A farily thorough treatment of the contemporary doctrine of Christology from a variety of perspectives, including a philosopher of religion, a New Testament scholar, an Evangelical Christian philosopher, a liberal process theologian, and a feminist. The round table structure of the text is interesting and pedagogically efficient. Each thinker is given an opportunity to express his/her view of Christology and to offer a brief critique of the other essays. Since all participants are associated with Claremont, it gives the reader a view into the theological and intellectual climate of Claremont as well as a taste of the different ways to think about Christ. However, I would have liked to see a more original account of feminist theology's response to the issue of Christology.

Smith and Davis present a concise discussion of the major facets to research in the field of Psychology. It guides the readers through all stages of the experimental design, from conception through implementation and interpretation. The authors succeed where others fail in conveying their ideas in an untechnical yet methodologically sound manner. It is a more than adequate preparation for undergraduate psychology students.

This book was a good introducion to the field of psychology. It was a great help to me during my general psychology course. Aside from presenting its information in a clear and easly understandable way, the text is well organized and full of study aids. The chapters are helpfully subdivided and each segment provides a synopsis and a "study break" self quiz so you can test yourself and see how much of the material you have asimilated. Margin definitions and summeries of all the important terms and concepts are presented adjacent to the full explanations of the material. The graphs and illustrations in each chapter are very informative and useful in explaining the concepts and experiments presented. Overall this is a good book for anyone who wants a genral overview of psychology.

Although Stephen T. Davis is a professor of philosophy, he appears to know the resurrection narratives as well as any Biblical scholar. In this comprehensive treatment of the resurrection, Davis addresses a wide variety of issues, including miracles, critical history, the concept of resurrection, the empty tomb story, dualism, physicalism, immortality, and apologetics. Along the way, he presents a sophisticated defense of the orthodox position against a number of objections. But Davis does more than just answer objections to Christian belief in the resurrection. He also presents what he calls a "soft apologetic" for the resurrection. What this means is that, unlike some apologists, Davis is NOT trying to show that nonbelief in the resurrection is irrational. Rather, he is simply trying to show that, from a supernaturalist perspective, belief in the resurrection is rational.

I, for one, am happy to accept that, for certain supernaturalists in certain epistemic circumstances, belief in the resurrection can be rational. But I also happen to think (and perhaps Davis would agree) that, for other persons in other epistemic circumstances, nonbelief in the resurrection can be rational. I am not just talking about naturalists here. Suppose we put aside all worries about the existence of God and the problem of miracles. Assume that there is a God who performs miracles from time to time. The crucial question is whether the resurrection is one of those miracles. In other words, did Jesus really rise from the dead?

As part of his defense of an affirmative answer to that question, Davis argues in favor of the empty tomb story. But it seems to me that his discussion is incomplete, for his defense of the *burial* of Jesus is incomplete. Davis's defense of the burial story consists almost exclusively of the argument that it is highly unlikely that Joseph of Arimathea is a Christian invention. But one can agree that Joseph of Arimathea was a real, historical individual without accepting all of the details of the Markan burial story (e.g., that Jesus was buried permanently in Joseph's tomb, etc.). And the *details* of Jesus' burial are crucial to arguments for the empty tomb, for the details have enormous implications about whether Jesus' followers knew the location of Jesus' tomb. If Jesus' followers did not know the location of the tomb, then the case for the empty tomb (and, by extension, the case for the resurrection) is greatly undermined. (For more information, see my forthcoming paper on the Secular Web about the empty tomb story.) Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, Davis did not address such details in his book. So Davis's argument is, at best, incomplete.

Thus, even on the assumption that there exists a God capable of raising Jesus from the dead, I still see no reason to believe that the resurrection actually happened. Nevertheless, I enjoyed the book and found it very helpful. In particular, I found Davis's chapter on bodily resurrection to be among the most helpful chapters in the entire book. Anyone interested in the historicity of the resurrection will definitely want to become familiar with Davis's book.

If you've never read a Stones bio before this isn't a bad book, however if you have then you've read 95% of this somewhere else. Davis takes his research from other author's books and old interviews without adding much that's new. That would be o.k. as the book is very readable except he still doesn't get the facts right. In spite of a plethora of information for research available he still manages to occasionally get names, places and events wrong. I'm a little nit-picky but I don't think it's asking too much of an author who wants you to fork over $30 for his book to get the cast of characters and the shows and who played on what songs right. I mean pick up the bloody album liner notes and read them if you can't do anything else. To Davis' credit he does give Mick Taylor the fine credit he deserves for being the best guitarist the Stones ever had, a point most other bios fail to dwell enough on.
You could skip this one but check out Victor Bockris' bio of Keith Richards and Steve Appleford's "It's Only Rock and Roll: Song by Song" for books that have the best research not to mention utterly absorbing and entertaining.

The previous reviewers were too hard on this book. Sure, the writing is sometimes sloppy, disorganized and repetitive, yet it's also frequently brilliant, hilariously over the top, and thrilling.... which is a pretty accurate description of the Stones themselves. I mean, this isn't supposed to a scholarly analysis, unless I read the liner notes wrong. It's a down 'n dirty tell-all. Most of the major turning points in this career are detailed with impressive flair (the Redlands drug bust, Altamont, "World War III", etc.) People interested in classic rock 'n roll decadence should also check out a great new video called "Welcome to the Rainbow". It's a documentary on the history of rock on LA's notorious Sunset Strip, with interviews and performances from gods like Ozzy, Robbie Kriegerman, Lemmy of Motorhead and more. It's a must-own for the serious rock collector!

... It Must Be HARD to be a Rolling Stone! ... That's all I can say! ... After reading this book, I'm not sure I would EVER want to end up in a touring rock band like The Rolling Stones. It's simply not WORTH all the money in the world! You got to give those guys credit: they all worked their butts off to get where they are, and this book proves it. ... It also comes very close to proving that Brian Jones really was MURDERED, as many of us in America believed all along. It shows how without the crystal-clear vision, unbending will, and immense drive and talent of Brian Jones in the first few years to make The Rollin' Stones a successful working band, they would have NEVER gotten to where they are today - and it's a sickenning crime and a terrible tragedy how Brian ended up, dead, at the botom of his own swimming pool, in his own back yard, surrounded by hostile sycophants and malevolant evil-doers!! ... This book is an absolutely FANTASTIC and FASCINATING read up to the point of Brian's murder. After that, it's a GREAT read up to the point of the departure of MICK TAYLOR. (Speaking of which, have you ever noticed how the song Can't You Hear Me Knockin' on The Rolling Stones 1971 album Sticky Fingers sounds EXACTLY like the song For Mods Only on Chico Hamilton's 1966 album The Dealer? ... What's up with THAT?! ... Maybe Ry Cooder IS right in calling The Stones bloodsucking thieves?) ... From the point when Ron Wood joins the band till the end of the book, it is significantly less interesting - and understandably so. Let's face it, The Stones' greatest albums are AFTERMATH, BEGGAR'S BANQUET, and LET IT BLEED (with Brian Jones); GET YER YA YAS OUT, STICKY FINGERS, and EXILE ON MAIN STREET (with Mick Taylor); and then SOME GIRLS , EMOTIONAL RESCUE, and TATTOO YOU (with Ron Wood). Of them all, BEGGAR'S BANQUET wears the crown - and we all know why! ... If you want to know what inspired and went into making this great music - as well as the circumstances surrounding the lives of the major players (and some of the minor players like Ian Stewart, Ry Cooder, and Gram Parsons) - then you will be satisfactorily rewarded by reading this well-detailed and well-crafted chronology of the ON-GOING carreer of "the greatest rock 'n' roll band in the world." ... - The Aeolian Kid.

Don't buy this book, this book is the design for students who don't know math particularly calculus. This book is designed not for beginner or advanced but is designed for mickey mouse. The content is totally horrible just joke stuff that you can answer very briefly without doing any writing in paper/computation. If you want be a mathematician don't even start using this book. You'll be in trouble in the future.

I loved 6th. ed. But I'm not happy with the 7th. Bivens and Davis have clearly taken over and ruined a great textbook. I'm looking for another textbook the next time around. The other teachers at my college seem to agree.

:) Jc

When my copy of Stewart fell apart awhile back, I decided to order this to replace it, since it was one recommended by CAS/SOA for Exam 1. I am not disappointed. This has more graphs and pictures than Stewart to help explain some of the fundamentals better. While the content and the layout are pretty much the same as other Calculus books, I particularly liked the writing style of the authors, who eplained things well without being really technical. If you are looking for a Calculus text that helps you solve the problems then I think this one is for you. There is a fair amount of rigor (i.e. proofs and theory) here, but no more than other texts. If you are looking for more of the theory behind the applications, I would try Apostol's 2 volume set which is much more rigorous. If you are looking for a text to study Exam 1, then this is the one for you.

I purchased the tape and found it to be most disappointing. I would not recommend this book (nor the tape) to anyone. Sorry, but that is how I feel. Scott.

All to often problem solving becomes a team exercise where each member "shares their ignorance (of the essence of the problem)" while searching for a solution. Having a systematic approach to define, research, select alternatives, implement, control, and encourage feedback is a better way to reach a successful solution. This little book provides a fun guide suitable for the novice in problem solving techniques. I found the book to be entertaining yet helpful, especially for my strategic planning clients.

Great way of making pooh's likfe look like ours. It shows us how simple life can be, and how much and how little things matter. Great book, easy to understand.

A good starting point for C++ and object-oriented programming with quite good coverage of the features of the language, but the author tends to only explain things in detail if there is an opportunity to try and be funny. Maybe 10% of the jokes in here are okay if you haven't heard them before, but most of them are lame and distracting, particularly on the second reading. Some concepts are woefully over-explained like the part on Classes which takes 2-3 pages to say "a class is a category of variables" and the reminders throughout the book which provide suprisingly obvious information when you dont really need it. Other things are not explained at all, like the chapters on Operator Overloading which begin by saying that 'this is an advanced part that you might need to use later' and then go straight into syntax and very minimal one-line explanations, completely without any context or saying exactly what operator overloading is all about. The last few chapters are uninspired and difficult to make sense of, however the treatment of other parts such as functions and classes is informative. The For Dummies books owe much of their popularity to their very reader-friendly appearance, however the content could benefit a great deal from a more sophisticated approach to programming ideas without sacrificing the overall casual/friendly tone. Introducing the concept of editing to the production of this book would also have been an improvement as errors are abundant, and many readers will be amazed that a Byte is refered to several times as being four Bits. Overall this book is informative and a good starting point in C++ and OOP, and you will benefit from reading it. But be prepared to overlook both the errors and the author's self conscious over-indulgence in making jokes that aren't funny.

Ok, so there isn't much consensus in all these reviews so this book obviously isn't for everyone. But I, for one, loved it. If you don't already know C as I did you might want to look to a different book, but there are lots of people out there wanting to migrate from C to C++ and for these people I highly recommend it. (Why would anyone else buy it? It says "Ideal for C Programmers Migrating to C++" right on the cover, and section 1 is titled "A Review of C"!)

Despite what I've seen in some other reviews I think the material is very logically presented with just the right level of detail and well thought-out examples. Best of all it is an interesting read; this guy is funny. I learned C++ years ago with this book and it still serves as a great reference when I program.

Well you might even be one!
But if you want to qualify as a dummy capable of learning C++..
I'd say you better have done programming before, or maybe you're more intelligent than most people I can think of.
Otherwise you'll be a very confused dummy?

With that aside - WOW!

I've done about 6 years programming in all sorts of "lesser" scripting and languages and now I feel like I'm on my way to - ENLIGHTENMENT! Now, really.. I'm 2/3 throught the book and I say thank you, thank you, thank you (or was that the copy copy copy constructor chapter?).

Ok, maybe 4 stars is nasty but let me try explain.
Jumping from arrays into advanced pointers by presenting a linked list program without much explanation is nasty too!
(I got over that one, but will you the reader?)

On the other hand, if you want to learn concepts and semantics - get this book. Maybe not everything is explained in detail(that's where you could have done programming before).
Also, can a relatively small book (400 pages) really cover that much in a lot of detail?
On the other hand, what is explained is explained very well - to my opinion. And its fun too!

Maybe Mr. Davis does not have a sense of humor that'll reach everybody - but after a truly hectic chapter I find myself laughing my head off. That's where I pick up on the author's own asides - my neighbour?
I'm really scared of what he thinks of me laughing out loudly by myself..

I'm now ready to hack C++ and understand concepts and semantics that i didn't 4 days ago. I'm not scared of C++ any more!!
Maybe you should try it?

Also, Mr. Davis, thanks for the nacho recipe - the microwave is ready!!

The book is wonderful, except I got my package shipped with the CD seal already broken and a Visual Basic compiler CD inside, instead of the C++ compiler CD.

I was disapointed with this kit! I couldn't look through the book becuase it was shrink - wrapped with the compiler, so I had no way of knowing that it was for experienced users of the C language. The author himself suggests that you "put the book back on the shelf" if you aren't already programming in C. So I was completely lost from chapter 2 and beyond. Although he gives some great examples of Object - oriented programming concepts in the beginning, this book will collect dust on my shelf until I am able to learn the language from another source. Not a good way to start with C++.

This book provides a great intro to C++ if you first have an understanding of C (prior programming knowledge is necessary!). I have learned a little C in the past and have been a programmer for quite a while so I had no problem breezing through this book. It basically follows a couple of examples (one small for snippets and one "project" at the end of each section) and expands them as you learn each new topic.

I bought this book because i needed learn C++ very fast for a College work. I am not a computer geek, but i consider myself a computer fan. After red the half of the book i realized without C language knowledge is not much what i going to learn from the book. I got C++ in 21 days and result a lot easier to learn from it. Anyway, the C++ for dummies has a lot of good examples, and after know some C is very useful.

This is one of the best C++ for beginners books I have ever read. It is for technical people who have programmed in other languages but want to get their feet wet with C++ and object-oriented programming. It does assume some level of C language knowledge. Most C++ books I've found dive right into the hard-core stuff but this book was well-paced and didn't try to go too fast. This is definitely not for a non-technical person.

This book is a simple introduction to C++. It is not for Windows programming. Dr. Davis makes this book very easy, fun to read, and understand. But note that the book, like most C++ books--even Bjarne's--is a book about operators and syntex, problem solving and understanding.

All the concepts in the book transfer to windows programming but some of the syntex does not.

Like cout << and cin >>. make sure that you are using a DOS compiler or know how to use your windows compiler properly eg. MS Visual C++. Author's don't write Windows code in C++ books because the code is way to long--unless the book is about Windows programming.

Randy