This book is pleasantly free of jargon and psychological intricacy. Instead it uses lay language and examples to demonstate that fatal and life threatening illnesses need not always lead to despair. Ellis and Abrams make the application of cognitive behavioral techniques readily attainable. Both authors are psychologists who have worked with large number of people who have faced death. Their experience is apparent in this work

This book covers 16 homes designed by noted and not so noted architects in the Northwest. I personally liked one of these homes so much, I built one just like it as a weekend retreat. The styles vary, as do the materials and locations. Most of what you'll see in here is rather comtemporary and timeless -- it worked then, and it still works today!

"Questions for Kids" is a collection of a thousand questions that can be used to help kids expand their imagination and understanding of the world around them. Each question can be used as a springboard to discussion and education. Some answers are sure to bring surprises to the adult asking the question. Others are just good questions to help children expand their thinking.

For example, one question is "What do you need to make pizza?". This leaves you with the option of including pizza dough or flour, water, and other ingredients of the dough. On the other hand when it comes to toppings what could be added? You could get really creative with this in determining what is appropriate or not. What about ice cream for a topping? Not appropriate? Maybe it would be if the "pizza dough" were phyllo, the "tomato sauce" were ice cream and the toppings were strawberries with chocolate drizzled across it. Open a child's mind to the possibilities of the world is one of the best gifts you can give them, this book helps you get started with many, many questions that can be used to help them think creatively.

If you would like a collection of questions to ask your young child that will help them learn manners ("What do you do if someone has bad breath?"), basic science ("Do fish have feathers?"), or expand their creativity ("What do you like to pretend to be?") this is a great collection to get you started. A recommended purchase for anyone seeking a starting place for expanding their child's mind, it is a recommended purchase.

In The Trajectory of Change, Michael Albert offers his criticisms and suggestions for the left, a movement that has yet to live up to its potential. He begins from the assumption that mass mobilization is the only way to force fundamental social change. Elites and other privileged groups don't respond to well-reasoned calls for equality, only to popular and militant demands for change -- as seen in the struggles for labor rights, civil rights, women's rights, and against the Vietnam war. Yet activists frequently forget the need to mobilize and concentrate instead on refining their own tactics, distancing themselves from the people they need to actually win change.

If we accept the need to organize ever greater numbers of people with ever greater militancy, where do go then? According to Albert we first have to reach out beyond social barriers like race and class (leftist university students need to talk to people in sports bars), and then we have to give a lot of thought to the "stickiness problem". That is, why do so few people stick with left activism after being exposed to it?

The two key issues Albert brings up are a lack of vision and a culture of personal criticism. If the movement can offer incisive critiques of social inequality but has no idea what institutions it wants to put in place, isn't activism literally pointless? And if interpersonal relations in the left have more to do with castigating activists who eat at McDonald's, wear Nikes, or watch TV than with making friends and partying, who would want to stay?

Running through each of Albert's arguments is the idea that we have to start paying attention to class. The left is now highly sensitive to race and gender inequality, both within and without the movement. So why is class inequality ignored in society and reproduced in our organizations? Albert has his own highly original explanation for why attention to class, once the preeminent target, virtually disappeared from the left (pp. 87-103), but the ultimate point is that classlessness needs to become a priority again -- both because the left opposes oppression and because working people won't find the left attractive until it stops reproducing the hierarchical forms of organization they suffer from every day in their work lives.

In all, this is a vital book for anyone working for social change. And it's short enough that even the busy activist can read it in a couple days.

Lehninger is one name that most undergraduates who take biochemistry courses know too well. This simplified, well-structured version remains an asset to a great number of students. But, no matter from which source you are ordering it, be sure to specify the actual edition you want as precise as possible. There are several variants of this book in the market (including Amazon.com...)! Do not forget to enter the complete details (including the ISBN number) of this textbook while placing an order for it; or else, you may end-up with the kind of "Lehninger" you didn't ask for.

An excellent book in biochemistry for a beginner in this subject. I especially like the the way the chapters are administrated. The book is best read from beginning to the end, because this will give you the whole picture in a educative fashion. It covers all the essential subjects of cellbiology needed for the medical student, as for instance metabolism and DNA. It also has advantages over other biochemistry books with its nicer apperance. With the pictures, medical notices and cellbiology material it covers all thats necessary. Good stuff and pleasant reading.

I'm a medical student, and this book, was recomemded for biochemistry, but I couldn't find it here in Peru, (because the 3rd edition hasn't been translated yet to spanish). I bought it here, and it arrived 9 days before estimated!!.
The 3D models of proteins ara amazing and the included cd helps a lot before examinations, (the interactive simulations of molecules is incredible!!), it really helps you understand all the biochemical processes. The depth of the book is perfect, no too simple, but not too complex either. PERFECT for med school

"Looking Forward" is an intrinsically flawed study of a prospective socialist society that relies far too heavily on misperceptions regarding human nature. At the risk of resembling an elitist, I am tempted to argue that Albert and Hahnel have utterly failed to contemplate the absolute impossibility of "elevating" certain class structures to a more uniformily productive and effecient labour structure. Parts of the presented economic theory are only possible in an imaginary world created by intellectually motivated revisionists.

Without doubt, the most frightening aspect of this study involves the authors' absolute ignorance regarding the freedom of musicians and artists. Our planet would suffer immensely in a system that so blatantly places publishing and distribution decisions so entirely on the masses. The authors go so far as to suggest, theoretically, that a genius the likes of Mozart must sacrifice artistic productivity and expression...participate in menial, rote labour...in an effort to further enrich society as a whole and close the gaps between class-systems. This would only further create the archetype for Marx's "self-alienated" man. Human beings are born with the innate right to create and share deeply emotional art without fear of persecution by a council which seeks to project supply, etc.

Creative use of quotations to validate an otherwise poor piece of literature. A particularly premature and underdeveloped stance on socialized health. Roll over Beethoven, roll over Marx.

Yet another great book from Robin and Michael decribing a post-capitalist economic system which avoids the pitfalls of market socialism and is more in-depth and coherent than other post-capitalist economic visions (guild socialism, anarcho-syndicalism, etc.).

I highly recommend this book, along with all of Albert and Hahnel's other works.

Also, I'd like to respond to the previous reviewer's horrified proclamation that "this study involves the author's absolute ignorance regarding the freedom of musicians and artists." In actuality, both Albert and Hahnel have written extensively about this particular problem. Both authors have differing viewpoints in regard to the role of artists in a participatory economy.

Albert says, basically, that the work of an artist should be treated like any other kind of work. And they should have balanced job complexes just like everyone else (gasp!). They must, in the previous reviewer's words, "participate in menial, rote labour in an effort to further enrich society as a whole and close the gaps between [classes]."

Yeah? And? Doesn't that just make sense? If we want an egalitarian society, we can't have certain individuals doing all the meaningless, rote tasks and others living lives filled with enriching and empowering work.

Albert replies to the question of whether "parecon would limit individual artistic creativity by what art to produce by referendum or committee"...

"Do you think this because artists, like producers of vehicles, get resources to work with (outputs of other people's efforts) or are allotted income for their work (and a claim on the social product) only insofar as their work, overall, is respected in the economy? I don't see why.In fact, quite the contrary. By (1) elevating diversity and self management parecon greatly promotes exploration and attitudes conducive to it, and (2) by allocating resources and tools and time self-consciously, it removes the impact of power or misdistribution of (voting rights) on the allocations, reducing the built-in tendency for "popularity" to outweigh "innovation" without any real assessment being made of the value of innovation.If you mean to point out that it would be within the purview of society to decree that some type innovation is unwanted or unlikely to be successful and that resources shouldn't be given over to it - yes, that is true - for art as for innovation in, say, how to electrocute people better, or for that matter, how to make better ladders, say, or whatever. But the assumption that in a parecon the population would not want musical and artistic innovation pursued by those with talents and creativity, in their own manner as they evolve their dispositions and talents, seems to me very very dubious. I should think the opposite would be true, overwhelmingly. What people currently like would be part of the issue in parecon - for sure. But it isn't the whole of it, as you are about to indicate, I bet. For one thing, smaller groups can like things a lot, making them very worthwhile even though not widely appreciated. But also, at a moment in time, much of what is pursued - not only in art, but in many dimensions of life, say science, engineering experimentation, etc. - is not yet appreciated beyond those who are trying to explore it (maybe not even entirely by them). Art is not special in this respect, in fact. So there is need for exploration and elaboration of art, music, and ideas and information and innovation more generally, that moves out beyond where taste currently is. Sure. But there is nothing about parecon that precludes or even impedes this relative to any other model I am aware of, much less capitalism...quite the contrary. Imagine a workplace for musicians. Society respects this workplace and includes it as part of the economy because it values music, including innovation. To work at this institution (and in different parecons we can imagine different instances, etc.) one has to be hired which likely entails demonstrating certain knowledge, talent, etc. The institution's budget is allocated internally to various activities, by its members, and therefore certainly not only to what a mass audience outside already likes. It really isn't much different in that respect than a workplace investigating new products, if you think about it."

So, I don't think they are ignorant of this problem. I think their solution simply makes sense, in a better economy. By the way, you don't submit your art to "the masses" but, instead, to committees of your fellow artists (whereas, in capitalism, you have to submit it to publishers, record labels, etc... who are generally only concerned with making a profit).

Anyway, buy the book.

Looking Forward is the introductory manifesto of the participatory economics movement. The book is meant to give anarchists, socialist-libertarians, and idealists in general a positive alternative to capitalism, centralized economies, and market socialism.

It is always interesting how one can draw comparisons between the far right and the far left. Milton Friedman, in Capitalism and Freedom, told us that the way to preserve freedom is to centralize information and disperse power. This is the essence of participatory economics.

Power is dispersed among all citizens, even to the extent that all have equally empowering job complexs (referring to the amount of authority and conceptual work). This way there is a double check against the libertarian fear of power players-- equal access to resources and equal empowerment.

And, the more novel feature of this system, information is centralized and avaliable to all. This is for the purpose of planning one's consumption bundle and work proposal. If, for example, I discover that there is a shortage of steel, I might postpone the purchase of a car, in order to get a better (artificially determined) price next year and also to relieve the strain on the workers in the industry.

But why would anyone care about the workers? This is one of the key contrasts between PE and capitalism. Hahnel and Albert argue that if people have the information and the power to help and consider others, then it will be done. In capitalism, we need know nothing about the conditions under which most of what we consume is made. Under PE, we would. By removing the disincentives to human compassion, our social nature is allowed to flourish.

While Looking Forward gives a clear outline of PE, it is too ambiguous at points. Hahnel and ALbert seem to respond to difficulties with generalizations. They do, however, refer the reader to other works meant to fill the gaps-- The Political Economy of Participatory Economics, Liberating Theory, and The Quiet Revolution in Welfare Economics.

If you want to know what the modern anarchist ideal looks like, in which poverty is no longer "necessary" and human sociality is cultivated, read this book.

Dumb ideas like this are brought forward again and again. Of course, inevitably, it will result in central social planning -- see, for instance, Hayek's Road to Serfdom to understand why.

Workers will be paid by hardship instead of value produced?! Hilarious. So the jobs that produce the most value, i.e., the most important jobs, will go unfilled!

It's amazing anyone would take nonsense like this seriously.

If you read the book thouroughly, Michael Albert's "ParEcon" is not utopian. One question remains. How will intellectual or talented dissidents who want more than the "effort/sacrifice" dividend?

Great book, Parecon is a deep and intuitive insight on what we can reach. Our only limit is our bias towards its theory.

This is the clearest exposition yet of participatory economics,
an alternative to captitalism, market socialism, and
Soviet-style central planning. The participatory economics
model was developed by Michael Albert in collaboration
with Robin Hahnel. I would recommend reading this book
with Hahnel's recent book, The ABCs of Political Economy,
which provides a more in-depth critique of mainstream
pro-market economics.

Instead of allocation by how much
power or bargaining clout you have -- which is how markets
really work (forget about mainstream propaganda
about markets as "efficiency machines"!) --
participatory economics is based on the idea of
self-management -- each is to have a say over economic
decisions in proportion to how much they are impacted.

Governance by corporations and the state is replaced
by democratic worker and neighborhood organizations.
The market is replaced by participatory planning -- the
creation of a comprehensive agenda for production by
the direct input of requests
for work and consumption outcomes by individuals and
groups, and a back and forth process of negotiation.
Intead of elite planners, as in Soviet-style central
planning, we all would craft the economic plan.

In the process of individuals and groups evaluating
possible outcomes, the planning system takes account
of consumer and worker preferences, thus giving measures
of social benefits and costs. As each production group
approximates to the average social cost/benefit, waste
is avoided. The overall structure is designed to support
the tendencies in human nature towards solidarity and
cooperation, as opposed to the market, which imposes
a regime where "nice guys finish last."

Parecon has a particularly elegant solution to the
problem of under-production of collective goods,
and over-production of negative external effects,
like pollution, which are widespread and destructive
effects of markets.

Little is said about how such an economic framework
would come about. Albert thinks that having a good
vision of where we want to go is important to motivating
the kinds of mass movements that would be needed to
bring about such a change.

anybody that spends time, as i do, thinking about what alternatives there are to our present society instead of merely complaining about the problems that it has, i think will find this book useful. it used pure irrefutable logic to present its case for a just society. just as importantly it exposed the flaws of prominent radical theories like anarchism, marxism, feminism, and nationalism, while still giving them the credit they are due. be forewarned, however, that this book tends to be redundant and it was hard for me to get through its 200 or so pages, but i'm glad i did. and definitely read the dialogues, because they defend comlementary holism against common criticisms.

...but you're not sure what to believe in. Marxism seems discredited, you don't quite trust anarchists and the "smash the state" rhetoric and although patriarchy and white-supremacy are certainly real parts of the problem, they are not the only problem.

Well, the folks over at Z (Z Magazine) have a solution. It's not really anything new, but rather a reworking and meshing of many older theories. The authors argue that the serious flaw of many of the old radical left visions was their "monism." Marxism claimed the economy as the central social field and all else as "superstructure." The practical effect was that Marxists ignored the problems of women and people of color beyond the economy. Anrachists and radical feminists had analogous problems.

Liberating theory suggests that their are four, equally important, sphere's of society: economic, political, kinship and cultural. The authors argue that the institutions of these four spheres are interconnected and (most often) mutually reinforcing. Therefor struggle for revolution can not occur in one, ignoring the rest.

The debates in this book seem to me a bit old. Opposition to parriarchy and racism have permiated most of the left and there has been a recent resurgence of class and political issues with the stirrings of organized labor, seattle, D.C. and the new third parties. So it seems to me many people now see the value of working on multiple fronts and inclusiveness.

However, these movements are also largely berift of long term vision. This book, despite its dated quality, could provide a good foundation for such a vision.

When I first heard about this book, I thought it was one of those weird, stream of consciousness stories, so when I discovered that yes, the pathologist who autopsied Einstein *had* taken possession of his brain, and yes, Paterniti *did* travel cross country with the now-elderly pathologist and brain, I just had to read it for myself!

The book itself, like the situation, defies easy categorization. I found it to be at its best as Paterniti describes the travels and visits cross country with the likes of William Burroughs and crazed night clerks for Days Inn. He peppers the travelogue with details about the previous owner of the brain in the trunk, Albert Einstein, which were also interesting, particularly in the context of the journey. I did not feel especially drawn to the ramblings and philosophizing Paterniti sometimes felt the need to include, but was willing to go along for that ride to see where the rest of the journey would take me.

Most compelling is his portrait of the pathologist, Dr. Thomas Harvey. At turns irritated with his quirks and fascinated by him, he paints the doctor as a somewhat eccentric but gentle octogenarian. He handles his near-obsession with the desire to actually see the brain in question with as much dignity as this whole crazy scenario will allow.

If you enjoy the genre of "truth is stranger than fiction," you will find "Driving Mr. Albert" as living up to this category of non-fiction.

I don't know where to begin . . . a spectacular journey across America and through the mind and heart of a redoubtable writer with a singular voice and vision, and with two of the most unique characters as mates - Einstein as you have never known him before, hovering like a giant sun over the passengers carrying his brain, and Dr. Harvey, an eccentric, enigmatic real life Frank J. Parnell ("Ever heard of the neutron bomb?"). I heard about this book on The Connection on NPR and immediately went out, bought it, and read it in two nights. It was far better than I even expected. The juxtaposition of Einstein's lack of intimacy and personal relationships with the writer's own need for it, and fear of leaving it behind, permanently, as he drives down America's highways with an octagenerian and a genius's brain in the trunk. The details of Einstein's life that provide a picture of Einstein as person and demigod. The trip itself, including a quintessentially William S. Burroughs moment with Mr. Burroughs himself. Truly engrossing reading. Once in a great while, a book like this comes out and redeems my faith that authentic, fresh storytelling as artform is alive and well. Brain jam through the latest great american road trip. I can't reccommend it enough.

Einstein's brain, removed from his body and bouncing around America! What a terrific symbol of...something! Well, yes and no. Paterniti has a terrific story, chronicling the adventures of Einstein's brain over the last forty-odd years. And he can be genuinely funny when presented with incongruous situations (and when you have Einstein's brain in the back seat, almost all situations are incongruous). The problem is that Einstein's brain doesn't do much, and Paterniti doesn't do much with it, at least not in a literal sense. They're driving, and there's that brain. That's the whole plot. To fill up the book, Paterniti has to give us his grand thoughts about Einstein and science. These are interesting, but they aren't THAT interesting.

The book is worth reading just to find out what's happened to Einstein's brain. But that's a relatively short section. Paterniti's rambling on about science and America will not hold your attention for all 220+ pages. Both me and my boyfriend feel this way.

I read Men Cry in the Dark this summer, and I passed it on to several friends. I haven't had it in my possesion since I finished reading it because everytime one person returns it to me, another takes it! After reading other reviews of the book, I had to put my two cents in. I think some of the critisms of the book were valid, but the personal attacks on the author were way out of line and unnecessary. I must admit, that as a person who does a lot of reading, this was far from one of the better books I've read. However, in spite of the grammatical errors and jump from first to third person, I thought it was a good story that needed to be told.

As a 26 year old married woman who has been with the same man since I was 20, I'm not at all familiar with the "dating game" and the issues the characters faced in their quest to find a good mate. Maybe that's why I found the story interesting. Everybody has not had the same experiences, and when reading, you should be prepared to find perspectives that are different from your own.

That said, I noticed that a lot of the reviews from the ladies were full of hostility and criticism about Mr. Baisden's characters, both the men and the women. Points about the men's bad judgements in selecting (or choosing not to select) women based on their education, amount of money they had, their bodies, age and skin complexion were addressed. Many ladies were quite upset about this. However, if Mr. Baisden is telling a story from a male perspective, then could it be that he is addressing the fact that, right or wrong, men make stupid choices based on trivial aspects of a woman's make-up the same way women do with men (i.e., his job, whether or not he's been to college, his physical appearance, how much money he makes, etc.)? None of these tell you the true worth of a person, or whether or not that person will make a suitable life partner. Perhaps that is why these men were in their thirties, had been with many women, and still hadn't found one to spend the rest of their lives with (except Tony)?

In regards to the female characters, men have dated some real losers the same way women have. I didn't hear any women disagreeing with Terry McMillan when she wrote about some of the jerks the characters in Waiting to Exhale came across. I know you women who had such harsh critism for Men Cry in the Dark can't be naive enough to believe that men don't ever come across some real chicken heads in their quest for Ms. Right.

I really couldn't relate to the experiences of the characters in Men Cry in the Dark, but I thought it was an interesting story that should make men and women take a look at their own responsibility for making wise decisions in selecting a mate and doing the work necessary to keep one once they've found them. I've already read Never Satisfied: How and Why Men Cheat (it's another one my friends keep "stealing" from me) and I look forward to reading Maintenance Man. I also plan to buy the Love, Lust and Lies video. Keep up the good work, Mr. Baisden. In spite of the negative reviews, you definitely have an audience who appreciates your work!

I thought this book was good in terms of revealing what men go through and think when it comes to relationships with women. As a black man, it's good to see another brother come out with our side of the story. I liked the characters and how he gave them their own individual identity. Mark's character was rather irritating, but not to the point of overshadowing the rest. I've had my won personal encounter with a Valerie myself, so that story line blows another myth out of the water. Good call, man. The ending was a definite eye opener. Something a lot of us brothers need to experience. Good work Mike! I've read some of the other reviews and all I have to say is it's rather contradictory for those who don't like the book speak of how too much emphasis is placed on color, material things, body size, education, etc., and then turn around and attack the writer personally as if what you've written was directed at them. It's one thing to say you don't agree with what the brother has written, but when you turn around and attack him in regards to child support and writing ability, maybe you need to check yourselves to see how YOU really feel about yourselves. Let's critique the content of the book; not that of the writer's personal life! Looking forward to the 'Maintenance Man', Mike. Keep doing what you're doing.

This is the first book I read from Michael Baisden and it was a page turner. I always love to read about relationship coming from the mans point of view cause you get to read what goes on thier mine throughout the story. Derrick had a learning experince when it came to his relationship with Angela which he thought he had control over but of course things twisted in another direction, it was kind of like getting his own medicine. Troy I admire for being loving and protecting father and lover towards his daughter and his relationship. Ben is a great and loving person also, but he had to learned the hard way when it comes rocking the craddle. Mark is also a great guy who you hate in the begining for loving one particular race (white females) but grow warm with understanding when it came to his needs and his life. This has been a great book and all four of the them has learn and become better man in the future, I look forward on reading his third book.