if "Esoteric Sience" (the evolution of the earth) left you with questions, this will answer some...

once you started reading you don't want to stop, (except to recapitulate...)

In this book, Steiner gives a compelling and very astute description of the zodiacal signs and their relationship to the formation of the physical body. This is a book that artists, astrologers and anyone interested in the evolution of the human form will find absolutly facinating.

My review is given below. Please refer to it.

"Darwin Retried" amounts to little more than Mr. Macbeth's committing the fallacy of taking a failure of imagination as an insight into necessity time and time and time ... again. One's belief that something is impossible does not make that thing impossible. Mr. MacBeth does not make a serious effort to understand the neoDarwinian position or is of such limited intellectual ability he simply cannot understand it.

The author is a Harvard trained lawyer. (This book is definitely not a ringing endorsement of HLS.) However, he does not apparently understand the difference between making an argument qua lawyer and making one qua academic. In court, one can appeal to the authority of an expert or experts in order to advance one's point. Such is the pragmatic nature of court precedings. In academia appealing to authority is unacceptable. One must say why those authorities to whom one's appealing are right; reasons must be provided, since X's saying 'Y is true' is independent of the truth of Y.

I find that someone decided to publish this book very troublesome. Mr. MacBeth's gossamers of arguments, clumsily expressed half-truths, misunderstandings, and muddleheadedness do not lead us to doubt the pith of neo-Darwinists claims anymore than the lunatic's cries of insanity lead us to doubt our own sanity.

I'm sorry that this was ever published. All theories should be carefully assessed and challenge. However any assessment and challenge simply won't do. Mr. Macbeth's work here is one that simply won't do.

I haven't read this book. I was reading the reviews to decide whether or not I should read it and saw that the previous reviewer decided to review it twice (giving it a single star twice) and decided in the interest of fairness to nullify that by adding a 5 star. I decided to check out this book because it was referenced by Jacques Barzun in his Dawn to Decadence history. And any book that generates the hostility witnessed in the previous review must be pretty good.