This book is absolutely one of the best books I have read on career planning and navigating the corporate world. It demythfies the corporate game and shows who really goes ahead. This is an excellent book for all professionals who want to proactively plan their own careers.

It's a shame that this book is out of print. Written in 1990, it preceded the web and therefore the possibility to influence a business audience via the additional word of mouth of thousands --in forums such as this.

Paul Stern was a CEO of 4 multi-national companies (Unisys, Burroughs, Braun and Northern Telecom) before the age of 50! His insights into the ethics and discipline of rising to the top on one's own accomplishments, should be required reading for all who would aspire to top management.

These lessons have not changed in the 11 years since it was written and are fundamental enough not to change for several more decades. Because the core concepts repeal pieces of myth like company loyalty, gamesmanship and mentors, the clear writing reveals a different kind of "how to" and a good amount of "don't bother to's" as well.

I can truthfully say that if you want an insider look into the mind of a CEO, no matter what your current occupation or management tier, you will come away with insight and inspiration, if not a course to set-- on your own way straight to the top. Good hunting.

Never buy a building. That's the rule which allowed penniless refugee families to create the New York skyline over two centuries. People with more money than sense should read Schactman's excellent history of making and keeping family wealth. The obvious message is that land currently not in its "highest and best use" is the fundamental investment vehicle. REIT's are vivid proof that the Wall Street mentality does not comprehend the difference between real and financial assets. We will see a switch from absurd PE's to neglected urban locations . Re-print this important book!

Toward the end of THE INARTICULATE SOCIETY, Schactman crystallizes America's discomfort with well-spoken individuals in a chilling insight: our TV and movie villains have become more articulate than the heroes. Full of pungent comments like this that underline how anti-intellectualism has been promoted through the principle of the LCD (lowest common denominator) -- the conception of the American people as having the intelligence of the average fourth grader (a marketing strategy adopted by advertisers so as to appeal to the widest possible audience), Schactman shows how this conception has flooded into every facet of our public discourse. Suggesting that those whom we have elected as our representatives have concomitantly engaged in the systematic stupidification of our political language upon the advice of highly paid communications consultants trained in the advertising, marketing and public relations industries, and in the process have sown the seeds of a disinterested, passive citizenry, Schactman, after his dead-on diagnosis, makes a series of proposals intended to resurrect democracy through the renovation of our once proud heritage of political discourse.

In the course of his discussion, Schactman relates how the classic liberal society was founded upon the belief that all (male, property-owning) members of society must be engaged in the public discourse, and the corrollary that in order to be able to do so, individuals must be able to discuss complex issues articulately and persuasively. Here is his succint summation of the rise of liberal individualism and its implications: "Empowering individuals regardless of class began with the revolution of Martin Luther and the Enlightenment, and found political expression in the populism of President Andrew Jackson and the 1848 nationalistic upheavals in Europe. In the latter half of the nineteenth century, from Karl Marx's theoretical bifurcation of the population into the exploiters and the exploited arose attempts to form the exploited masses of a particular country or region into coherent groups that could agitate for change in their political and economic status. Where the residue if feudalism held sway, nationalism also began to provide a rationale for the old feudal constituencies to cohere of the purposes of organizing themselves in nonfeudal aggregates. Leaders whose abilities lay in mobilizing these masses came to the fore and pushed out those old-style leaders who had previously made their way up political ladders to positions of ascendancy and who saw their task only as influencing the elites." Pg. 96.

He goes on to discuss how the Marxian analysis has been refocused in the face of the proliferation of various forms of media: "Jurgen Habermas insists that the center of argument about the modern world has now shifted from Marxism contentions about how industrial production is organized to an examination of how commination in societies is organized and effected. That contention is well founded. While a discussion about the bases of entertainment can be held without reference to the political sphere, it is no longer possible to discuss the modern political sphere without reference to communications techniques and communications technology." Pg. 97

He further expands this particular line of argument to point the finger at a media which has all but abandoned its mandate to inform and engage the American people in the political process. He notes also that in addition to jettisoning journalistic principles that originally posited the media as corrective to the abuses of power, the media now crowds out those who do not seek to appeal to the LCD. In an apt metaphor which neatly depicts how there is no such thing as a neutral "marketplace of ideas," he says: "...quality (entertainment) products are few in number and power, a half-dozen rowboats struggling to stay afloat in a harbor crowded with the yachts, international freighters, and cruise ships of the mass entertainment industry." Pg. 101.

But that is just the beginning of the insidious effect of the entertainment cultures effect on public discourse which, according to Schactman, views people not as citizens, but as consumers. "...It is a way of thinking that presumes everything has a price, all things can be bought and sold, and therefore all things should be bought and sold. ....No other objective--not art, not morality, not personal integrity, and certainly not the modeling of good articulate behavior--can be of importance. Articulate behavior is not perceived as able to sell anything but itself, and as such it is useless to the commodifiers. Inarticulate behavior, on the other hand, has been construed as something that appeals to the masses, and thus as a useful commodity." Pg. 107

In a pincer movement, under the guise of populism, conservative elements attack articulate culture as unmanly, villianous. This strategy supports and cheers their unreconstructed supporters who have been raised on the myths of the tight-lipped gunslinger, the man of few words, the man of action. Think of the current administration where lack of articulateness is promoted as a virture, where tough talk is portrayed as emblematic of American character and American resolve. Schactman argues that in the face of a society that promotes inarticulate behavior, that it is up to every individual and every family to resurrect and nuture this dying virture. He also suggests that those in government should lead us by example into a newly articulate age. That would be welcome, but as it does not seem to serve the political and economic goals of the governing class -- who sell themselves as commodities and enable the market culture to pervade every aspect of our lives -- the adoption of this particular proposition seems seems doubtful. Nevertheless, here's a slogan I offer that may be of use to those who seek to resurrect a country founded by intellectuals and bomb-throwers: Representation without taxation is tyranny.

When I saw that this book has not been reviewed, I was shocked. So, even though I have not read the book in about a year, I will give it one.

Many books approach the nature of the problems within the media or public education as something which is apocalyptic. That may not be all that bad since it creates some sort of artificial tension that makes for more interesting reading. Tom Shactman does the same. However, unlike Sykes and other writers who tend to be dramatic, Shactman does spread out blame in a real sense. There isn't even the stench of an ad-hominem. What's more, the blame is really centered on a process, not on agencies or any sort of ideology. This makes for an clear thesis that exhibited exceptional follow-through in rhetoric and evidence.

What is the thesis? Well, I can't remember exactly what he wrote, but the gist of it was that we as a society has been losing the ability to discern and convey wisdom. Not raw data, precisely, but useful, contextual, nuggets of information. This inability to connect by conversations can, and he documents the results, lead to serious problems like decreased conflict resolution, poor education, and media manipulation among others.

He ends up describing a couple of remedies that do have some hope of solving some of these problems.

If you are researching pedagogy or media studies, or just plain interested in communications, this is a book that I cannot recommend highly enough.

Very informative, well written book. So much better than Douglas's Mindhunter. This book sticks to the subject matter unlike Douglas who is too busy patting himself on the back. Not only does Ressler give us a look into the minds of serial killers but he also takes us through the history of serial murder and the development of profiling and VICAP as well as taking us through the progression of the FBI's Behavioral Science Unit. This is a very educational and worthwhile read.

I am a big fan of true crime books, and this one doesn't disappoint. Very interesting look inside the minds of serial killers, and some of the reasons behind their actions. I will say that Robert Ressler comes off as very arrogant and spends way too much time talking about himself and his early life before joining the FBI - I ended up skipping past some of it because that's not why I was reading the book. But on the whole a good read that will keep you hooked.

In Robert Ressler's Whoever Fights Monsters, he explores his work profiling serial killers in greater detail. The book is excellent, but like his colleague John Douglas, who wrote Mindhunter with Mark Olshaker (along with 5 other books), Ressler is a bit full of himself. However, this does not mar the book greatly, as Ressler and Shactman provide an excellent and informative read. This book gave me far more knowledge on serial killers and VICAP than Mindhunter (which is still a fine book). I would recommend this to anyone interested in true crime.

I don't normally rate books here but was recommending this oneto a friend and checked to see if Amazon had it in stock. When I sawit only had one review, I decided to add my own. This is a good book. Anyone with a general interest in science or science history should enjoy it. It's easy reading, but perhaps too light on the actual science for the average reader. As the above reviewer notes, the author may not have a strong background in the subject, which shows at times. For example, I'm certainly not a chemist but I also thought the author confused Carbonic Acid (IIRC H2CO3, the stuff in soft drinks from dissolved CO2) with dry ice, unless that's a historical term for it? I also felt the last chapter was a bit rushed to bring the story up to present day. That last chapter should be expanded in to several chapters to present a better view on what has been accomplished in this field in the last few decades. But nitpicking aside, I enjoyed this book and recommend it. I hope this author writes more books like this one.

This is a good book to read to clear your head of non-science, particularly if you are not a scientist. It achieves the goal of the Sloan Foundation funding, which is to popularize science by disconnecting it from the diagrams and equations that some of the other reviewers here are lamenting the absence of. Well, that's what made it so readable for me. I like science but not math. At least not sciency-math. We learn from this book that it is the businessmen who have fueled applied cold research, and many people who also are ignorant of math have benefitted from the resulting frozen food industry and from air conditioning. All products of the very deliberate conquest of Thule, very engagingly explained by the author. This book reminds me of how appropriate the chief guy (what's his name, "Lee"? Anyway, the guy who won't let you chew gum in the airport there) in Singapore's comments were in the Wall Street Journal, when they asked a cross section of famous people what the greatest invention of the last millenium has been. His reply: "Air conditioning." It all makes sense when you read this on the beach, before heading to your air conditioned condo, or to your air conditioned car, to get your keys to go get pre-cooled cokes from the refrigerator unit at the air conditioned 7-11, right next to the Slurpee machine and the little display of fresh fruit. I agree with some of the reviews that the book is a little disjointed, but offer that this in turn illuminates some of the idiosyncracies of several key scientists who would, for example, devote 15 years to trying to boil helium. Whatever you do for a living, compared to that, seems like a breeze. A cool breeze. Which you can feel without quantifying via incomprehensible, gnostic and exlusivist equations whose chief function is to blur this science beyond comprehensibility for long-winded reviewers like me.

If you are interested in science, scientists and its history; If all you remember from your science classes are the names of scientists like Boyle, Van der waals and Joule; if you are ready to be taken on a fantastic ride into the realms of the cold and the story of its conquest.... This is the book for you.

I really enjoyed it very much. Not only did I get a better perspective of physics and chemistry but I was surprised at the amount of work that had gone into the construction of the common refrigerator or the air conditioner, to which we never pay any attention. And the personal touch the author added really helped me feel like I was with the scientists when each discovery was being made. Now, I feel like I know Dewar and Joule well enough to call them by their first names!

This book is an account of Woodrow Wilson, concentating on his second wife, Edith Bolling Galt Wilson. I found it enjoyable to read and rather moving. Wilson was an interesting and odd person, and this book accurately shows that after his stroke in 1919 he was no longer the brilliant person he was before that calamity. Edith lived on till Dec. 28, 1961, which date was the 105th anniversary of Woodrow Wilson's birth. I found this book a satisfying and attention-holding book, tho it is does not pretend to be scholarly.

Another great book by the author of Whoever Fights Monsters. This time, Ressler tells of his life before he started hunting serial killers, and of his almost obsession-like need to have justice served against a judge who hired someone to kill his wife. Ressler's style is always engrossing, and the adventures he has in his life are amazing.

Wonderful photagraphs and great images of beautiful New England! Reminiscent of my childhood, and old fashioned villages of yesterday. A must for the coffee table!

The best biographies (and autobiographies) are those that do more than catalog their subjects' achievements -- they chronicle some inner struggle that makes the story interesting on a human level. Reading this book, you wonder why it was written. There seems to be no personal revelation, nothing below the surface. The author sees everything in black and white, and there doesn't seem to be anything more going on than a chronicling of local legal issues that have little relevance to anyone but a few insiders. Snyder's "interior" struggle seems to be her understanding that other people are bad. I guess she has always been perfect. This may be true, and if so I congratulate her, but it just doesn't make for interesting reading.

This is such an incredible story, I could not put the book down... how could any one person take on the mob, the druggies, and some of the most vicious murderers ever seen in New York City? And while, much of the time, under death threat to her self and family by these creeps who had been getting away with their murders for years... To label her just a Conservative is ridiculous -- she is also liberal, feminist, family, but above all, AMERICAN. New York City and State, and America, owe her a tremendous debt. However, as I neared the end of her incredible odyssey, I wondered why she did not give a solution for the overall "War on Drugs," obviously a losing proposition. But she does! There are hidden powers in high places that should be doing everything possible to save America from this Drug Hell that has engulfed the nation. Time to wake up, folks...

It's too bad that the title "In the Belly of the Beast" was already taken because that would have been an appropriate tag for this page turner. Having spent 25 years as a narcotics agent in New York City, I am humbled by the personal danger encountered by Judge Snyder.Courage and intellect such as hers are very rare commodities in this city.The insight that this book provides into the NYC criminal justice system has been previously kept as a dark secret. She is one of the reasons that one can feel safe walking the streets of Manhattan at midnight and we all owe her a tremendous debt of gratitude. Unfortunately, many New Yorkers forget the grafitti ridden days of the 70's and 80's when the judiciary was rife with "Cut em loose Bruces". Watch a re-run of New Jack City to refresh your recollection!

After reading Mr. Ressler' first book, "Whoever Fights Monsters," I was hoping that his second book would go into even greater detail in explaining how the many elements of murder investigation yield a criminal profile of the killer. Sadly, this book goes the other way. It downright skims over some of the most intriguing cases of our time. The result is maddening. I was left hanging time after time after time. I was also hoping that Mr. Ressler would turn down the ego a notch or two with his second book. No such luck. "I Have Lived in the Monster" is even more ego-ridden than "Whoever Fights Monsters." If you don't believe me, just check out the photo section. I am still looking for that special book that goes into great depth on just one case to show true-crime buffs just how criminal profiling really works. That was a HINT, Mr. Ressler!

Though I found the material fascinating (especially the chilling interview with Jeffrey Dahmer), I agree with the reviewers who note the egoism. Of course Ressler should be proud, but perhaps he should let others tout his accomplishments rather than doing it himself. It detracts from the cases he describes. It reminds me of the old Saturday Night Live skit when our hero bursts in with, "Here I come to save the day..." Despite the egomanical strain, there is lots of good information on behavior profiling here. The author could show a bit more empathy for the victims. He'll recount the most horrid crime as if it were the recipe for apple pie. I'm thankful for his dedication to crime and for his insights into profiles of the serial killer. I suspect his first book is more in depth than this one.

This book may not be truly deserving of five-star status, but I am rating it as such because I think Ressler deserves more credit than other reviewers on this page seem to want to give him. This may not be the deep psychological analysis that more scholarly readers desire, but that is precisely why it appeals to lay persons like myself. The book is more than just graphic descriptions of gruesome murders. In fact, the entire content of the Gacy interviews centers on his denial of any involvement in the killings. Just goes to show that the author does explore psychological characteristics of serial killers beyond their grotesque crimes. In contrast, I found the book to be a well-rounded discussion of crime and society, with just a splattering of serial killer interviews. Furthermore, consider the events surrounding the last victim of Jeffrey Dahmer - the young man actually escaped. However, Dahmer was able to convince police the young man was his boyfriend and they then escorted him back to Dahmer's apartment where he was further tortured and killed. This is just one example of why Ressler is a man who is dedicating his life to the very valid and noble cause of educating law enforcement as well as the general public concerning profiles of serial killers. It is simply foolish to assert that Ressler is just tooting his own horn. I say it's worth reading, for those of you who take an interest in true crime and criminal psychology.