"Political correctness" has made it difficult to challenge even that part of the thesis of the Fullbrooks' book, Simone De Beauvoir and Jean-Paul Sartre: The Remaking of a Twentieth-Century Legend, which relates strictly to the history of philosophy. Nevertheless, challenged it must be, and has been, contrary to the claims of Sharon Wright in her online review. What she calls their "impressive scholarship" has come under serious and precise attack from a number of quarters. What follows is simply the lead-in to an article that I myself published as early as 1995 ("Sartre and Beauvoir: Refining rather than 'Remaking' the Legend", Simone de Beauvoir Studies, vol. 12, 1995, pp. 91-99); the rest of that article goes on to justify my claims in detail.

"The crux of their argument is the assertion that Sartre's reading of the draft of L'Invitée during his leave in Paris between 4 and 16 February 1940 was what provided him with all or most of the crucial ideas that were to form the substance of L'Etre et le Néant. [...] Now, there are least four MAJOR flaws in this line of argument: (i) we do not know with certainty exactly what was in the parts of L'Invitée that Sartre read in February 1940; (ii) the argument ignores completely Beauvoir's acquaintance with drafts of Sartre's L'Age de raison, and also seriously underplays the philosophical content of those of Sartre's Carnets de la drôle de guerre that Beauvoir had read before February 1940; (iii) we DO know that Sartre had been working since the mid-1930s on the ideas that were to be central to L'Etre et le Néant; (iv) the momentous philosophical system that the Fullbrooks ascribe to Beauvoir is simply not to be found in even the final version of L'Invitée."

Since, as Sharon Wright points out, the Fullbrooks were far from the first to argue for the philosophical originality of Beauvoir, those of their claims that are demonstrably false have done nothing to promote this case. Rather, they have tended to obscure, and direct attention away from, many of the complex and fascinating questions concerning the relationship between the thought of Beauvoir and that of Sartre. What is more, some of the sensationalist, journalistic features of the style of the book have served to inflame sensitive issues that require particularly cool, rational treatment.

No book on Beauvoir or Sartre has led to so much discussion, provoked such consternation or so changed the way we see these cultural icons as has Kate and Edward Fullbrook's "Simone de Beauvoir and Jean-Paul Sartre: The Remaking of a Twentieth-Century Legend". The basis of this recently republished book (which I had the pleasure of rereading last week) is disarmingly simple. The Fullbrooks checked out Beauvoir's and Sartre's newly-available letters and diaries and found that the traditional story that says the Beauvoir constructed her first novel "She Cme to Stay" on the basis of philosophical ideas she took from Sartre's essay "Being and Nothingness" is the exact opposite of the truth. Sartre only began, the Fullbrooks carefully document, to compile notes hor his philosophical treatise after studying the second draft of Beauvoir's novel. The Fullbrooks also, and again drawing on the letters, make the case that it was Beauvoir's sexual promiscuity, rather than Sartre's that initially dictated the famous open terms of their 50-year relationship. All this radical post-patriarchal revisionism, which the Fullbrooks refused to play down, was too much for many critcs when this book appeared in 1994. Some reviewers were apoplectic, others deeply sceptical, and the "New Yorl Times" twice ran long reviews warning their readers against this "feminist claptrap". But in fact the Fullbrooks, in claiming philosophical originality for Beauvoir, were themselves not so original as perhaps they and certainly their critics imagined. Margaret Simons, Linda Singer and Sonia Kruks had previously argued the case for Beauvoir as an innovative philosopher and the source of some of Sartre's later ideas. The Fullbrooks' discoveries gave new significance to this prior scholarship and inspired Simons to go off in search of Beauvoir's student diaries. (See Simons 1999) Simons's subsequent discoveries and the slow but continuing cultural shift away from presuming that women are never the source of original ideas has taken away some of the shock value of the Fullbrooks' first book. Indeed, seven years on and their impressive scholarship has never been seriously challanged. By now scores of Sartre scholars much have checked out the letters and diaries and found, to their dismay, that the Fullbrooks did not make any of it up. But although "Simone de Beauvoir and Jean-Paul Sartre: The Remaking of a Twentieth-Century Legend" through its success no longer enjoys the controversy it once did, it remains, with its compelling narrative and writerly qualities, one of the best books evr written about either Beauvoir or Sartre. Even the "New York Times" had to admit that it was good read. For capturing the spirit of these twentieth-century giants and their extraordinary relationship, this book is yet to be beaten.

Alcorn deals with first rate issues in a third rate manner. His presentation of systems is particularly lacking in depth. Bibliographic references are not directly tied to text. General chapter references are given at the end of the book, but these are often dated and thin.

It's not very wise if you approach this book with the mentality that within the book you are going to find all the answers that explain why and how the world functions they way it does. However, this book is designed to provide you with key tools that will assist you in your own personal expedition(s) of the world around you. The overall vision of the book focuses on systems, the "niche" of technology and it's evolution, and universal laws to mention a few. This book is an excellent book that gives you thorough and detailed insight on why and how things around you work, and how important and crucial technology is to our everyday lives.

Fortunately, the Paul Turner series gets better as does Zubro's crafting of enjoyable cop mystery stories. With this one, the debut of Paul Turner, Zubro tackles an interesting premise: are gay activist orgnizations behind the murder of an anti-gay televangelist's daughter? It's a question Paul Turner, a gay Chicago homicide detective, doesn't like having to look at, but one he realizes he must if he is to solve this case. The reader gets taken in a lot of different directions and one has to wonder if the poor cop will ever solve this case. Maybe Zubro hadn't made up his mind "who done it" until the final chapter because there are no really good clues, but plenty of motive to go around. All in all it was an enjoyable read, but it's not among my top 25 murder mysteries, regardless of genre (gay or straight or whatever)or author.

This is the first of Zubro's many books that I have read, and sorry to say it will be the last also. I love gay mystery as a genre, but this book disappointed on many levels. The plot, about the murder of a bigotted televangelist's daughter, and the gay community's possible involvement as a means of revenge undoubtedly has potential, but isn't developed, with the result that I didn't really care how the book ended. Undoubtedly the biggest let down is the quality of the writing. It's pedestrian and leaden, making the promising idea of the central character, a gay cop and father a crashing bore.

I was never so disappointed in a book as I with this one. Can someone tell me what the soup on the cover is? Can't find it referenced anywhere.

I was looking forward to learning about making soups, not just the generic - this soup consists of water, leeks, etc. If you want to know the name of every consomme possible, than this is for you. I was very disappointed especially after purchasing "The Sauce Bible". I expected more than this book delivered.

This is a great book on soups if you have some culinary knowledge. I've used a number of David's ideas for classical soups in my place. Its a great book for those who want to understand soup.

This book would have been good had the author attempted to capture the interior world of the protagonist, Andy Hessel. He doesn't. A coming-of-age story must have this in order to be considered literature. Lyons is merely skimming the surface of character development and I think he is badly in need of taking a creative writing workshop or reading Catcher in the Rye.

This remains a gem of a novel on pool-hall cool and urban male passages. Witty and adept,this multi-talented author (now out in the Pacific) colorfully and poised like a pool hall Buddha captures one NYC neighborhood world and its enduring attractions, terrors, and male initiation rites with anthropological poise, transient exactitude,and the bliss of an ex-insider.

Most of the book did nothing more than tell you that "paying taxes is bad," and the "tax man is evil." It convinces the reader that giving to charity is more effective for helping the poor than giving to the government. However, the book doesn't give you REAL tips on reducing your taxes, and I believe it is geared toward people who are rich -- not middle class.

The book is for people who are new to the concept of Charitable Remainder Trust (CRT) or need a quick refresher. The book does an excellent job describing the fundamentals of CRT and gives numerous hypothetical scenarios in which this method of financial planning would be beneficial. Although rather simplified, each scenario is illustrated with $ comparisons of Assets, Cash flow, and Estate tax, with and without the use of CRT. (This comparison got a bit tedious towards the end.) The book also contains a short glossary for reference. As with any beginner book on a highly technical and complex subject, the reader is left with more questions than he/she had started with. A good beginner book answers most of the questions that the reader started with and elevates the reader's curiosity to seek answers to a more refined set of questions. I believe this book has been successful in accomplishing that.

Tambasco claims that we have misunderstood the atonement of Christ since Anselm. Tambasco claims that the Apostle Paul, for instance, maintained no concept of laying the sins of one (man) to the account of Another (Christ). Tambasco claims we have, for centuries, only "misunderstood" that Jesus died to pay for our sins as a reconciliation between God and man. Jesus Himself understood His atoning sacrifice as payment for our individual sins. Just for starters (and in addition to the Hebrew Scripture precendent of sacrifice), we have Isaiah 53:5, Matthew 20:28, Matthew 26:27-28, Mark 10:45, John 1:29, John 19:30 (wherein "tetelestai" mean that payment was rendered in full), Acts 20:28, Romans 3:23-25, Romans 5:9, 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, 1 Corinthians 6:19-20, I Corinthians 15:2-4, II Corinthians 5:14, II Corinthians 5:18-19, Galatians 3:13, Ephesians 1:7, Hebrews 9:11-15, Hebrews 9:26, Hebrews 10:10, 1 Timothy 2:5-6, 1 Peter 1:18-19, 1 Peter 2:24, 1 Peter 3:18, 1 John 4:10, and 1 John 2:2 speaking against Tambasco's attempt at theological sexiness. It is no wonder that he appears on reading lists with authors like Crossan, Borg, and Funk, all of the pseudo-academic, soundly discounted Jesus Seminar.

Anselm did not create the modern notion of atonement. Rather, he publicized biblical principle. Christ, the perfect expression of God's love for man, willingly died as payment for sins. He was and is the perfect reconciliation between God's justice and mercy.

in a brief book (114pp), anthony tambasco has taken another look at saint paul's concept of atonement. you may or may not agree with the conclusions that the author reaches (who ever agrees with everything in any book), but you gain from the author's insights. unless you force the bible to mean what your religion teaches, rather than humbly study the bible for what the bible has to say.

Imagine you ordered a book thinking it would be a clever
"ice breaker" for your swinging parties. Now imagine, after
five minutes of reading it to your unsuspecting party guests, they run
screaming because of the uninspired, banal, insultingly simplistic
questions posed by authors Bret Nicholaus and Paul Lowrie. Now
consider, what should be done with this book after you've wasted your
hard earned money? A) use it to line your birdcage.... B) use it for
target practice....

THINK TWICE! What, these options aren't
challenging or creative enough for you? Well, welcome to the world of
"Think Twice". The only thing that has some readers
thinking twice, is HOW DID THIS BOOK EVER GET PUBLISHED????

Think Twice is a fun-filled book that is great to "Break the ice". My friends all like the book and at my Birthday Party we stayed up to 3:00 a.m. palying a game show using all the books. We had a great time. We all thought that Think Twice was the best yet. It was like having your own little game in 1 book. Everyone went out the next week and bought a complete set. We all can't wait for the next one to come out. Keep up the good work!

Probably one of the most helpful features of the previous edition was the illustrations. They showed stage by stage, tumor invasion, size, involvement of other organs, etc. Without the illustrations, you can get along fine with the AJCC TNM Staging Manual. I was very disappointed.

The usefulness of "TNM Interactive" has come a long way in assisting the managers and treaters of malignant tumours. Both doctors and patients have bestowed tremendous trust on this interactive resource.
In order to make it to the top, this CD-ROM combined the strengths of other formidable TNM tools, namely: the "TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours", the "TNM Atlas" and the "TNM Supplement", which altogether enhanced its accuracy in prognosis and other patient care efforts. The only thing one may hold against this disc is that its user-flexibility qualities need facelifts.

Same old story. Gullible boyfriend (a doctor,if you can believe that) kills wealthy husband. The women with their stunning looks and money lead all the men around by their johnsons. Nothing what so ever to distinguish Levine's version of it from all the rest. BORING!

A real gem. First rate if you like humor, action and something more... Better than Hiiasen.