This volume is a fine translation of Spinoza's _Ethics_ together with some other writings that help to illuminate it -- namely, the _Treatise on the Emendation of the Intellect_ and some well-chosen passages from Spinoza's correspondence.

Aside from its presentation of Samuel Shirley's clear and readable translation, this volume includes two additional helpful features. Seymour Feldman's workmanlike twenty-page introduction provides an overview of Spinoza's thought and of the main themes of the _Ethics_; and a translator's preface includes a list of twenty-four possibly confusing features of Spinoza's terminology with short explanations/clarifications. The TIE is of interest in its own right, and the items from Spinoza's correspondence are well selected to illustrate or elaborate some of the features of his more formal wriitngs.

Invaluable are the Introduction by Seymour Feldman and also, the Translator's Preface by Translator Samuel Shirley which gives lucid explanations of key Spinoza termsone of which is:

From Page 23, Note 5 G-D(Deus)

"Although Spinoza gives repeated warnings that his "Deus" is far from the anthropomorphic conception of God prevalent in the theology of his time, the reader will find it difficult to bear this constantly in mind. It is not until Ethics 1, Prop.14, that God, by definition, is shown to be identical with the infinite, all-inclusive, unique Substance, and thereafter it is all too easy to lose sight of this, as the religious overtones of the word "God" keep asserting themselves. So Spinoza's frequent use of the phrase "Deus sive Natura"God, or Natureis intended as a salutary corrective. For Spinoza God is all Being, all Reality, in all its aspects and in all its infinite richness."

Scholars, students and those who just plain love philosophy should be overjoyed at the release of this volume of Spinoza's collected works, the first in English. The Shirley translation is excellent, easy to follow, and much smoother in general than E.M. Curley's Cartesian-anchored exposition. Until this volume came along I was using three different editions of his collected works. I cannot describe the pleasure of having all Spinoza's works at my fingertips. It pays to be able to consolidate.

The Hackett edition is study, the pages quite thick considering such a lengthy volume, and sewn with thread, ensuring a lasting product, especially comforting considering the price asked. Still, it is a bargain when compared with the Curley edition published by Princeton. Volume Two of that edition has not even been published, though Volume One has been out for quite some time. If you love Spinoza and want to consolidate your collection into one volume, you can't go wrong with the Shirley translation.

The subtle things in this book are suspected of being capable of doing serious damage to the idea of consensus. Still, this is mainly a book for serious readers who seek ideas in previous centuries. It is unlikely to provide much material to songwriters and comedians who long for sustained fame in the 21st century, and who might benefit by providing the kind of depth contained in the title of Chapter XIII, "It is Shown That Scripture Teaches Only Very Simple Doctrines, Such as Suffice for Right Conduct." (p. 175). This unabridged Elwes translation, available from Dover Publications since 1951, was originally published in 1883. According to the Introduction, the second work included here on pages 279 to 387 (where this unfinished work reaches a lack of conclusiveness with, "we shall easily see that men and women cannot rule alike without great hurt to peace. But of this enough.") A POLITICAL TREATISE was translated by A. H. Gosset, "who has also, in my absence from England, kindly seen the work through the press." (pp. xxxii - xxxiii). The lofty thoughts presented in the main work here are primarily theological in nature. There is no index, and the Notes on pages 267-278 are those of the author on the primary work, A THEOLOGICO-POLITICAL TREATISE. Chapter I, "Of Prophecy," on "sure knowledge revealed by God to man," (p. 13) as distinct from ordinary knowledge which all share, and Moses is considered first, as unique in the sense expressed by Deut. xxiv. 10: "And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses whom the Lord knew face to face." (p. 18). Furthermore, Spinoza wrote, "that if Moses spoke with God face to face as a man speaks with his friend (i.e. by means of their two bodies) Christ communed with God mind to mind." (p. 19). There is a return to the earlier view of Moses on pages 123-4 in Chapter VIII on "The Authorship of the Pentateuch." After an examination of the early books of the Bible, and especially Deuteronomy, it was the opinion of Spinoza, "I cannot find anyone, save Ezra, to whom to attribute the sacred books." (p. 130).

The Introduction by R. H. M. Elwes provides a few facts about Spinoza's life on pages x-xx and a brief summary of his writings, primarily the Ethics from pages xxiii to xxxi. The description of appetite, desire, pleasure, and pain on page xxvii as a basis from which "Spinoza deduces the entire list of human emotions" is thought to be the best of Spinoza, but that isn't what this book is about. As the Ethics developed, "The doctrine that rational emotion, rather than pure reason, is necessary for subduing evil passions, is entirely his own." (p. xxviii). Tobacco is not mentioned often in this book, but it is reported that one of Spinoza's amusements was "smoking now and again a pipe of tobacco." (p. xix). Also on Saturday, February 20, 1677, Spinoza spent some time with the landlord and his wife "in conversation, and smoked a pipe of tobacco, but went to bed early." (p. xx). His friend and physician, Lewis Meyer, came to see him the next day, the 21st, and Spinoza expired at about three o'clock on that Sunday afternoon, while the landlord and his wife were at church. The malady from which Spinoza suffered was called phthisis, and it seems as unlikely that any pain that he might have suffered will be conclusively linked to the habit which he enjoyed by doctors who currently do research on heart and lung problems for the leading companies in the tobacco industry, but there may be some basis here for finding a link between philosophy and what they call "junk science."

Those who seek commentaries might find a number to choose from. Spinoza's works were targets of opportunity for philosophers who were concerned about freedom of religion. The final mention of Spinoza in the text of THE SOCIOLOGY OF PHILOSOPHIES by Randall Collins (Harvard University Press, 1998, paperback, 2000) is in a section called Deep Troubles: Free Will and Determinism, Substance and Plurality. As simply summarized there, "Spinoza avoided two-substance dilemmas by positing a single substance with mental and material aspects" (p. 843). The conclusion of that section of Collins's Chapter 15, "Sequence and Branch in the Social Production of Ideas" is "No doubt future philosophies will be created upon this long-standing deep trouble." (p. 845). That seems far more likely than that anyone will explain why Spinoza died of phthisis.

The life of Benedict Spinoza is unique in itself and is the coherent background to everything he wrote, which contradisdicted his family origin. First of all, his name was not originally Benedict but Baruch, which is Hebrew for Benedict("the blessed one").
Second, he was the son of a well-to-do Spanish or Portuguese family who had to imigrate to the then United States of the Netherlands to escape the persecution of the Catholic Holy Inquisition, which was at its heyday in Spain and Portugal. It was in the famous tradition of Holland's liberal thinking that he grew up and began his philosophical studies, which were latter to be the foudation for great philosophers like Hegel. Third, as soon as he could, he abrogated the Jewish religion and his Jewish origins and was then anathemized ever since by the Jewish community and by his own family, to the point of being barred to share his fathers' inheritance. He appealed to court, won the case, and voluntarily did not take possession of the money. Fourth, in the tradition of a few great philosophers (Rousseau among them), he disdained all the luxuries and prestige his intellect could bring him and prefered to work as a shoemaker , devoting much of his time to his philosophical thinking, particularly targeted to some tenets of the Jewish and Catholic religions. Sure, there is many more to tell from this unique philosopher, but the reader can be sure that this is the very appeal of the book and is mirrored all the time in his reflexions. His lack of a superior knowledge of Latin, the language in which the text was originally written in the very tradition of the time, allows the reader an easy understanding of the content Spinoza tries to convey, whithout in any way jeopardizing the strenght of the philosopher's arguments.

In the book, which was never his intention to be published in his lifetime, he addresses many religious and philosophical questions and one is appaled by the apparent easiness with which the philosophers runs down a lot of religious dogmas, both Jewish and Catholic, whithout any possiblity of being considered heretic. Take, for instance, the logic with which he approaches miracles, and the reader will be astounded by the clearness of his arguments, originally developed in Latin (one of the more than 8 languages he was able to read or read/write). Also of importance is the characterization of the differences between apostles and prophets, and many more. His vision of the best way politics should be conducted - he favored his concept of democracy - is less strong but none the less interesting.

This is a seminal book for everyone interested in the foundations of the modern philosophical thinking where Spinoza occupies a very important place.

I am the author of the May 1999 review that faults the typsetting of the Hebrew in Spinoza's notes.

You have attached my review to the wrong translation.

The review applies to the Samuel Shirley translation reprinted in 1998 by Hackett Publishing Company, ISBN 0-87220-398-0.

You originally had it attached to the correct edition. How did it get here?

Please fix it. I don't want to libel Mr Ewes.

I teach third graders who read at a 5th-9th grade level. The first problem with this book is that, on the back, in huge, yellow letters, is, "Learn more about your Christain heros! Read what traditional educators try to keep from you!" Not a good thing to send home. This book was much too difficult for them, not just because of the unnecessarily thick language. It is very poorly written. The prose is wordy and full of characters who are only mentioned once and then forgotten. The children claimed to like and understand this book, but their retention and actual understanding was nil.

... Given the older audience, I found this book to be well written and enjoyable for adults as well. A final chapter ends with a summary of the accomplishments of this man and what that means to our society today. It has nice illustrations, and includes an index.

Mr. Tiner combines an encouraging and inspirational story with layman's explanations for the experiments Mr. Morse conducted, which is his writing style for other books he has written for this series as well. In this way one comes away not only with the kind of story that encourages one to persevere, but also with a greater understanding of how the telegraph works if one did not already know.

Beginning as an extremely talented artist, Morse struggles to earn enough money to afford a house and be able to stay home with his family. He gains admiration, but very little money until he finally works on a highly profitable project. Unfortunately, his wife becomes ill and dies while he is away, and this information takes days to reach him.

His sorrow over his wife's death, and having earlier seen a war begin because communication was delayed, cause him to remember what he has learned about electricity. Then only a novelty in science, he designs a way to turn it into instant communication. For 12 years he works on the design and also seeks funding for the project, only to meet with either ridicule or admiration but no funding. At one point he nearly starves to death. Finally the government agrees to fund the project, and the rest, as they say, is history. The guiding force which helped keep him through these trials was his faith in God and the encouragement he drew from the Bible.

This is a wonderful book! I would make it, and the other biographies by John Hudson Tiner, required reading for young people -- and highly recommended for adults, too.

We memorize cold facts in school like "Morse invented the telegraph" but rarely learn anything about the human drama behind the facts. Here is a famous American who nearly starved himself trying to get his idea off the ground, an idea he KNEW was revolutionary, that none of the "experts" one would support! It's a story of perseverance and courage that eventually paid off and changed the world.

This book is immensely better fare for young people than the mindless drivel on TV and video games. As far as it having a Christian flavor, so what? It's true. Morse is one of many Christians who changed the world--Newton, Kepler, Pasteur, and many others. Does that aspect make the story politically incorrect? Should historians neglect the driving force behind a man's work? Get real, teachers, and tell your students more about Morse and less about Madonna. There are some excellent role models in American history and this is one of them.

John Hudson Tiner makes the character come alive and captures the misery of rejection and the triumph of vindication. It is EASY reading for any student not held captive by teachers that don't teach them how to read. There's nothing like true stories of real people (good-bye, Harry Potter), to inspire, motivate and stimulate young people to become the achievers of tomorrow. Read this and all the others in the Sowers Series, as well Tiner's other excellent books. You'll not only be inspired, you will learn a great deal of amazing history the textbooks never told you.