The apparent purpose of this book is to address "The Social Question." What this question is, is never explained. Perhaps in 1923 when it was first published everyone knew the "social question" that was on all lips. It is unfortunate that it was not explained to the reader in the new forward.

The book is short, but its stream-of-consciousness style makes it almost unreadable. The author has a theory that man is composed of three basic parts, (body, spirit and soul), and that, therefore, to create as ideal a world as possible, the scope of intra-human dealings should also be separated into the equivalent of these three "spheres" (the economic, the spiritual and the political). How all human dealings can be perfectly delineated into these three spheres, each totally separate from the others, is not explained. All skepticism is headed off as being un-objective, uninformed or already discredited (we have not adopted his ideas, and it is not a perfect world, ergo: any ideas except his are discredited). His arrogant, all-knowing attitude combined with the knowledge of the disastrous results of the implementation of similar "social solutions" since this book was first published make it a dreary and depressing read.

Steiner seems to believe that the common man is yearning for some perfect pattern by which to live his life and that once presented with such a theory will eagerly alter his interactions with his fellows to fall into line with it. All of his conclusions depend upon this being the case. He frequently refers to his knowledge of the mind of the proletariat. How he has this special knowledge is not explained. It seems to be a mystic gift. Having been a working man all of my life, I believe that he is wrong on all counts. The working man does not deeply ponder philosophical questions of how society should be structured, nor does he seek to alter his own consciousness to fit in with the conclusions he would arrive at if he did. As is the case with all other "social scientists", Steiner believes that man is on the verge of evolving a new consciousness. The frightening aspect of such beliefs, when they come into fashion with those with the power to implement them, is that when people do not exhibit such an evolution they must be slaughtered by the millions.

Steiner's ideas, like the thousands of other abstract philosophical musings down through the ages of how best to order human affairs, are intellectually interesting, but before these ideas are imposed on society, I suggest that those who would implement them familiarize themselves with the mechanisms of coercion and terror, and that they begin building the gulags for the poor unfortunates who do not understand his complex theories.

If the reader has an urge to delve into the mystical meanderings of another human mind, and has the patience to re-read each sentence and paragraph several times to divine its meaning, and is a collector of obscure philosophical theories, this can be an interesting read. To me it was a tedious exercise with no real value.

As the subtitle, "Rethinking the Basis of Society" suggests, a fresh look is taken at the basis of social life. The question as to what healthy social forms are, or how to evolve forms that are healthy is not new. The French Revolution, the movement through feudalism to private property, Socialism, Communism, the innauguration of American style Democracy and Civil Rights, even the current battle in American public life between the proponents of "smaller government" or those clamoring for a "just society" have all the same thing in common, they would attempt to create or change social forms. Some would do so for better, some for worse reasons, "to endow the blessings of liberty", or to create situations that benefit a select few over the many.

The author, Rudolf Steiner, offers no program in this book. Rather in the spirit of the great and unfortunately late philosophical tradition, he attempts to bring us towards glimpses of what he refers to as the "primal thoughts" regarding the "body social". While some might snicker at this as arrogance, others will see "primal thoughts" for what they are - insights into the nature of man and society, insights that go to the heart of the matter, insights that in their mode of expression have not been robbed of all but a semblance of life.

Rudolf Steiner, who had worked in an educational capacity with workers, chosen by their unions to do so, had said that the "modern worker" through his education had religion reduced to idelology while being left with a mechanical mode of thought imposed on him by natural science. The effects of this are far reaching. We might ponder as to whether this hasn't created our tendency to succumb to idelology in our public life in lieu of the ability to really come to terms with this life itself. In short, that is what the entire book is about.

In the simplest terms the book posits the realm of man vs man, where each person stands on equal footing with another solely because each is human, the rights or political sphere; man associates with man to create commodities in the economic realm; and finally, the human being in his or her relationship to the creative powers as well as the powers of creativity, would constitute the cultural or spiritual sphere. The monolithic modern state dominates all three spheres creating an ill society. The political powers that be as well as the economic powers that be are either colluding or each trying to overtake the other to the detriment of all.

Steiner's thoughts are not always easy to grasp. His thoughts on the "aging" of money for example, are for myself particularly difficult. On the other hand, his lucid thoughts both as to why human labor is not a commodity, and then how to liberate it from the stranglehold that the economic sphere presently has on it, are nothing if not brilliant.

Contemporary French Cinema is certainly helpful as it is one of only a few books to be published in English about French cinema from 1980 on. Unfortunately, as is common with many contemporary cultural studies, the book lacks a historical perspective, and therefore explores some avenues that may be relatively insignificant, while glancing over others that perhaps should have been studied more closely. This book is also a little too unorganized, with Austin moving rather uneloquently between subjects, movements, and genres. Still, it gives a nice overview of stylistic tendencies and movements of contemporary French film.

Harris, an occasional resident of Lebanon since 1983 and now a university instructor in New Zealand, has produced the first reliable and readable history of Lebanon to appear in years. The first section introduces the country's geography, sects, and politics; the second provides a routine but useful overview of Lebanon's political history from 1920 to 1989; and the final one breaks new ground in English by making sense of the country's recent past, dealing at length with the Michel Aoun's to throw off the Syrian occupation, then the consequences of Aoun's defeat.

Harris is that rare foreign specialist of Lebanon who makes no excuses for the Syrian occupation there. He notes that since Syrian troops gained nearly full control of Lebanon in October 1990, the regime of Hafiz al-Asad has treated Lebanon as "a conquered state" and calls this era the "years of stagnation and humiliation" for ordinary Lebanese. Harris rightly interprets Syrian actions in Lebanon-economic and cultural no less than political and military-as intended to stabilize Syrian primacy. He reports how the Lebanese have responded to life in the world's only remaining satellite state by trying, against overwhelming odds, to maintain a civil society. His description brings to mind Poland in the 1950s, suggesting that while the Syrian yoke will be heavy and long, it will not permanently prevail.

Middle East Quarterly, March 1997

A lecture that must have lasted a half hour, Rudolph Steiner's words on the Four Temperments are shallow and missing the mark due to lack of information. While I cannot really say too much about Steiner and his philosophy because I have not read anything besides this short pamphlet-like writing. For 1909, he may have understood some things of early psychology and possibly even read Freud, James and Watson, for there is definately a psychological slant to the teachings. Steiner whose majority of his work deals in occult studies does reach the limits of psychology into occultism, but not to an extreme degree. He makes some logical conclusions here and there, but not enough to add up to anything really pertinent or solidifying an idea. He reads almost like an astrology chart where one is sanguine, this or that is likely of your character. I am still skeptical on astrology, so this did not sit well with me. While Steiners work is reverred by many, I cant say this book would purport me to buy another of his book any time soon.

This is not a simple book, it is in fact the Schwarzkopf's PhD dissertation in philosophy. As such one would not expect it to be straighforward, and as forseen there is much which is not explained throughout the book, simple terms such as "world", "spirit", "I" etc take on new meanings, if not, then they are considered in new contexts for which the unprepared reader is not ready. A reasonably deep understanding of the British empiricists is also required before attempting this book, the very brief summaries of the achievements of Locke, Hume etc are not adequate unless you already have at least a brief understanding. At times there are confusions and ambiguity.

To the main contribution, this entails an attempt at understanding the world through the fascinating concepts of given and not given, given being those things which are given to consciousness without any extra effort by a person, not given includes, especially, the focusing of attention and awareness to the moment. Note that the actual potential for the use of the attentive faculty is given, its actual use is not. Schwarzkopf tries to resolve much of the dualism present in most people thinking by using this complementary approach to realise the already present unified world which is broken up by the mind. It is a wonderful idea following much of Rudolf Steiner's and Georg Kuehlewind's work as a starting point. It is in many ways enlightening but is also caught up in the afforementioned ambiguity inherent in the use of every day language. This stops the average reader from really understanding what is being said. Contrast this with "The Logos Structure of the World" (Kuehlewind) which is written in more obtuse language but nonetheless captures the essence on a second or third reading. I did not find this to be the case here. Remarkable ideas but requiring better explanation.

One of Victorian culture's greatest and most original writers was overdue a new biography. Simon Heffer gives us a readble and lively version of his life, but in the end does little to make Carlyle's work live for modern readers. I suspect that Heffer is really too sympathetic to Carlyle's late, ranting writings to re-think their significance. Instead he just wants to make excuses. It's a very great pity, because Carlyle is certainly a genius. His greatest works - like 'Sartor Resartus' - are unique, a wonderful kaleidescope of ideas and images written in his dazzlingly fractured prose. In a Victorian context he was certainly a racist, but the multiple sources of his thought, and his jumbled cross-language sentences give us a far better idea of what 'multi-ethnic' culture could be than a bag full of post-modern post-colonial theorists.

I recently bought this book for a school sponsered summer reading program and i enjoyed very much. SO much so that i had finished in under two hours. I wish the book had gone on longer brnging me evidence to support both cases on whether or not UFO's exist. However, over all i would recommend to others.

This is not his good stuff. It is marketted fluff using his name. There are some good collections, but don't buy anything by this publisher.

As Robert Crumb grew up his comics sometimes became more imature but even though he might get more bitter his art work gets better. His stories get better. When he started he might have done simple comic gag but as he has got older those gags have mutated it hilarously well writen stories. Each Complete Crumb Comics is better than the last.

The first thing you need to notice about this book is the publishing date. While fifteen years is a blink in geological time, it does predate the GPS unit whose use would help this book a lot since many of the sites are only vaguely described. The scale on most of the map must be B-flat or something, because they are in no way proportional to the actual distances on the real roads. The book is also full of highly inaccurate or out right wrong numbers. Of the 46 sites in the book (back cover says 56), I have collected (visited) 27 of them. At many of the sites I found so little material, that I considered the whole thing to be a waste of time. At one site (Lake Possum Kingdom) if you follow the directions, you will need a boat for the last mile and a half of the trip. I often was able to apply a little reasoning about geology and find other sites that were far superior to the ones in the book. Some of the sites cover geographical areas that are larger than some states (Toyah Agate, Cleburne fossils.) Many of the sites are pay to hunt sites. Texas has enough roadside geology exposed in road cuts that I have never found it necessary to pay to hunt rocks. Further more I often knew of free sites that were far superior to the pay site listed. An example would be wood and jasper in the Trinity-Crocket area. I spent all day looking for anything and at the end of the day I had maybe a pound of low-grade stuff. The next weekend I went to Madison county 35 miles away and found about a hundred pounds in three hours. All in all, this book is a big disappointment.

This helpful book has assisted in finding very interesting samples and formations...Unfortunately, it seems the most recent addition was published in 1987...An update would be wonderful...

This book, I feel, was not as good as the critics said it was. I
It just did not interest me the way I thoght it would. I did enjoy learning about the history of blacks in Chicago. It was boring to me because of the format in which it was written. The book just did not click with me.