Although the book seems to be sincere effort in terms of the treatment of subject, but the language is too tricky with very very esoteric terminology used. Also the use of word 'quantum' seems to be too casual and thus the terms such as 'quantum monad' seem too ambiguous. Perhaps when Mr Goswami has finally reached some perspective about 'truth', he will realize that any truth that can be expressed, ceases to be 'the truth'.

I was about four years old when I discovered that things die, and the outrage that I felt at this news has fueled a fifty year search to understand what we're doing here. This is not my only literary quest, but it is a big one, and it has taken me all over the map. When I studied relativity and quantum physics in college, I saw - 'through a glass darkly' - that this was an important piece of the puzzle, but real understanding eluded me. I just bought the The Visionary Window, and I knew almost immediately, that this, for me, was the Ahah! book - the one that brought all the pieces together. I recommend it highly.

Many students of philosophy understand and appreciate both
Western materialist philosophies and Eastern philosophies
more centered on consciousness. Like looking at an atom,
and looking at a galaxy, these two philosophies needed a
middleground to connect them
In this book, Goswami is the first person ever to unify
the two seemingly disparate ideologies. He provides the
middleground in a way that books like "The Tao of Physics"
fail to do. (They only "hint" at the connection).

I am very happy that I bought this book.

Roustang writes a fascinating account of the birth of the Psychoanalytic Movement and Freud's attempts to both grow and control the movement he founded. Freud had created something new, something that had the potential to free people up. To spread his discovery, he felt he needed disciples - people who would take Psychoanalytic theory beyond where he could take it himself. The kind of people he needed for that - smart, creative, determined and powerful people - were also precisely the kind of people who would chafe at the control he insisted on imposing on them. Roustang describes vividly, at chapter length, the various flavors of relationships that existed between him and Jung, him and Tausk, him and Groddeck, and gives shorter accounts of Abraham, Rank, Ferenczi, Andreas-Salome, Deutsch, and Fliess. The wide variety of strategies these folks employed to protect themselves against Freud astounds. Jung had his distancing superiority, Tausk an obedient stance ending in his suicide, and Groddeck his resignation that his own highly original work could only be heard as derivative of Freud's work.

I like the book as a case study on launching a new kind of conversation into a world that's not exactly waiting with baited breath for this new conversation: the pitfalls and the traps to avoid. I don't claim that this is Roustang's entire purpose. He is interested in exposing what the book's cover calls "fundamental conflict among the basic tenets of Freudian theory", thus "psychoanalysis can never be effectively administered through the means of a psychoanalytic association or any sort of collective body". This is supposed to pave the way to his own new theory of psychosis.

The original (French) title of the book is "Un destin si funeste", which translates to something like "So disastrous a fate". From Roustang's account, I'm rather more struck by the sudden emergence of all these thinkers, all within a train ride of Vienna, all with similar new conceptions of Man, representing such a clear break with the past, as if they were listening to currents on the same wind.