Beyond Good and Evil from the start is a book concerning moral philosophy. The title leads the prospective reader to believe that Nietzsche is dealing essentially with ethical issues, but the scope of the text is much broader, encompassing reflections on religion, and current affairs.

Beyond Good and Evil opens with a section on the 'Prejudices of Philosophers', in this he under takes a critique of the philosophical traditions. Unlike previous philosophers, Nietzsche does not select an issue or notion and analyze it, in the process distinguishing his views from those of the previous writers and erecting a body of concepts that form a system of thought. Instead he calls into question the very basis of philosophizing. His targets are philosophers themselves. He claims that philosophers merely pose as persons seeking the truth.

Nietzsche considers religion as 'neurosis', it involves an unnatural self-denial and sacrifice. He is not unaware of the advantages that religion brought to human society, even as it has debases human nature. He believes it has helped create a variable social order. By demanding we love each other. However his attitude towards religion is that it represents a stage in human development that must be over come.

Beyond Good and Evil is not an easy task to read. I admit that there are parts of this I I had trouble understanding and often it was a frustrating read.

While Beyond Good and Evil is probably the quintessial Nitzschean piece, I would have to say Zimmern's translation lags behind Kaufmann's. Although her use of quaint Elizabethan English is charming, and her edition has a beautifully personal touch to it (Zimmern was Nietzsche's dinner companion and erstwhile friend), the mistakes in her translation, while subtle, detract from it, especially when precision of language is so important for reading this book. Go with Kaufmann.

Nietzsche never advocated any sort of morality as "good morality", nor did he encourage the creation of a "best possible society" by use of a certain morality. Nor is that what this book is about. (Nor did he propose the creation of a new moral standard: his good/evil versus good/bad antithesis is an analysis; Nietzsche was a philosopher, not an ideologue, moralist, or politician). Moreover, he did not find moral complacency to be the greatest fault of his time: rather, the mental complacency and lack of intellectual integrity displayed by many academics and "philosophers." Nietzsche here tries to analyze a range of issues and exposes in the most surprising ways numerous relationships, psychological insights, and types of morality, personality, and so forth. The aphoristic style is not a reflection of discontinuity: it is an embodiment of Nietzsche's ideal of constant questioning. These are thought experiments which develop ideas in unexpected ways, ideas which are retraced through the entire work. It has structure and continuity for those who know how to find it. The book has some faults and a few remarks which strike the reader as unnecessary drivel: but what great work doesn't? Whether we agree with it or not, like it or dislike it, until we are great critics or philosophers, we have no excuse for giving less than 5 stars to one of the greatest books of all time.

I believe that the other reviewers here may not have understood Franco's (admittedly unobvious) intent in this work. Certainly the greater portion of the book is devoted to an explication of Hegel's essentially post-mediaeval notions of `ability,' with particular attention paid to those seemlingly inconsistent areas aligned with the early Christian modes of thought, but--useful as this is--it is merely the foundation for Franco's presentation of his own theory of `paralysis of will' in late 19th and 20th century political discourse. One is tempted to gloss over this short section, since at first glance it seems a trivial sort of nonsense, but a close reading in the light of his comments on Heigel's later period reveals that Franco does indeed cast new and interesting light on post-Leninist Marxism. This, unfortunately, is obsecured by some meandering in the later parts, and certainly bringing Ayn Rand into it (however indirectly) was entirely uncalled for. Still, beyond the unquestionably excellent study of Hegel himself, this book has something interesting to offer modern philosophers.

I hesitate to use this review as a "discussion board", but I'm afraid TMChurch has somewhat glossed over the shortcomings in Mr. Franco's achievement. While it is, without a doubt, a substantial bit of research, Franco veers off course, neglecting the import of Hegel's private life on his all-too-public philosophy. Missing are the hazy, misbegotten 'Amsterdam Years' of Hegel's youth and the reckless university pranks and mayhem that made Hegel the philosopher everyone loves to scrath their collective heads over.

To Mr. Franco - a good work that simply requires a finer brush stroke. To TMChurch: a more careful read is in order!

As a Slobovian, it has always been difficult to accept Hegel's edification of the Prussian State. After all Prussia, in guises including but not limited to Nazi Germany, the Papist Church, the Uncircumcised turks, Croat fascist biker gangs, and italin black shirts on bicycles, has invaded my beloved land many times. Mr. Franco shows me that Hegel was more than just a rightist apologist for this tyranny, and more than simpply a precursor to godless marxism....he like Thomas Jefferson, Robbespierre, Ronald Reagan, and the late and famous slobovian rock star Czicik Kromonobicka was a believer in freedom. thank you for writing this book even if my english does not enable me to truly comprehend it.

It is with much regret and shame that I admit I spent two solid months of my life labouring to get through this book. I obviously did it out of obstinate stubborness, triggered by a college professor who chided that there was "no way I would be able to get through this book". In the time you will have to spend to get through this, you could instead read countless works which are better written AND simultaneously more profound and beneficial to the reader. If you have the time and energy to read something like Hegel's _Science of Logic_, please take my advice and read the complete works of Carl G. Jung instead. I realize that Jung is of a vastly different genre and time period, but after reading modern psychoanalysis, it is hard for me to get exited about something like Hegel anymore. Although there are some very fascinating aspects to this book, the reader does not stand to benefit in any realistic way from reading Hegel's _Science of Logic_.

The one thing I did like about this book is Hegel's discussion on the true nature of calculus and other advanced mathematics. Hegel reminds us that most types of calculus, and simple algebra for that matter, are limited in that they require the mathematician to have final answers before he can even proceed, and the mathematical process is usually just an exercise in seeing how one arrives at these final answers. In other words, mathematics is more about tracing the path connecting beginning and end points in an equation, after this end point is already known, than it is about conjuring up answers from nothing. Another interesting aspect of this book is its innovative contributions to the world of chemistry and the origins of the modern periodic table of the elements. Hegel sheds light on the earliest days of modern chemistry, reminding us of the revolutionary processes that led up to our understanding of chemical elements and compounds. We are reminded that everything stems from and starts with the compound, and the existence of the pure elements is inferred later by analysing phenomenon such as "mixing ratios" and saturation/absorbtion capacities. Hegel explains these founding pillars of chemical wisdom which many modern scientists take for granted. It is admittedly interesting to read about the processes that led to the discovery of the now-ubiquitous periodic table.

I like it a lot. You should read it because it is insightful.

In his Preface Hegel states he will defend Metaphysics, a science that has fallen into disrepute since the days of Kant. He does this with great skill and uncommon insight. His method is a new operator in Logic, the Speculative operator (popularly known as the Dialectic), and Hegel demonstrates the use of this new operator from the most Abstract to the most Concrete categories possible. In his Introduction Hegel states that his book will show forth 'the mind of God before the creation of the world and a finite spirit.' Decide for yourself if he was successful in this, but I say he was. This book is not usually well-received by the modernist, while the postmodernist will condemn these ideas as 'Logomachy.' Nevertheless, Hegel's SCIENCE OF LOGIC (1812) has had an enormous impact upon the avant-garde and upon some of the most influential intellectuals that history has ever seen. In this book Hegel incorporates the Categories of Kant in a new, metaphysical paradigm and demonstrates to those who struggle to follow his New Logic that God is Real, the Real is Spirit, Spirit is Mind, Mind is Reason and Reason is the Goal of all History. Others have rightly said that God is the Goal of all History, but Hegel fleshes out the details with scientific precision and invites scientific criticism of his new logical operator. (Note: This is a book for experts and specialists. If you have not yet read Kant, do not expect to understand even a single page of this technical tome.) For the student of modern philosophy, this book is a rocket ship to your next destination at the apex of Western Philosophy.

Capital, from Karl Marx,has to be respected as a book that moved all the intellectual scenario of the late past century and early twientieth century. But, altough Adam Smith's Wealth of the Nations still is a scientifically and theoretically valid work, the Capital was completelly refuted book (in that Karl Popper's sense). The Capital was based in a deterministic view of world, which was comprensible in that period of history, when the Newton's Science was the gratest scientific achievement. But that determinism was crushed with the advent of Enstein's theory of Relativity, and the most important of all, the advent of Quantum Mechanics, in the early years of this century. In a indirect way, the whole point made by Marx was destroyed: His premise which says that, studying the past, we can predict the future. Appling a method used in the Exact Sciences (inferential-deductive) Marx thought was possible to known the future (the inexorable Communism, coming from the struggle of classes)from simply analising the past, as the mathematics would do with a theorem. Marx viewed Economics as a static system(not the way Smith already viewed the Economics, a century earlier), and the free will as a illusion, since all ideologies was merely a subproduct of particular economic era (again determinism). And the worst of all, the moral fundaments of his revoluttionary ideals was: since we already known that capitalism will be replaced by Communism, one way or another, let's end it ourselves, right now, no matter how much blood we'll provocate. In other words is something like this: If you, my friend, are going to die one day, one way or another, I'll kill you right now! A interesting book, but only as a curiosity (because of his influence) and nothing else. As a economic work, its tottaly refuted for a long time.

...P>The key to grappling with Vol. 2 involves two major problems.

First, Marx took capital as irrational, and the capital-labor relation as an anatagonistic relation of domination. So part of the problem with Capital involves explaining how capitalism can even function in the first place. This helps us to grapple with Marx's discussion of circulation sans crisis.

Secondly, think of department one and department two as capital and labor respectively and it makes a lot more sense. As with Vols. 1 and 3, every aspect of Capital is steeped in a description of the antagonistic social relations (class struggle) and the forms in which they appear (form here means 'mode of existence', the way in which the antagonistic social relations make themselves apparent to us.)

The reason that Marx investigates the forms of the underlying social relations has to do with Marx's conception of science. Marx uses the term science to denote thought which critiques, which does not assume that essence and appearance (form and content) mirror each other, but are mediated and therefore distorted and not directly perceived.

As for the people who continue to insist that Marx wrote an alternate economics textbook, wake up. The book is not about economics per se, since Marx felt that the separation of the economic from the political, legal, artistic, etc. was a specific manifestation of the capital-labor relation. He critiques this separation and does so, not through a transhistorical set of 'laws' (as so many claim), but through a critique of bourgeois society's own understanding of itself (most prominently for Marx, via political economy.) For Marx, the 'laws' of capital are the forms of motion of the class struggle, not transhistorical, disembodied rules.

A complete argument can hardly be made here, but do yourself a favor if you wish to make a comment on or engage with Marx: read what Marx says. Like any other worthwhile intellectual, Marx takes a lot of effort (an acquaintance with Hegel helps a lot). Unlike most, Marx really was serious, even (especially) in relation to Das Kapital, that the point is not to understand the world, but to change it. Theory can never resolve the contradictions of the practical world, only revolutionary practice, the self-activity of the working class (most of us), can produce a society based on the 'free association of producers', in which 'the freedom of each is the precondition of the freedom of all'. Hardly the vision of a totalitarian.

The book is fascinating because it has exerted so much influence. It is frightening because very few that acted on the theories presented in the book can have properly understood them. When they had understood them they would have found them to be useless. In order to arrive at this conclusion I have read the book thoroughly, which is hard work. The influence of the book derives from the dramatic but accurate description of the way capitalism functioned at the time Marx lived. Apart from a few responsible capitalists such as the Quakers, capitalists were only chasing profit without any consideration of the health of their employees and their families. Acts of parliament to reduce labour hours from 15 hours during six days as well as the extensive use of child labour were fiercely opposed by the capitalists referring to their certain ruin if these laws were passed. Marx writes: "capital never becomes reconciled to such changes". Marx does not point out that the exploitation of farm labourers was just as bad or even worse. Exploitation is as old as civilisation. That is however not a justification for the absence of moral standards.
The economic theory is presented as if it is scientific and that the laws will lead to a replacement of the capitalist system by a superior one. Unfortunately there is no science and the description of the superior system is extremely limited.
What Marx refers to, as laws are hypotheses and effects that are the result of the hypotheses. All examples are based on the idea that a worker works for six hours for a capitalist to earn enough to pay for his subsistence and works another six hours without being paid for by he capitalist. A typical example of a "law" derived from this hypothesis is that when the labour costs of a product declines profits decline. This strange idea is based on the idea that if the total cost of raw materials and machinery depreciation and labour costs are 100 and the labour cost thereof declines from 40 to 20 that the profit also declines from 40 to 20 as paid labour time is equal to unpaid labour time. This leads to the next "law". As the profit declines with increasing investment in equipment the capitalist increases sales more rapidly than the profit percentage declines so that his absolute profit increases. It is obvious that if the volume increases more in percentage than the price declines as a percentage that the absolute profit increases. Marx devotes many pages to explaining this "law". The sentences are however very cumbersome and loaded with emotions that make it very hard work to discover that the laws are mathematical necessities. Marx does not recognise any work having value other than that of manual labour, " only the labourer is productive". He does not consider selling, product development, accounting, figuring out in what to invest, analysing risk taking as work. He therefore considers that all "profit" made is theft from the worker. Marx specifically excludes competition from his theories "actual movement of competition belongs beyond our scope". He nevertheless makes some negative comments like referring to it as " capitalism begets by its anarchical system of competition, the most outrageous squandering of labour power".
As far as the new superior system Marx only writes: "But capitalist production begets, with the inexorability of a law of Nature, its own negation". "This does not re-establish private property for the worker but will be based on co-operation and the possession in common of land and of the means of production".
The conclusion "Marxist" countries logically drew from Marxists theories were, (1) the only owner of the means of production can be the state (2) there is no needs for marketing and sales (3) profit can never be justified (4) there is something wrong with competition and that can be avoided by central state planning and (5) our success is assured as our actions are based on scientific laws. In that way they did accept his hypothesis with disastrous effect.
Some examples of emotional language, that makes the book fascinating to read. "Capital pumps the surplus-labour (unpaid working hours) directly out of the labourers", on supervision, " The place of the slave-driver's lash is taken by the overlooker's book of penalties, on profit "the profit made in selling depends on cheating, deceit and inside knowledge" and finally "If money comes into the world with a congenital blood-stain on one cheek, capital comes dripping from head to foot, from every pore, with blood and dirt".

It is fascinating that a book that describes real problems with powerful emotional language can make many intelligent people with good intentions believers without critically analysing the proposed theories. It is frightening that many powerful political leaders applied these theories (with or without good intentions).

In Nietzsche's Daybreak we see the beginnings of Nietzsche's complete and exhaustive interrogation of morality with its link to suffering. As with all of N's books, there are real gems here. His tone is calm and sedate, not shrill and inflated as in later works, such as the Anti-Christ or Twilight of the Idols. And it begins with a commencement to undermine our faith in morality. This is a recurrent them of Nietzsche's, who critics have said, gave the criminal back his conscience.

Some important points contained in the book include his linking of animal behavior and human morality and comments about the suffering and its consequent blame that become keys to his later works. Also worth mentioning are his comments in 205, Of the people of Israel. Read this section. It is prophetic. Nietzsche saw the Jewish problem in Germany as critical to the coming century. That he became associated with anti-Semitism has been unfair and a travesty.

Daybreak is a great primer for Nietzsche's later, more systemic, works such as Genealogy of Morals and Beyond Good and Evil. Many of his later ideas are interrogated here, in some intances, the arguments are even better articulated.

Daybreak is for readers that want to experience the tremendous efforts that Nietzsche undertook to overcome his training and experiences as an educator and to discover and create his own voice. As with the extraordinary previous work -- Human, All Too Human -- Nietzsche writes in a manner that strongly suggests a very rich series of debate openings. He aims to stimulate, provoke, and establish a literary forum to air his overflowing wealth of ideas, questions, doubts, intuitions. Daybreak, like other works by this incredible writer, is meant for slow readers. You don't just simply sit down and read it from cover to cover like an entertaining best seller. Every other page will contain a notion that will either delight, mystify, irritate, or -- best of all -- provide one of those wonderful ah-hah experiences that only happen when you are immersed in serious thought. It's best to take your time with one section after another and seriously ponder what he is saying, because Nietzsche builds a very startling view of human existence that cannot be appreciated by a quick reading.

As emphasized in the extremely well-written introduction by the editors (who do a great job in setting Daybreak in its context among other works by Nietzsche), the main subject of the book is a critique of morality -- what does it really mean to humans when we try to strip it down to its essentials and challenge the many conventions of custom. Nietzsche does not simply treat morality as an interesting subject for a pleasant intellectual dialogue, but rather makes it clear that he is in deadly earnest about how fundamentally important it is, and how our attitudes about it create ourselves and our world. You cannot read this book passively, because Nietzsche writes about difficult concepts that are very much alive today, such as this excerpt from section 149 about the common compulsion to conform to social custom, "The need for little deviant acts":

"Sometimes to act against one's better judgment when it comes to questions of custom... many toerably free-minded people regard this, not merely as unobjectionable, but as 'honest', 'humane', 'tolerant', 'not being pedantic', and whatever else those pretty words may be with which the intellectual conscience is lulled to sleep: and thus this person takes his child for Christian baptism though he is an atheist; and that person serves in the army as all the world does, however much he may execrate hatred between nations; and a third marries his wife in church because her relatives are pious and is not ashamed to repeat vows before a priest. ... The thoughtless error! ... it thereby acquires in the eyes of all who come to hear of it the sanction of rationality itself!"

There's much more of course, and one of the constantly exciting aspects of reading Nietzsche is to experience the way he interweaves discussions of art with larger philosophical concerns. His insights into literature and music are never trivial, and he provides a series of very startling perspectives. Daybreak is not the best known of Nietzsche's works, but it is essential to anyone who wants to engage seriously with his thought.

Daybreak: Thoughts On Moral Prejudices (1881) goes further than Human All Too Human in elaborating Nietzsche's critique of Christian morality. It is perhaps also more masterful than the earlier work in its artful use of aphoristic juxtaposition to engage the reader in his or her own reflections. Indeed, Nietzsche seems bent on conveying a particular type of experience in thinking to his readers, much more than he is concerned in persuading his readers to adopt any particular point of view.

Nietzsche criticized the Christian moral world view on a number of grounds that he was to develop further in his later works. His basic case rests on psychological analyses of the motivations and effects that stem from the adoption of the Christian moral perspective. In this respect, Daybreak typifies Nietzsche's ad hominem approach to morality. Nietzsche asks primarily, "What kind of person would be inclined to adopt this perspective?" and "What impact does this perspective have on the way in which its adherent develops and lives?"

Nietzsche argues that the concepts that Christianity uses to analyze moral experience--especially sin and the afterlife--are entirely imaginary and psychologically pernicious. These categories deprecate human experience, making its significance appear more vile than it actually is. Painting reality in a morbid light, Christian moral concepts motivate Christians to adopt somewhat paranoid and hostile attitudes toward their own behavior and that of others. Convinced of their own sinfulness and worthiness of eternal damnation, Christians are driven to seek spiritual reassurance at tremendous costs in terms of their own mental health and their relationships to others.

For instance, Christians feel that they need to escape their embodied selves because they are convinced of their own sinfulness. They are convinced of their own failure insofar as they believe themselves sinners and believe themselves to be bound by an unfulfillable law of perfect love. In order to ameliorate their sense of guilt and failure, Nietzsche contends, they look to others in the hope of finding them even more sinful than themselves. Because the Christian moral worldview has convinced its advocates that their own position is perilous, Christians are driven to judge others to be sinners in order to gain a sense of power over them. The Christian moral worldview thus paradoxically encourages uncharitable judgments of others, despite its praise of neighbor love.

The fundamental misrepresentation of reality offered by the Christian moral worldview provokes dishonesty in its adherents, particularly in appraisals of themselves and others. It also encourages them to despise earthly life in favor of another reality (one that Nietzsche claims does not exist). Still further psychological damage to the believer results from the Christian moral worldview's insistence on absolute conformity to a single standard of human behavior. Nietzsche contends that one size does not fit all where morality is concerned, and that most of the best and strongest individuals are least capable of living according to the mold. Nevertheless, Christians are urged to abolish their individual characters, and to the extent that they fail to do so they reinforce their own feelings of inadequacy.

Nietzsche's picture of Christian morality seems dismal. He regards it as the motivation for attitudes that are self-denigrating, vindictive towards others, escapist, and anti-life. Nietzsche never alters this basic assessment of the moral framework of his own tradition; instead, he continues to develop these themes in all his later discussions of morality and ethics.

A lovely succinct account from four towers in a tradition of economics that is widely represented in the financial markets. Roger Garrison - himself a leading light in modern times - leads off with a brief overview. The nice thing is that Garrison manages to get it all across without resorting to waffle - another Austrian tradition.

In fact, in my view, Garrison is the star of this review since his ability to keep it simple is a tremendous asset. Anyone familiar with the dark mutterings of academics in Austrian academic journals will know exactly what I'm talking about.

Aside from Garrison, the pieces by Rothbard and Harberler are the best since they tackle the central issue of Trade Cycle theory - that any system run by central bankers is inherently unstable since their tinkering with interest rates leads directly to the business cycle. Much better to have a competitive banking system without a central bank and a curency tied to gold. That way credit expansions will never be explosive. Of course, what they don't tell you is that their proposals are inherently deflationary and force deficit countries to do all adjustment when they experience balance of payments problems.

Rothbard's piece sets out the mechanics of the Trade Cycle especially well and everyone should be able to understand what he's getting at without too much difficulty. It's no more difficult than the average economics course on an MBA programme. That's hardly difficult, is it?

Readers wishing to understand the micro-economics of the Austrian school should also check out some of the recent publications of one Israel Kirzner.

At last! An anthology from one of the most important schools of libertarian economics in a portable form! This book can be easily incorporated into a course on economics or banking.
And yet, "The Austrian Theory of the Trade Cycle" is a narrowly useful tool. It's like a tire gauge, that means everything when there's a problem with the tire, but tells nothing about gas or oil levels. I see few times when the average production supervisor, Sunday-school teacher or working mom would have occasion to read it.
In the introduction, Roger Garrison spells out the differences between the Austrian School and other movements in free-market economics. The Austrian School emphasizes the role of time in decision making. To think of an example, Joe wants to buy a car now that the interest rates are low. But if the interest rates are high, he'll put his money in the bank and wait a year until he replaces the family car.
Ludwig von Mises' essay, which lends its name to the book, reveals the international character of the Austrian School. The essay was translated out of the French, points back to the British Currency School, and alludes to the contribution of Knut Wicksell from Sweden. This theory was, nevertheless, developed by Austrians, beginning with Carl Menger. References to the University of Chicago and to the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, bring the movement to a home in America.
The key point is that a boom produced and prolonged by easy bank money with government support will sooner or later contract into a bust when the easy money turns hard. Just ask any farmer who bought machinery on credit years ago, when inflation was rampant.
Gottfried Haberler demonstrates that economics is, in fact, difficult to reduce to mathematics. He points to how money is needed at different times as a product moves out of the ground through its production phases to the end user.
In contrast, Murray Rothbard tells us with sparkling satire why we no longer have "panics" and "depressions." He also gives insight on how a change in time preference changes interest rates; interest rates fall if enough buyers become savers.
Friedrich Hayek points to an insidious effect of inflation. Not is it more fun to be a debtor on a fixed-rate loan when inflation is high, but taxable profits are much higher than the profits are worth in reality. Easy money gives rise to inflation.
Roger Garrison finally draws a couple of price/quantity graphs in his summary, savings/investment graphs to be specific. Money created by the government has the same short-term effect as a genuine increase in savings, but genuine savings are lower because savers are coolly greeted by lower interest rates for their hard-earned money. The bust after the boom is a real let-down.
With my MBA from Campbell, this material is clearer and livelier to me than it would be to the man on the street.

I ordered this book as a part of a course I am designing for myself on economics. It is a good introduction to the Austrian school but provides information that even those familiar with the subject will find useful. Rothbard addresses many fallacies regarding the free market and provides a clear explanation of the Austrian theory of the trade cycle and other theories, relating them to history and comparing them with classical and Keynesian theories. This is a helpful comparison, as it reveals some inherent flaws in the latter and outlines the eventual results of the acceptance of those theories. This book does not give an in-depth analysis of its subject, but provides a cohesive picture and points for further examination. It is also a helpful text for understanding capitalist theory and the history of the Austrian school.

It was truly an exciting experience which found me capering about loose scoria ridges looming over the still fuming caldera several feet about the beach; I felt quite daring, especially as I am extremely afraid of heights! I learned a lot that I had missed by dropping out of my degree program prior to going on my summer field camp. There were examples of debris flows, unconformities, erosional channels, wind formations, faulting, uplift of sea bed strata with fossiliferous deposits, all an education in themselves. I also learned that hours on end in the hot sun plotting individual grains of rock for size, shape, color, angularity, and inclination is not my cup of tea. It makes a great summer vacation for the enthusiastic amateur, but I couldn't imagine it as a permanent, full time job. I decided I had missed nothing by remaining a nurse, and looked forward to a publication of results that I could enjoy in the quiet of my own home!

Just such a report has since be published (2000). I had the great good fortune to discover Walter L. Friedrich's volume Fire in the Sea while browsing the various Amazon links from another book on geology. Although it's not an in depth geological or archaeological survey of the research on the island, it is an excellent compendium for the page length of what is known about it with respect to these two topics. Above all it is an approachable discourse on the tectonic history of Santorini, both ancient and modern. There are wonderful photos of the various vistas around the island-many of which I recognized from my own visit there--and several maps that show the development of the site through time. Reports of volcanism and earthquake activity through the ages are included from earlier authors that give an almost biographical character to the story of Santorini or ancient Thera, and there are several illustrations of Minoan art work that help recreate the character of the island prior to the eruption for which the volcano is most noted and often cited, that during Minoan times ca. 1700 BC. At the end of the book in Appendix 1, the author has included one of Plato's Dialogs discussing the ancient tale of Atlantis with which the island has been linked by a number of researchers.

I found the book to be an excellent discourse on the geology of the island but was a little disappointed in that there was so little about the archaeological site of Akrotiri, especially as geologists-including Dr. Floyd McCoy, with whom I worked and who is mentioned in the volume-have been very helpful in illuminating some of the events of the city's last moments. The excavation site is fascinating, as the structures are preserved in places up to second stories. The faulted stair case (p. 70) is included and is one of the most emotive sights in the devestated city, but a more thorough discussion of the site and what is believed to have occurred there during the eruption that ended its life is a very stirring tale, one that could have lent a greater sense of the moment to the reader. It would also illustrate how the activities of archaeology and geology are integrated to generate productive results. Although the author discusses in brief some of the concerns of the modern inhabitants of the island, I would also have enjoyed more photos of the modern towns in the area, since I suspect they are very like those that have existed on the island since antiquity. A discussion of their own history and likely future would have added a sense of continuity to the tale of Santorini

The first customer review's comment on Mount St. Helens requires a correction. Mount St. Helens erupted in May 1980, well before this book was written.

Ash particles from this 1980 eruption in Washington State's Cascade Mountains were thrown high enough to be caught up in the jet stream and deposited in a fine-grained plume that extended all the way around the world. This prompted publication of tongue-in-cheek picture postcards that proclaimed, "Don't come to Washington: Washington will come to you!"

But since the book was originally published in Germany, the authors may be forgiven for expecting comparisons with Stromboli and Vesuvius to have more interest for their target audience. An Indonesian author of a similar book might well have focused on comparisons with Krakatoa.

This in-depth survey of the Santorini volcano's natural history and its connections to the Atlantis legend will hold special appeal for students of volcanism and geology: Fire in the Sea is packed with color photos of the volcano, relics, excavations, and maps; and it includes in-depth discussions of volcanism in general. An outstanding, involving account for the dedicated student of geology.

This book was wonderful. It shouldn't be read as a history but more as a philosophy. Even there, it is a bit short of the greats. Why then do I call it wonderful? It is a view into the past intelligentsia. His history is antiquated; from a modern perspective some of it is wrong. However, it is great to see the history of views about history and the philosophy of them. I am not a pursuer of the P.C., and understand that the context of civilization, at his time, is the molder of his views. Old books such as this are windows into time and are treasures to be cherished. As far as his philosophy I intend to read more of his work in the future to get a better perspective, but I found it interesting. I am on board with Hegel in that we should pursue our Ideal of the Greek Golden Era to maintain a lofty goal for civilization. Which can be summed up by Thucydides in his description of Athenian life; "We love the beautiful, but without ostentation or extravagance; we philosophize without being seduced thereby into effeminacy and inactivity (for when men give themselves up to Thought, they get further and further from the Practical--from activity for the public, for the common weal). We are bold and daring; but this courageous energy in action does not prevent us from giving ourselves an account of what we undertake (we have a clear consciousness respecting it); among other nations, on the contrary, martial daring has its basis in deficiency of culture: we know best how to distinguish between the agreeable and the irksome; notwithstanding which, we do not shrink from perils."

Philosophy of History is Hegel's most accessible introduction to his thought.

The introduction and preface are the most valuable parts of the book.

Much of the book is only of historical interest. His history of Greece, Rome, Israel and the Germans cannot be taken seriously anymore. There are racist and jingoist views in this book that seriously date it.

On the other hand, the book clearly expresses Hegel's spiritual philosophy of an evolving God who learns from the history of the world that is his thought.

For those who are looking for an introduction to Hegel that is written in his own words, this book is invaluable.

Hegel didn't see the historical events as mere chances or something that happen by itself.. He believes that there has to be reason that cause all the historical events.. That reason is the struggle for freedom of human kinds. This central theme is presented through out the book. The way Hegel present the history is not through chronological order but he present it as being from East to West. This representation of the his history is very interesting in itself. By the time that Hegel wrote Philosophy of History, China was still under imperial rule therefore chinese could have much of the freedom. One of the criticism that I have on Hegel is that he threat the Far East as the strange and unrelated area.. Next interesting point that I found in this book is that the western civilization start from Greek.. (I definitely agree with him because Greek is the birth place of western philosophy, art, and politics).. By the time Roman take over the Europe, the center of culture m! ove from Athens to Rome..(Here, again everything moved from East to West). During the Roman Era, there were struggles of people against imperialism... In the sections about Roman, he wrote about the development of Christianity. As an advocated Christian, Hegel believed that Christianity is the divined political plan for people to be free from Roman Emperor.. (That's my interpretion of the Hegel's section on Christianity. It may be different from Hegel original idea) The last section he used Germany as the example of how modern nation evolved. In other word, he traced the history of Germany from barbaric period, to age of Holy Roman Empire, to the era of Germanic empire.. The transition from Holy Roman Empire to the Germanic Empire is the struggle for freedom from Catholic church by Germanic states...

The philosophy of Martin Heidegger has the poetry of Holderlin as one of its nucleus of inspiration. The immnse difficulty of translating this wonderful text by Heidegger into English can only be appreciated by those who are familiar with the German language and have read the original German text. While the dialogue between Heidegger and Holderlin is often intense, dificult and complex, it is at the same time illuminating in terms of deliniating the task of the philosopher and the work of the poet. Dr. Hoeller's translation consitutes an authentic, rigorous and meditative re-creation of Heidegger's thinking. If there is any doubt regarding the faithfulness by the translator to the text the reader should start with the essay, "Holderlin and the Essence of Poetry," which is the most accessible of the essays. Dr. Hoeller has not tried to force the heideggerian text into the limited conceptual of the English language. On the contrary Dr. Hoeller has been able to maintain Heidegger's thinking alive and challenging.

The present volume is a translation of Erläuterungen zu Hölderlins Dichtung, Volume 4 (1981) of the German Collected Edition of Heidegger's works. It contains six essays written between 1936 and 1968, which are supplemented by two brief, related texts and an "Afterword" by the editor of the German edition, Friedrich-Wilhelm von Herrmann. Only two of the essays have already appeared in translation.... .... The remaining essays appear here for the first time in English....Of the two supplementary texts presented in Elucidations of Hölderlin's Poetry, Heidegger's "Preface to the Repetition of the Address 'Homecoming'" (1943) had already been translated (in Existence and Being). The other short text is Heidegger's "Preface to a Reading of Hölderlin's Poems" (1963), which can be heard on the phonograph recording Heidegger liest Hölderlin (Pfullingen: Neske).
There is also "A Glimpse Into Heidegger's Study," which consists of photographic reproductions of several pages from one of Heidegger's copies of Hölderlin's poems which show Heidegger's marginal notes to Hölderlin's poem "Griechenland." Perhaps the most accessible of the essays is "Hölderlin's Earth and Heaven," in which Heidegger meditates on this poem. Written by Heidegger when he was almost eighty years old, nearly all of the themes of the earlier essays are revisited in it: the forgotten question of the meaning of be[-ing] [Sein], our intimacy with nature and its mystery, the poet's calling, the provenance and essence of language, the sense of the holy on earth, the uniqueness of human presence among things, the spiritual core of experience, the omnipresence of the Greek philosophical tradition in Western sensibility, the primacy of thinking in existence, the meaning of belonging to a cultural heritage, and human historical destiny.
These essays are not literary criticism in the ordinary sense, although they have by now inspired a generation or two of scholars (beginning most notably with Jacques Derrida) who undertake various forms of textual analysis of works of philosophy and literature. As Heidegger notes, the essays "do not claim to be contributions to research in the history of literature or aesthetics. They spring from a necessity of thought" (p. 21). What, then, are these commentaries? They are not explanations of Hölderlin's poems, prose versions of his poetry; rather, they are Heidegger's efforts to get at Hölderlin's thought, which, like anyone's thought, he believes, remains and must remain a mystery. According to Heidegger, "we never know a mystery by unveiling or analyzing it to death, but only in such a way that we preserve the mystery as mystery" (p. 43). We should also note that, for Heidegger, authentic poetry is not a literary genre alongside drama and the novel, but is rather "the founding of be[-ing] in the word" (p. 59). The nature of poetry, Heidegger says, is ontological, not linguistic; its source is remembrance [Andenken] or "reflecting on something, [which] is a making firm . . .. Remembrance attaches thinkers to their essential ground (p. 165). In another place, Heidegger call this making firm or thickening of thought in recollection or reflection writing [Dichten] in the basic sense or "poetizing thinking," which Heidegger further characterizes as an activity of that special individual, the poet's poet (p. 52), who is situated "between" (p. 64) human beings and the gods. The poets, whom he calls demigods (p. 126), are analogous to the chthonic gods Heidegger finds reference to in the fable " Cura" (Hyginus), which he cites in Section 42 of Being and Time. In that text, we recall, Heidegger finds an early preontological reference to Sorge [minding, also translated as care], which he takes to be the fundamental feature of existence.
For the existential analyst, however, the most remarkable passages are found in "'Remembrance,'" where Heidegger presents a brilliant, albeit brief, phenomenology of shyness or retraint [Scheu] [ (p. 153). The context of the discussion of restraint is Heidegger's description of the nature of the poet, who thinks back to the origin of the rivers, that is, to the origin of the poets themselves, those unique individuals who mediate between what is of this earth and the gods (p. 126). The poet is characterized by restraint. What is restraint? It is not bashfulness [Schüchternheit] or timidity, Heidegger explains, nor is it based on insecurity. Instead, restraint is a keeping to oneself that is marked by a concerted reserve in the face of that about which one might easily be facile. Restraint is a keeping to oneself that guards something precious, for which one feels great affection. What evokes restraint first causes the poet to hesitate and withhold what he or she might be tempted to make available without further ado. The heart of restraint is forbearance [Langmut]. Restraint is a model of what human presence might aspire to. In an age when self-assertion and "attitude" are accorded pre-eminence among the behaviors associated with success, fulfillment and self-realization. It contrasts with childish demands for immediate gratification and the unwillingness to postpone gratification. It is also seen in the capacity to wait-for answers, for a solution to life's everyday demands, for resolution to the congenital ambiguity of life on this earth, and for change in psychotherapy.
"Restraint is that reserved, patient, astonished remembrance of what remains close, in an intimacy that consists solely in keeping at a distance what is far off and thereby keeping it ever ready to arise from its source." The references to intimacy and distancing are familiar from Heidegger's other writings, where they are associated with be[-ing] [Sein] and its source. Given the relation of thinking and be[-ing], restraint is "knowing that the origin [of be[-ing] in its source] does not allow itself to be experienced directly." As Heidegger understands it, the fundamental tone of restraint, then, is humility with respect to our grasp of what is going on. "Restraint determines the way to the origin" of be-[-ing]. It is both our way out of inauthenticity and the way in to the source of be[-ing]. Moreover, Heidegger adds, restraint is "more decisive than any sort of violence"--including interpretative violence in psychotherapy.
Finally, there is Heidegger's notion of recollection, which is not a retrieval of the past, as it is in psychoanalysis. Instead it is way of moving into the future by taking over one's destiny, authentically and with resolve. The poet's experience, once again, provides the model of this kind of recollection, which might serve all human beings, who, as Hölderlin says, "dwell poetically on this earth."

A finely crafted translation of a pivotal book in contemporary European thought, phenomenology, post-modernism, and literary theory. The book is a must read for those interested in the relation between poetry and philosophy, not only in Heidegger, but also as this conflictual pair of terms moves through recent 20th century European theory and literature.
Although one may criticize Heidegger's investment in Holderlin's writing and life as partial, and perhaps as conceptually manipulative, the book offers a fascinating engagement
with the life of words.

Heidegger is a man who knows how to fill up a full class period with lots of talk. It would be possible to condense this book, the transcripts of two lecture courses given in 1936 and 1938, into a book 1/4 the length of the current tome. First of all, the time spent on Nietzsche's Nachlass is not particularly fruitful. What Nietzsche has to say regarding the eternal recurrence and the will-to-power can be found, and in the mature form, in BGE and Zarathustra. The lectures are interesting in some respects, for instance the chapter on Nietzsche and positivism is interesting and worth consulting in connection with "Plato's Doctrine of Truth." The reading of Kant's Third Critique is unique as a demonstration of Heidegger's approval of Kant, specifically the treatment of the beautiful.

Prior to reading this book, Kaufmann was my favorite interpreter of Nietzsche's writings; but now, Heidegger has the prize. No other book that I have read on Nietzsche has come close to the depth and detail of this work. Heidegger masterfully exposits the concepts of will to power and eternal return to illumine Nietzsche's whole philosophical project in a way that I just haven't encountered previously.

A fair criticism of this book might note that Heidegger draws parallels between Nietzsche and himself (Being and Time: being = will to power; time = eternal return), and that this suggests he may be reading more than is really there. But considering how cryptic some of the original writings are, he'd almost have to. In his own defense, Heidegger does all his thinking right before our eyes, so to speak, and I'm satisfied that any possible invention on his part is true to the original concepts.

Where this book really shines is in its handling of the eternal return. This is Nietzsche's most troubling idea, and many commentators treat it as mere novelty and move on. I must confess that I used to think it was Nietzsche's Achilles' heel; a sort of personal fancy that he worked into the background for giggles. But Heidegger proves the opposite to be true. It is really the mature fruit of Nietzsche's whole project; and along with the will to power, a truly exciting and profound view of the phenomena of life.

I read the volumes on The Will To Power as Art and as Knowledge whilst at university studying philosophy and it illuminated Nietzsche's thought for me. Heidegger's is the only worthy exposition of his philosophy because not only does he seem to be the only one capable of comprehending it but he doesn't seek to distort it in any way or use it for his own ends. There are no ulterior motives here : Heidegger lets Nietzsche's philosophy speak for itself - and what a magnificent and awe-inspiring philosophy it is ! If you have ever wondered, as I certainly had prior to finding these works, about the precise meaning of Nietzsche's thought of the 'Eternal Recurrence of The Same', or how it relates to the 'Will to Power', then these are the book you want to read. I had become thoroughly frustrated at the cursory treatment which this part of N.'s philosophy receives elsewhere, but Heidegger shows that the thought of 'Eternal Recurrence' is in truth one of the two indispensable fundamental elements of N.'s philosophy - along with 'Will To Power', without which the thought of Eternal Recurrence cannot truly be thought. The lecture course 'Nietzsche' (reproduced in these books) is a comprehensive and faithful account of Nietzsche's thought (and life) - perhaps the only genuine one. It will also help those who know about Nietzsche's ideas but haven't encountered Heidegger's or can't see the relation between these two giants of Western thinking.