empiricism is seen in distinction from Rationalism, in that it doubts the viability of universal principles (rational or otherwise), and uses sense data as the basis of all knowledge - experience is the source of knowledge. Hume was a skeptic as well as empiricist, and had radical (for the time) atheist ideas that often got in the way of his professional advancement, but given his reliance on experience (and the kinds of experiences he had), his problem with much that was considered conventional was understandable.
Hume's major work, 'A Treatise of Human Nature', was not well received intially - according to Hume, 'it fell dead-born from the press'. Hume reworked the first part of this work in a more popular way for this text, which has become a standard, and perhaps the best introduction to Empiricism.
In a nutshell, the idea of empiricism is that experience teaches, and rules and understanding are derived from this. However, for Hume this wasn't sufficient. Just because billiard balls when striking always behave in a certain manner, or just because the sun always rose in the morning, there was no direct causal connection that could be automatically affirmed - we assume a necessary connection, but how can this be proved?
Hume's ideas impact not only metaphysics, but also epistemology and psychology. Hume develops empiricism to a point that empiricism is practically unsupportable (and it is in this regard that Kant sees this text as a very important piece, and works toward his synthesis of Empiricism and Rationalism). For Hume, empirical thought requires skepticism, but leaves it unresolved as far as what one then needs to accept with regard to reason and understanding. According to scholar Eric Steinberg, 'A view that pervades nearly all of Hume's philosophical writings is that both ancient and modern philosophers have been guilty of optimistic and exaggerated claims for the power of human reason.'
Some have seen Hume as presenting a fundamental mistrust of daily belief while recognising that we cannot escape from some sort of framework; others have seen Hume as working toward a more naturalist paradigm of human understanding. In fact, Hume is open to a number of different interpretations, and these different interpretations have been taken up by subsequent philosphers to develop areas of synthetic philosophical ideas, as well as further developments more directly out of Empiricism (such as Phenomenology).
This is in fact a rather short book, a mere 100 pages or so in many editions. As a primer for understanding Hume, the British Empiricists (who include Hobbes, Locke, and Berkeley), as well as the major philosphical concerns of the eighteenth century, this is a great text with which to start.
A Classic Edition of Two Philosophical Masterworks.......2004-05-27
Hume's Enquiries are more or less a repackaging of the material from Books I and III of his earlier A Treatise of Human Nature. Ever desirous of literary fame and dismayed by the lack of interest others had shown for his prior tome, Hume went back to the drawing board and attempted to present his philosophical system in a way that would be palatable to the reading public. We should feel fortunate that he did so. For, though the significant changes are in style and emphasis rather than substance, these books are a perfect introduction to Hume's thinking. And while the shorter form did require some not insignificant cutting, most of what you find in the earlier book is presented here in a simpler, more accessible manner. That's not to say that there is nothing new here; there is. In particular, he considers some religious subjects (i.e. miracles and immortality) that he was unwilling to broach in the earlier work.
The connecting thread here is an emphasis on grounding philosophical inquiry in an empirical account of human nature, and particularly of the human mind. The first Enquiry is an account of Hume's take on the implications of the classical empiricism he inherited from Locke and Berkeley. For Hume, as for the other classical empiricists, empiricism was primarily a psychological theory about the origin and content of our concepts. (So empiricism, Hume thought, is a crucial element of any plausible account of the human mind.) The central tenet of this theory is that our concepts are furnished by experience, which includes both sensory experience and introspection (i.e., the experience of our own mental states). And the empiricists also agreed about the way we can justify our beliefs. Some beliefs are true (or false) in virtue of the ideas they contained, and we can know their truth (or falsity) simply by thinking about them; other beliefs are true (or false) in virtue of how the external world is, and we can know their truth (or falsity) only by drawing on our experiences of the world. According to Hume, all substantial conclusions about the world fall into this second category. That is, the truth (or falsity) of all substantial claims about the existence and nature of things in the external world can be discovered only by checking those claims against the evidence of our senses.
Here we seem Hume wielding this philosophy of mind in order to adjudicate disputes in metaphysics and epistemology. Do you want to know whether something can be known? Then think about the concepts in which it is expressed. Could we come to know this by thinking about the meaning of our concepts? Could we come to know it by going and looking or doing certain empirical tests? If the answer to both these questions is no, then knowledge of this subject is an impossibility for us. Do you want to know whether some claim of the metaphysicians is true or whether it even makes sense? Consider the concepts they use to express their views. Is there any way you could reduce the content of this concept to some experience? If not, their claims are literally meaningless.
This interpretation of Hume's project downplays his skepticism and emphasizes his professed intentions to provide a positive account of the operation of the human mind that appealed to nothing beyond the evidence of our senses. According to proponents of this interpretation, Hume is most interested in a description of the operation of the human mind. He's describing what human nature allows us to know and what it doesn't allow us to know. Furthermore, he argues that our nature is such that, where it fails to provide us with the resources to acquire the knowledge we might want, it provides us with a natural habit of forming the right conclusions anyway. Even though our nature limits our knowledge of the world, it ensures that we possess the habits of mind needed to make our way in the world. Hume dubs all these habits of mind "custom."
And I think this naturalistic interpretation of Hume's project provides an entry into the views he defends in the Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals. Again, it's possible to interpret Hume's project in moral philosophy as a skeptical one. The fact that he thinks morality is based in human sentiments show that he is, in some sense, a subjectivist about morality. He doesn't think there is any plausible account of our moral thinking as based on reason or empirical inquiry alone. Morality, then, is more a matter of feeling than a matter of thinking, observing, and reasoning. But, importantly, Hume doesn't think this is indicative of some problem with morality, and so he doesn't understand himself to be undermining ordinary morality. His aim is to expose the groundless pretensions of reason in order to make room for a wholly naturalistic account morality; it's not to show that morality doesn't have a firm basis. For he does not think that morality would ideally be based on reason and empirical evidence rather than sentiment. Rather, he thinks there is a sort of philosophical overreaching involved in trying to base morality on reason or empirical evidence as opposed to sentiment.
But what is the relevant sentiment? According to Hume, it is a general sort of benevolence, of concern for others. Our possessing such a feeling does not mean that we'll always set aside our own interest in the interest of others; nor does it mean that we are not largely self-interested. It does, however, mean that we're not wholly self-interested, as we are motivated to do (and not do) certain things even when they do not affect our own interests and desires. But what inspires these sentiments, and how exactly do they translate into moral judgments? Morality, Hume argues, is based on sentiments of approbation and disapprobation that are prompted by a recognition of the connection between human actions, dispositions, etc. and what is in the best interest of oneself and of mankind in general. What we take to be virtues, Hume argues, are those dispositions that lead a person to perform actions tending to promote his own happiness and the happiness of others, whereas vices are dispositions that do the opposite.
A must read! A great classic literary achievement ........1998-09-28
If sceptical thought has evolved since Socrates this book is the evidence. Hume perhaps sets the standard for all philosophical inquiry that is scholarly and brilliant. The subject matter I found most illuminating and delightful to read was on moral distinctions (right and wrong). This is serious stuff. If you take the time to understand Hume, you certainly will not be wasting your time.
Fascinating asymmetrical paradigmatically-oriented concept.......1998-07-25
Mr. Hume presents a psuedo-transient macro-realistically templable prescript for the acogitive development of pertinent systems within the spheres aforetoherein ascribed to the previously-defined source wherein the constructs devised to meet the needs of the specified systems or entities oriented within such a paradigm would be construed as a non-extant positable body of asubstantive text as pre-emptively pertinent to the essence of the text-body at hand thereupon wherein tofore.
Book Description
This volume represents the first philosophically sound discussion of the concept of number in Western civilization. (Mathematics)
Customer Reviews:
The first escape from the Elencus..........2005-10-17
You know how _frustrating_ it is, reading a platonic dialog? Some question like "What is virtue?" or "What is justice" is asked, and Socretes goes on for pages showing that the so-called "experts" don't have a clue about what it really is?
But what's _really_ frustrating is that you're all expecting, at the end of the dialog, after following a hard line of argument, that you'll be rewarded with THE definitivie definition of 'virtue' or 'justice' or whatever--only to be disapointed. All you get in the end is a new appreciation of your own hopeless ignorance...
...well, imagine a platonic dialog which started the same as any other platonic dialog, but with the question "What is a number?" Only this time, at the end of the dialog, you actually get an answer to the question?
In retrospect, its pretty amazing that Plato didn't write a Socratic dialog concerned with the question "What is number?' After all, Plato considered numbers more real than physical objects, and people like the Pythagorians were going around claiming that everything _was_ made out of numbers. But what the heck _is_ a number, anyways?
Perhaps the reason was that everybody thought they already understood what numbers were. But Frege, like Socretes before him, realized that this so-called knowledge was really just a collective ignorance. So Frege starts out this book with a thorough, merciless review of what his coleages and predicessors were saying about what numbers were, showing that they ranged from cocksure to confused, from pompously-wrongheaded to just plain silly.
But then Frege does something really amazing--for the first time in history, he goes on give a real answer to the question "what are numbers?" Building on the work of Hume, he gives a sustained argument now known as "Frege's theorem" which shows how numbers can be grounded on an understanding of one-to-one correspondence.
Unfortunately, this work had to wait almost a century for the rest of us to really catch up to its significance. Russell found a contradiction in the arguments presented here, and for the next 80 years attention shifted elsewhere. But first Charles Parsons, in 1964, and then Crispen Wright and others in the 80's and 90's begain to realize that Frege's theorem could be reconstructed without the paradox. This sparked a whole flurry of neo-Fregean studies which is one of the most active branches of analytic philosophy today.
This revival means that Frege's importance, and the importance of reading and comming to grips with the arguments presented by Frege in this book, are going to continue to grow. Although tragically Frege didn't live to see the day, we now realize that the line of reasoning he followed in this book was one of those signature moments in human history, every bit as profound as the invention of the wheel or the discovery of the pythagorian theorem--it was the moment where, for the first time ever, the question "what the heck _are_ numbers, anyways?" got a real answer.
Frege, You're Not Supposed To Have..........2004-03-24
*The Foundations of Arithmetic*, one of the most durable works of philosophy of mathematics ever produced, is something of a curiosity as presented by J.L. Austin (who translated the work for the use of an Oxford undergraduate course); and perhaps Frege's platonism got the best of Austin, and this work is really just as , well, Kantian as it appears, "a good sight" more Kantian than "standard" Frege is typically allowed to be. Frege's definition of number in terms of equipollence (one-one correspondence of sets) is legendary: that is to say, it is traditionally understood to do a great deal more work than the "thin" version allowed by mathematical logic as reconstructed to avoid Russell's paradox.
But here Frege's work-up of the concept for a general readership is so "genteel" as to suggest that this may not in fact be the case, and that Frege actually partook more heavily of Neo-Kantian bromides than his *theory of arithmetic* suggests; to wit, that this theory was always intended to be situated within a general philosophy of mathematics obeying the strictures of reasoning involving Kantian "intuition" (as is typically said of Frege's last efforts in the field). As such, it would be unfortunate that we cannot effectively read this book (formerly available *en face*, and unfortunately much the worse for the original's omission) in conjunction with its contemporary geometrical counterpart: long out of print, rarely making its way into the philosophical Frege literature, and perhaps in all parts an *anticipatory* if "crochety" rebuke to Hilbertian formalism.
Perhaps Frege was to a certain extent wholly other than the mathematics of his time; perhaps we are not well-served by a Frege "out of time"; we certainly have one of the great prose stylists of English on hand here, and perhaps it would actually do to consider his aptitude for "gold" extraction here as a clue to puzzling out the rest of Frege -- a figure supremely unconcerned with sameness of meaning, and already owing a certain debt to those para-philosophical figures all his work is at cross-purposes with (the German '70s having been quite a time indeed). A great help to understanding number theory, a marvelous thing for a library to have.
Excellent work.......2003-06-14
His conclusion (p.99e) is that the laws of arithmetic are analytic judgements and consequently a priori.
Note that he is very consistently hard on Mill.
Some interesting quotes: p. 115e #106. "...number is neither a collection of things nor a property of such, yet at the same time is not a subjective product of mental processes either, we concluded that a statement of number asserts something objective of a concept.
... (p. 116e) We next laid down the fundamental principle that we must never try to define the meaning of a word in isolation, but only as it is used in the context of a proposition: only by adhering to this can we, as I believe, avoid a physical view of it.
#107. (p.117e) "A recognition statement must always have a sense."
great work.......2001-11-28
possibly one of the greatest works in history of philosophy and the founding book of 20th century analytic philosophy... I read it only once and a better appraisal will be coming shortly..I can say right away this is not simply a 'technical' work in philosophy of mathematics but a broad although short philosophical investigation in notions of truth, meaning and identity - although it expressly deals with defining numbers in purely logical terms. continental philosophers who read this work might change some of their negative ideas about where analytic philosophy is coming from.
A Must for Any Philosopher of Mathematics.......2000-09-24
This book written by Gottlob Frege is one of the most influential books of the 20th century philosophy of mathematics. In here Frege establishes the nature of arithmetics as founded in logic, which is his logicist proposal. For that, he refutes the assertion that logic as such is founded on psychology.
Sometimes he distorts a little bit what others say about logic, so he argues against those thinkers more effectively. In here he establishes the anti-psycology difference between concept and object; though he has not made a difference yet between sense and reference. He also refers to a principle called the contextual principle, in which the word makes reference to something depending on the context. Afterwards after he wrote the book, he would reject this principle, because of his doctrine of sense and reference: the sense of the words determine the sense of the sentence; and the reference of the words determine the reference of the sentence.
This is a great philosophical work, and I would suggest it to anyone who is starting to study Analytic philosophy (philosophy of mathematics, logic and language), and also those who want to consider the platonist proposal.
Book Description
Oxford Philosophical Texts Series Editor: John Cottingham The Oxford Philosophical Texts series consists of authoritative teaching editions of canonical texts in the history of philosophy from the ancient world down to modern times. Each volume provides a clear, well laid out text together with a comprehensive introduction by a leading specialist, giving the student detailed critical guidance on the intellectual context of the work and the structure and philosophical importance of the main arguments. Endnotes are supplied which provide further commentary on the arguments and explain unfamiliar references and terminology, and a full bibliography and index are also included. The series aims to build up a definitive corpus of key texts in the Western philosophical tradition, which will form a reliable and enduring resource for students and teachers alike. David Hume's aim in writing An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (1748) was to introduce his philosophy to a European culture in which many educated people read original works of philosophy. He gives an elegant and accessible presentation of strikingly original and challenging views about the limited powers of human understanding, the attractions of scepticism, the compatibility of free will and determinism, and weaknesses in the foundations of religion. Hume's philosophy was highly controversial in the eighteenth century and remains so today. The text printed in this edition is that of the Clarendon critical edition of Hume's works. A substantial introduction by the editor explains the intellectual background to the work and surveys its main themes. The volume also includes detailed explanatory notes on the text, a glossary of terms, a full list of references, and a section of supplementary readings.
Download Description
Extracted from: Enquiries Concerning the Human Understanding, and Concerning the Principles of Morals, By David Hume. Reprinted from The Posthumous Edition of 1777, and Edited with Introduction, Comparative Tables of Contents, and Analytical Index by L.A. Selby-Bigge, M.A., Late Fellow of University College, Oxford.
Customer Reviews:
Circular Reasoning........2006-07-16
C. S. Lewis exposed the circular reasoning in Hume in the book "Miracles." David Hume was not a skeptic. He was a freemason and therefore a gnostic. He was only skeptical of nongnostic positions, such as Christianity. He was an apologist for gnosticism. He had blind faith allegiance to the masonic lodge and its creed.
His argument against miracles is his chief argument against Christianity, and it suffers from circular reasoning. Circular reasoning you exclaim? Yes. Hume argued that miracles violate uniform experience. However, if uniform experience is against mircales, then they cannot happen. Uniform experience is his presupposition. But, uniform experience is defined to exclude miracles. If they didn't happen, well, they didn't happen. This begs the question. I have a better argument than Lewis's. I would simply point out that pure logic cannot dispense with the empirical question of whether miracles happen. Afterall, mathematics is made up of tautologies. As such, mathematics or logic or any formal reasoning cannot have physical meaning. Pure logic, as Hume employs, cannot tell us anything about the world. Therein lies the sophistry. It boils down to the distinction between analytic statements and synthetic statements. Whether or not miracles happen depends not on logic, but on the existence of God who intervenes in human affairs. As the former atheist Antony Flew said, it is impossible to argue against the existence of God in light of the evidence of intelligent design of the universe.
If anyone went to the moon and found a house there that supplied oxygen, food and other human necessities, they wouldn't hesitate to posit a creator of that house. So why would anyone question the existence of God in light of this wonderful planet that supports our lives?
What is remarkable about him is how irrational he is. He possesses a flair for writing and shows great promise in reasoning. Yet, he sacrifices good reasoning for pushing his gnostic agenda. It's like a person who graduates from medical school who decides to murder patients, or a graduate from law school who chooses to rob banks. He tries to use reasoning to support irrational thought. Hume was a strange man. The engine is running, but there's no one behind the wheel.
Descartes' Ultimate Error.......2005-10-10
If one accepts the methodology of Descartes in applying scepticism to reason and the senses, in effect denying the existence of all things but a "thinking thing," two entailments are logically consequent: Either Berkeley's idealism or Hume's scepticism. I don't accept Descartes' starting point, so I find the entailments confused and incoherent. But if one does accept Descartes' starting point, then the two extremes must be heeded. If for no other reason than observing the absurdity of either man's conclusions, it is valuable to read both entailments. But in their confused process, both men bring certain salient features to light.
Hume accepts Descartes starting point, making it his own. But to Descartes method, he adds Pyrrhonist scepticism: That all reason leads to infinite regress, and that all sensations (or impressions) can not be trusted.
Hume begins with the conclusion that all sense perception is either an impression or idea. Even memory and imagination, two other faculties of the mind, are conflated into these two species of perceptions, as impressions. Their difference is one of degree (vivacity), not of kind. Hence, Hume is the author of what is known as the "Copy Principle." Instead of unmediated, direct perception through the ordinary senses, all perception is mediated by the imagination into impressions and ideas. From this follows certain resemblances, contiguity, and causal associations between impressions or ideas, and from this association we develop a sense of self. But even the notion of causality here is one of implied inference, not of actual inductive reason. Hume denies there is any real causality that can be known, although we operate "as if" we infer cause from effect. Even probability is reduced to a mere association of ideas and/or impressions; because neither reason (which always leads to infinite regress) or senses (which can always be deceived) can actually be true. The Enquiry also treats of miracles and the testimony of others derisively; but don't we rely on the testimony of others who claim the earth is round rather than flat, just as we rely on others who testify to miracles in a byegone era? After all, few of us have direct experience with a spherical earth (Popper makes this observation).
Hume's method incorporates five kinds of scepticism: (i) methodological, (ii) conceptual, (ii) nomological, (iv) explanatory, and (v) reductive empiricism. His commitment to scepticism is not without some capitulation. While he denies absolute causality and inductive inference and probability in an actual senses, he relies on them for practical purposes. One can't remain a pyrrhonist for long; some elements of reason and some degree of confidence in impressions is necessary for ordinary life. But if one starts with Descartes' starting point, extreme scepticism is a necessary entailment. Which, after seeing Hume deny so much intuition, is it really worth starting with Descartes' scepticism? Answering that question is what makes Hume interesting.
Hume at his best.......2005-10-09
David Hume was perhaps the leading light in the Empiricist movement in philosophy. Empiricism is seen in distinction from Rationalism, in that it doubts the viability of universal principles (rational or otherwise), and uses sense data as the basis of all knowledge - experience is the source of knowledge. Hume was a skeptic as well as empiricist, and had radical (for the time) atheist ideas that often got in the way of his professional advancement, but given his reliance on experience (and the kinds of experiences he had), his problem with much that was considered conventional was understandable.
Hume's major work, 'A Treatise of Human Nature', was not well received intially - according to Hume, 'it fell dead-born from the press'. Hume reworked the first part of this work in a more popular way for this text, which has become a standard, and perhaps the best introduction to Empiricism.
In a nutshell, the idea of empiricism is that experience teaches, and rules and understanding are derived from this. However, for Hume this wasn't sufficient. Just because billiard balls when striking always behave in a certain manner, or just because the sun always rose in the morning, there was no direct causal connection that could be automatically affirmed - we assume a necessary connection, but how can this be proved?
Hume's ideas impact not only metaphysics, but also epistemology and psychology. Hume develops empiricism to a point that empiricism is practically unsupportable (and it is in this regard that Kant sees this text as a very important piece, and works toward his synthesis of Empiricism and Rationalism). For Hume, empirical thought requires skepticism, but leaves it unresolved as far as what one then needs to accept with regard to reason and understanding. According to scholar Eric Steinberg, 'A view that pervades nearly all of Hume's philosophical writings is that both ancient and modern philosophers have been guilty of optimistic and exaggerated claims for the power of human reason.'
Some have seen Hume as presenting a fundamental mistrust of daily belief while recognising that we cannot escape from some sort of framework; others have seen Hume as working toward a more naturalist paradigm of human understanding. In fact, Hume is open to a number of different interpretations, and these different interpretations have been taken up by subsequent philosophers to develop areas of synthetic philosophical ideas, as well as further developments more directly out of Empiricism (such as Phenomenology).
This is in fact a rather short book, a mere 100 pages or so in many editions. As a primer for understanding Hume, the British Empiricists (who include Hobbes, Locke, and Berkeley), as well as the major philosphical concerns of the eighteenth century, this is a great text with which to start.
A comment on one part of Hume 's classic .......2005-02-27
First I would like to commend the excellent review of this book by CT Dreyer in which he correctly shows how Hume extended the empiricism of Locke and Berkeley to the point where skepticism seemed our only honest way of thinking about our knowledge of the world. Hume's questioning of induction, of how we can be sure tomorrow will be like today , his questioning of how we can trust our senses to know the outside world, his questioning of how we can hold our world logically together when analysis reveals that there is no necessary connection between ' cause' and 'effect' in everyday life action means he wakened not only Kant from his dogmatic slumber but Philosophy itself from the sense that it will provide absolute understanding.
Hume is a very clear writer. I remember reading the famous billiard ball account of causality in which our common sense view of ' before' and ' after' is questioned and taken apart. I believe Hume says after this account, something to the effect and ' still when we leave the room we leave by the door and not by the window'. A friend of mine in this class when the class ended opened the window ( on the ground floor ) and went out that way.
This is difficult and great philosophy. I do not pretend to understand it or its implications fully. A test of the mind and a necessary read for anyone who would know Western Philosophy.
As Exciting and Thought-Provoking as Philosophy Gets.......2004-02-28
Hume, I and many others think, was the greatest philosopher to have written in English, and this is the book to pick up if you want to introduce yourself to Saint David's distinctive brand of classical empiricism. This is a must-read for anyone with even a passing interest in philosophy, and it's hard for me to see how anyone interested in the history of modern thought can avoid reading this book or the corresponding sections of Hume's Treatise.
As is well-known, the Enquiry concerning Human Understanding was intended as an encapsulation and popularization of the views Hume defended in Book I of his magnum opus, A Treatise of Human Nature. Hume assumed that book's commercial failure could be accounted for by its length, difficulty, and lack of accessibility, and so, being a man who desired literary fame, he hoped to acquire commercial success by presenting the same ideas in a more appealing and accessible manner. Unfortunately, it seems Hume misunderstood what the literati of his day were looking for in a philosophical treatise. For the Enquiry, like the Treatise before it, didn't bring him the fame he sought. Still, Hume did understand what goes into writing excellent philosophical prose, and consequently this book is a much easier read than Book I of the Treatise. Indeed, this book constitutes an excellent introduction to Hume's thought, and, except for maybe Berkeley's Three Dialogues, I can't think of another primary source that would serve as a better introduction to classical British empiricism.
Now, let's get to the ideas here. Hume, like the other classical empiricists, was primarily concerned with the psychological question of the origin of our concepts. About the answer to this question, the empiricists were all agreed--our concepts are furnished by experience, which includes both sensory experience and introspection (i.e., the experience of our own mental states). And the empiricists also agreed about the way we can justify our beliefs. Some beliefs are true (or false) in virtue of the ideas they contained, and we can know their truth (or falsity) simply by thinking about them; other beliefs are true (or false) in virtue of how the external world is, and we can know their truth (or falsity) only by drawing on our experiences of the world. According to Hume, all substantial conclusions about the world fall into this second category. That is, the truth (or falsity) of all substantial claims about the existence and nature of things in the external world can be discovered only by checking those claims against the evidence of our senses.
The traditional way of placing Hume within the story of empiricism goes something like this. Hume takes up the empiricism of Locke and Berkeley and pushes it to its logical conclusion. Whereas Locke and Berkeley hadn't been wholly consistent empiricists, Hume, the true believer, demonstrates that classical empiricism leads to a pretty thoroughgoing skepticism. Since he's wholly convinced of the truth of his empiricist premises, Hume is willing to accept the skepticism that goes along with them. However, those who aren't convinced of that his empiricism is obviously correct think that Hume has actually demonstrated the implausibility of his empiricism. If this is where empiricism leads, they think, then it's clear that we need to reject empiricism. Indeed, some, like Thomas Reid, view Hume's arguments as constituting a reductio ad absurdum of his sort of empiricism. On this interpretation, Hume's philosophy essentially presents a dilemma for all future thinkers: abandon empiricism, or accept empiricism along with Humean skepticism.
But a different view of Hume, one of Hume as proposing a wholly naturalistic account of the human mind, has recently emerged as a competitor to the general conception of Hume's place within philosophy sketched in the previous paragraph. This interpretation downplays Hume's skepticism and emphasizes his professed intentions to provide a positive account of the operation of the human mind that appealed to nothing beyond the evidence of our senses. According to proponents of this interpretation, Hume is most interested in a description of the operation of the human mind. He's describing what human nature allows us to know and what it doesn't allow us to know. Furthermore, he argues that our nature is such that, where it fails to provide us with the resources to acquire the knowledge we might want, it provides us with a natural habit of forming the right conclusions anyway. Even though our nature limits our knowledge of the world, it ensures that we possess the habits of mind needed to make our way in the world. Hume dubs all these habits of mind "custom."
If this view is correct, then Hume has abjured many of the normative aims of traditional epistemological inquiry. He isn't attempting to show how we can answer a skeptic or why we have good reason to believe what we think we know. Instead, he wants us to stand back from our everyday beliefs and think about the natural processes that result in them. How, exactly, do our minds operate? How do we come to think what we do about the world? Hume thinks that this sort of inquiry will lead us see that, at some point, the explanation of why we think what we think reaches certain brute facts about the operation of the human mind. When we reach these points, there is nothing more to be said. We simply can't help thinking in these ways, and we lack the resources to demonstrate that these ways of thinking constitute an accurate way to represent the operation of the external world. And, Hume claims, it turns out that many of the fundamental elements of our conception of the world--the belief that things stand in causal relations to one another, the belief that we can know that there is a world outside our minds, the belief the future will resemble the past--end up not being open to ratification by experience. With respect to beliefs of these sorts, we ultimately have to appeal to custom in order to explain their existence and popularity. Hume, then, can be seen as demolishing the pretensions of reason in order to make room for a wholly naturalistic account of human thinking.
Book Description
The Oxford Philosophical Texts series consists of authoritative teaching editions of canonical texts in the history of philosophy from the ancient world down to modern times. Each volume provides a clear, well laid out text together with a comprehensive introduction by a leading specialist, giving the student detailed critical guidance on the intellectual context of the work and the structure and philosophical importance of the main arguments. Endnotes are supplied which provide further commentary on the arguments and explain unfamiliar references and terminology, and a full bibliography and index are also included. The series aims to build up a definitive corpus of key texts in the Western philosophical tradition, which will form a reliable and enduring resource for students and teachers alike. Shortly before his death, David Hume declared his Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals (1751) to be the best of his many writings. In this highly influential work, Hume sets out his theory of justice and benevolence, and the other virtues, and argues that morality is founded on the natural feelings or `sentiments' of humankind. The text printed in this edition is that of the Clarendon critical edition of Hume's works. A substantial introduction by the editor explains the intellectual background to the work and its relationship to the rest of Hume's philosophy. The volume also includes detailed explanatory notes on the text, a glossary of terms, a full list of references, and a section of supplementary readings.
Download Description
AS the mutual shocks, in SOCIETY, and the oppositions of interest and self-love have constrained mankind to establish the laws of JUSTICE, in order to preserve the advantages of mutual assistance and protection: in like manner, the eternal contrarieties, in COMPANY, of men's pride and self-conceit, have introduced the rules of Good Manners or Politeness, in order to facilitate the intercourse of minds, and an undisturbed commerce and conversation.
Customer Reviews:
Disappointed with the production of the book.......2007-03-16
I expected more from the production of the book. Yes, it contains the complete text of "An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals," but:
1. There is nothing else, not even a page giving the year in which David Hume first published it.
2. There are numerous formatting errors. For example, in several places a paragraph is broken in the middle of a sentence.
3. Footnotes are put in the body of the text rather than at the bottom of the page.
On the other hand:
1. A decent sized font has been used, so the text is easy to read.
2. The book is printed on high quality paper.
In retrospect, I wish I had bought a book with an editor's introduction.
Of Two Minds.......2005-03-19
Hume treats of morals in two distinct fashions. His major and last contribution is his "Enquiry," which was written late in his life; the other is Part III of his "Treatise on Human Nature," which was written much earlier in life. The two treatments are very different, and of the two, I much prefer the latter, as it is "demonstrated" a posteriori that man has a "natural inclincation" to maximize pleasure and to avoid pain. Besed on this natural inclination, humans endeavor to do those things that produce happiness, pride, joy, etc., because it maximizes pleasure, whereas humans endeavor to avoid those things that produce uneasiness, disturbances, misery, etc., because those things produce pain. From this a posteriori of natural inclinations, Hume explores the reasons why some things count as virtures (because they maximize pleasure), while some things count as vices (because they produce pain).
His "Enquiry," however, takes an altogether different approach, one based on the sentiments of utility and beneficence. Here humans do things that maximize their usefulness to themselves and to society that concomitantly bring beneficence. Those sentiments that are distinguished in natural language such as dexterity, perserverance, chastity, endurance, honesty, etc., count as virtues because they are "useful," while those that produce in natural language such things as sloth, lethargy, dishonesty, misery, etc., count as vice because they are "not useful." Our language itself is the measure of their untility.
The two theories, juxtaposed, are not at odds with each other, but definitely have distinctively different aetiologies. What I prefer about the "Treatise" is that one can infer the logical necessity of "natural inclinations" (dare I say "instinct") to maximize pleasure and avoid pain. This seems indisputably true empirically. Morals are indeed an a posteriori part of the human constitution. All the virtues and vices derived from this single principle have a solid foundation in human nature itself. Conversely, to merely posit that virtues and vices are merely sentiments according to their "utility" is less grounded in the person's natural inclinations, and is something one observes about human behavior in general.
Which approach will the reader prefer? That's difficult to determine, which is a good reason to read both the "Treatise" and the "Enquiry." As I already mentioned, they are not at odds with each other, they just have different starting points. Personally, the approach in the "Treatise" appeals because it starts with a intrinsic feature of what it is to be human, i.e., it seems to have a stronger foundation and logically inferred consequences from observances. Yet, the approach in the "Enquiry" is more vivacious, but is less grounded, because it is merely posits observances of ephemeral conditions that continually change from time to time and from culture to culture. If one wants to affirm that morals do have a solid foundation in human nature, you'll probably prefer the "Treatise," but if one wants to affirm that morals are merely "preferences" built into our natural language that differ from culture to culture and from time to time, you'll probably prefer the "Enquiry." Either way, however, they take us away from pie-in-the-sky metaphysical speculations!
A Humane and Optimistic Account of Morality.......2004-05-27
Hume, for most people, is largely defined by his work in metaphysics and epistemology. There's no doubt that his work in these areas is of signal importance, but I think a tendency to focus on these areas at the expense of his moral thinking suggests a somewhat misleading interpretation of what he's up to. It's really only in his non-moral works that the picture of Hume as a radical skeptic has much plausibility. For here it seems clear that Hume's primary aim in his moral works is to ground his philosophical theses in a careful consideration of human nature; and it's also clear that he doesn't intend this to be a skeptical and debunking account of morality.
Now, it's true that there are ways in which Hume is skeptical about a certain way of thinking about the origin and nature of morality. The fact that he thinks morality is based in human sentiments show that he is, in some sense, a subjectivist about morality. He doesn't think there is any plausible account of our moral thinking as based on reason or empirical inquiry alone. Against the view that our awareness of moral distinctions is based on the exercise of reason, he argues that we do not figure out whether a person is virtuous or vicious, or an action good or bad, simply by thinking about things. And against the view that our awareness of moral distinctions is empirical, he argues that we do not figure out which things possess which moral qualities by going out and looking or by anything else of this sort. Morality, then, is more a matter of feeling than a matter of thinking, observing, and reasoning.
Hume's basic argument for the conclusion that morality is based on human sentiment is that the essential practicality of morality requires us to understand its basis in this way. Morality is about action, and neither reasoning nor ordinary empirical inquiry can be the source of our moral thinking since they are impotent to prompt us to action. Reason does not motivate, and our moral judgments, concerns, sentiments are intimately connected to motivation. Nor does recognition of the empirical facts motivate all on its own. Motivation always requires the existence of certain conative states in addition to the relevant beliefs arrived at through reason and empirical inquiry. So, in order to account for the practicality of morality (i.e. for the connection between morality and motivation), we need something to make us care about moral goodness and badness; and that something is to be found within the emotional part of our nature.
But, importantly, Hume doesn't think this is indicative of some problem with morality, and so he doesn't understand himself to be undermining ordinary morality. His aim is to expose the groundless pretensions of reason in order to make room for a wholly naturalistic account morality; it's not to show that morality doesn't have a firm basis. For he does not think that morality would ideally be based on reason and empirical evidence rather than sentiment. Rather, he thinks there is a sort of philosophical overreaching involved in trying to base morality on reason or empirical evidence as opposed to sentiment.
So far, so good. But what is the relevant sentiment? According to Hume, it is a general sort of benevolence, of concern for others. At least where our own interests do not intrude on this feeling, we can take pleasure in the pleasure of others and we can be disturbed and pained by their pains and difficulties. Our possessing such a feeling does not mean that we'll always set aside our own interest in the interest of others; nor does it mean that we are not largely self-interested. It does, however, mean that we're not wholly self-interested, as we are motivated to do (and not do) certain things even when they do not affect our own interests and desires. Such a feeling, Hume argues, must be the basis for the sort of general and unselfish concern for welfare of others that morality requires of us. And since this sentiment is a common component of human nature, it provides morality with a non-parochial basis. The moral point of view, Hume argues, is one we take up when our sentiments and feelings about people and actions are based on a shared perspective based in human nature. And since we share similar sentiments and sensibilities in virtue of our shared nature, morality possesses a sort of intersubjectivity.
But what inspires these sentiments, and how exactly do they translate into moral judgments? Morality, Hume argues, is based on sentiments of approbation and disapprobation that are prompted by a recognition of the connection between human actions, dispositions, etc. and what is in the best interest of oneself and of mankind in general. What we take to be virtues, Hume argues, are those dispositions that lead a person to perform actions tending to promote his own happiness and the happiness of others, whereas vices are dispositions that do the opposite. And this allows us to see the source of Hume's optimism. For it is his view that being moral is in our own interest, and in the interest of others. The morally good person is one whose actions are for the good of himself and for the good of others, and this is why we approve of such people. This is why we find them pleasant, why we enjoy their company, and why we think it's a good thing to be virtuous. So this is anything but a dark, self-denying account of morality and our moral obligations. Morality is not a set of chains holding us back from realizing ourselves, from expressing our true nature. Given what our nature is actually like, Hume claims, there is no need to understand morality as involving self-abnegation for nothing more than self-abnegation's sake.
If I had to recommend a single book in moral philosophy to the general reader, I suppose it would be this one. There may be greater works of moral philosophy--Kant's works and Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics, for instance--but those are works for the philosopher and this is a book for everyone. It's wise, accessible, inspiring, beautifully written, occasionally quite funny, and largely convincing.
Outstanding Edition.......2003-01-09
This is another outstanding edition in the Oxford Philosophical Texts series. This is a first rate book for both students and experts on Hume. It contains an excellent annotated edition of the Enquiry itself, excellent background information on Hume, a very nice introduction to the Enquiry written by Tom Beauchamp, a leading Hume scholar and moral philosopher, an outstanding guide to the Hume literature, and a good glossary. All for a very reasonable price.
An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals (EPM) is one of the cornerstone texts in Western philosophy and is written with Hume's characteristic combination of incisive analysis and charming style. Hume's goal is to describe the bases of human moral conduct. As stated by Tom Beauchamp, EPM is descriptive rather than prescriptive. While Hume clearly has strong opinions about what constitutes appropriate moral conduct, in EPM his focus is really on moral psychology rather than moral direction. This approach is what would now be called metaethical. As with his work on epistemology, Hume is also concerned with establishing the limits of human reason. In Hume's analysis, reason has an important but limited role in moral judgements, crucial for reaching appropriate judgements but does not establish the basic principles for moral judgement. Hume sees morality as based on an interesting interplay of moral sentiments, which he sees as intrinsic to human nature, self-interest, and social utility. The importance of each of these varies with considerably in different social settings. In family life and close personal relationships, moral sentiments dominate but the force of moral sentiment weakens as the range of socieity increases. In more complex social settings, Hume sees a form of utilitarianism as restraining self-interest. For Hume, specific moral systems are variable, somewhat situation dependent, and historically contingent. Thought provoking and very readable.
Hume was one of the most forward-thinking men of his time........1999-05-07
David Hume is a genius philosopher. His basic principle-- knowledge can only come from experience. His ideas on morality are indicative of a rich understanding of the mind and its surrounding world. This book should be read by anybody interested in morality, religion (its viability) and experience. He is a fascinating thinker.
Average customer rating:
- Interesting characters--worth 4.5 stars
- A Story About Blackmail and Attempted Murder
|
Enquiry
Dick Francis
Manufacturer: Berkley
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
 Literary
| General
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Mystery
| Mystery & Thrillers
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Francis, Dick
| ( F )
| Authors, A-Z
| Mystery & Thrillers
| Subjects
| Books
Paperback
| Francis, Dick
| ( F )
| Authors, A-Z
| Mystery & Thrillers
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Mystery & Thrillers
| Subjects
| Books
Literary
| General
| Literature & Fiction
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
General
| Francis, Dick
| ( F )
| Authors, A-Z
| Mystery & Thrillers
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Paperback
| Francis, Dick
| ( F )
| Authors, A-Z
| Mystery & Thrillers
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
General
| Mystery & Thrillers
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
General
| Mystery
| Mystery & Thrillers
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
All 4-for-3 Deals
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Forfeit
-
Slay Ride
-
For Kicks
-
Smokescreen
-
Dead Cert
ASIN: 0425197050
Release Date: 2004-07-06 |
Book Description
A closed-door enquiry has found a jockey guilty of the lowest possible crime--throwing a race for money. His reputation scarred, he's begun his own investigation--but asking the wrong questions just might get him killed.
Customer Reviews:
Interesting characters--worth 4.5 stars.......2006-04-07
This is my 1st Dick Francis book--another author I selected from the "Mystery Lovers' Book of Quotations." I found it quite enjoyable--especially since the author provides sufficient information/clues to "figure it out." Which I did, but with some effort. The characters are varied & interesting--especially the dichotomies in social position & how the characters respond to these under varying circumstances. The central theme of horse racing was also different & interesting too. The ending is, however, rather sudden & unforeseen. I'm not sure how realistic it is--but it's possible. I look forward to reading more Francis' books.
A Story About Blackmail and Attempted Murder.......2004-11-15
Jockey Kelly Hughes and trainer Dexter Cranfield have their licenses suspended by the Oxford stewards for supposedly throwing a race. Hughes believes that they were framed and he sets out to clear their names and get the licenses restored.
Who would want to ruin their careers? Could it be the envious and greedy jockey Charley west? Could it be rival trainer Jack Roxford or the imperious Lord Gowery?
As the truth is revealed we hear a story of sexual deviation, blackmail, fixed evidence and attempted murder.ENQUIRY is up to the usual standard for a crime novel by Dick Francis.If you are a fan of the author, you will probably enjoy this book.
Average customer rating:
- My Introduction to Dick Francis and still my favorite!!!
- Francis at his best
- If you love rational heroes...
- Truth Revealed
- Good first impression
|
Enquiry
Dick Francis
Manufacturer: Blackstone Audiobooks
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Audio CD
General
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
| Classics
| Comic
| Contemporary
| Literary
General
| Mystery
| Mystery & Thrillers
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Francis, Dick
| ( F )
| Authors, A-Z
| Mystery & Thrillers
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Mystery & Thrillers
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Literature & Fiction
| Books on CD
| Audiobooks
| Formats
| Books
Unabridged
| Literature & Fiction
| Books on CD
| Audiobooks
| Formats
| Books
Francis, Dick
| ( F )
| Authors, A-Z
| Books on CD
| Audiobooks
| Formats
| Books
Mystery & Thrillers
| Books on CD
| Audiobooks
| Formats
| Books
General
| Books on CD
| Audiobooks
| Formats
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
High Stakes
-
Knockdown
-
Under Orders
-
The Edge
-
Twice Shy
ASIN: 0786199334 |
Book Description
THE RACE IS ON to prove a jockey's innocence-a Dick Francis classic!
When a banned jockey starts asking questions, he may get barred from life....
Dick Francis is..."Rare and magical."-San Diego Union-Tribune
"Head and shoulders above the rest."-Ottawa Citizen
Dick Francis was named Grand Master at the 1996 Edgar Awards
Customer Reviews:
My Introduction to Dick Francis and still my favorite!!!.......2004-10-23
I have the listened to the BBC dramatization of Enquiry at least a dozen times and the unabridged version several additional times and it never fails to entertain me. It was the first of the Dick Francis stories I listened to or read and it is brilliant from several points of view. The development of all the characters is done so well, especially Kelly Hughes and his helper Roberta and minor characters such as the sleazy detective and the horse trainers and owners. You meet so many memorable characters as Kelly seeks to clear his name and Dexter Cranfield's as well. Kelly Hughes was the kind of hero several stories could have been done about and I wish there were more. While not all the Francis stories were written quite as well as this story, I listen to this one several times a year. I strongly recommend this book/audio to all fans of Dick Francis and the hourse racing business.
Francis at his best.......2002-08-30
"Yesterday I lost my licence."
That's how the book begins ... and indeed Kelly Hughes, a leading jump jockey , has been indefinitely suspended from racing after being found guilty of deliberately losing a race.
He knows that someone has rigged evidence against him, and rather than sit back and wait for the ban to be lifted , he sets out to find his secret enemy.
Hughes isn't a detective, and just as he doesn't really know how to carry out an investigation, the reader can't guess at how the plot will develop. My favourite highlight is when Hughes is driving home after a dance. At first it seems to be just a 'filler' scene, but it turns into something more dramatic - and the writing here is particularly well-crafted.
The two main characters are Hughes himself , a widower, and Roberta, the snooty daughter of his employer. Near the start of the book Roberta asks him:
" "That picture .. that's your wife isn't it?"
I nodded.
"I remember her". She said. "She was always so sweet to me. She seemed to know what I was feeling. I was really awfully sorry when she was killed"
I looked at her in surprise. The people Rosalind had been sweetest to had invariably been unhappy. She had had a knack of sensing it, and giving succour without being asked. "
Unfortunately Roberta has been brought up by her father to regard jockeys as an inferior social class, and it takes a long time for the two of them to kindle any real friendship, let alone romance.
Francis is particularly good in this book with the minor characters - such as the aristocratic Bobbie, who clearly is very fond of Roberta but can't help hinting that Hughes is a better match for her, or Derek the diffident mechanic who kept most of his brains in his fingertips.
The plot doesn't flag, the tale builds to a satisfactory climax and I only wish Hughes had appeared in another of Francis' books.
If you love rational heroes..........2001-03-24
The primary reason I continue to seek out and read Dick Francis is that he continually creates heroes that are efficacious and rational. He avoids the common pitfalls of most modern writers, and instead invents characters who pass the ultimate test: "Would I like to meet and know this person?" If you can answer "yes" to that question then there is great potential for enjoyment in the fiction centered around that character. If you answer "no" to that question, why even bother reading further?
Dick Francis' characters almost always recieve an unreserved "YES!" Read "Enquiry," it's not the best from Francis but it's still furlongs beyond the rest.
Truth Revealed.......2000-12-17
Jockey Kelly Hughes and trainer Dexter Cranfield have their licenses suspended by the Oxford stewards for supposedly throwing a race. Hughes believes that they were framed and he sets out to clear their names and get the licenses restored. Who would want to ruin their careers? As the truth is revealed we hear a story of sexual deviation, blackmail, fixed evidence and attempted murder.
Good first impression.......2000-12-15
This was the first Dick Francis book I have read and I must say that I am impressed! I bought it because I had nothing to read one rainy afternoon and because I am interested in horseracing. I read it in one day. The characters were real and the plot was interesting. If you look at the copy I have you will see all kinds of scribbles in it where I have marked quotes and phrases that I liked. For example, Kelly describes how he feels after his accident as "Not so much as banging the head against a brick wall as being actively attacked by a cliff". Yep, I know that feeling...Francis just said it better than I could have. Just one warning...don't pick up this book unless you can afford to spend the whole afternoon reading it.
Average customer rating:
|
Ethical Issues in Business : Enquiries, Cases, Readings
Manufacturer: Broadview Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
General
| Reference
| Business & Investing
| Subjects
| Books
Ethics & Morality
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
The Philosophy of Money
ASIN: 1551112574 |
Book Description
The core of this text comprises chapters on all the key issues of business in Canada today. Each chapter includes a hypothetical case study and an introduction highlighting key ethical points; two academic essays; and a real-life case study. Questions for discussion accompany the essays and case studies. The author has also included a general introduction to ethical issues and an overview of ehtical theory; a section on institutionalizing ethics (discussing ethics officers/programs/ codes etc.); and appendices providing excerpts from important classic contributions to ethical theory, and from relevant Canadian law.
Average customer rating:
|
Church and Organization: A Sociological and Theological Enquiry
Joseph McCann
Manufacturer: University of Scranton Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
General
| Church History
| Christianity
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Theology
| Christianity
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
Ecclesiology
| Theology
| Christianity
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
Sociology
| Religious Studies
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Theology
| Religious Studies
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
Social Theology
| Theology
| Religious Studies
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0940866196 |
Book Description
Church and Organization investigates organizational theory and the theology of the Catholic Church. Do theological ideas apply to social arrangements? Can the gap be bridged between ecclesiology and sociology? These questions probe an area seldom explored in the past and never charted so as to discern the foundational principles that they have in common.
Books:
- The Dark River (Fourth Realm Trilogy, Book 2)
- The Discipline of Market Leaders: Choose Your Customers, Narrow Your Focus, Dominate Your Market
- The Fertile Female: How the Power of Longing for a Child Can Save Your Life and Change the World
- The Good Husband of Zebra Drive (No. 1 Ladies' Detective Agency 8)
- The Invisible Wall: A Love Story That Broke Barriers
- The Last Arab Jews: The Communities of Jerba, Tunisia (Social Orders : a Series of Monographs and Tracts, Vol. 1)
- The Measure of a Man: A Spiritual Autobiography (Oprah's Book Club)
- The New Saint Joseph Sunday Missal & Hymnal/Black/No. 820/22-B
- The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner (New York Review Books Classics)
- The Red Badge of Courage & "The Veteran" (Modern Library Classics)
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
- A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier
- Seascapes Floral Expressions Practice Set
- The MacAddict Guide to Making Music with GarageBand
- West Federal Taxation 2007: Comprehensive Volume
- After the Affair: Healing the Pain and Rebuilding Trust When a Partner Has Been Unfaithful
- Watchdogs of Democracy
- Cost Accounting, 5th Edition: Process Cost Practice Case
- The manifesto of capitalism: An analysis and summary of Adam Smith's Wealth of nations
- North of Nowhere, South of Loss: Stories
Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism (Post-Contemporary Interventions)
A Brief History of Neoliberalism
The New Imperialism (Clarendon Lectures in Geography and Environmental Studies)
Spaces of Global Capitalism: A Theory of Uneven Geographical Development
The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (Theory and History of Literature, Volume 10)
