List price: $19.95 (that's 30% off!)
Used price: $4.75
Collectible price: $16.94
Buy one from zShops for: $7.95
Used price: $7.48
Buy one from zShops for: $7.50
This is a one-of-a-kind book, but if one is interested in improving one's ability to work in a concentrated manner, this is excellent and well worth having.
Used price: $1.28
Buy one from zShops for: $3.19
List price: $29.95 (that's 30% off!)
Used price: $20.92
Collectible price: $25.00
Buy one from zShops for: $20.87
Sheldon
Used price: $56.96
It's true what they say: many of the finest photographs you will ever see come from people you've never heard of. For every Ansel Adams, there are a dozen Arthur Lazar's hard at work. Perhaps you don't know their names, but the plain fact is, their images demonstrate not only a technical mastery, but a more human understanding of the medium as well.
I owe much of what I know about photography to Arthur Lazar, so I'm less than neutral. But that doesn't make the imagery in this book any less superb. Several images are among the very best I've seen; I wouldn't hesitate to compare them to the works of more famous artists like Adams or Weston. I was fortunate to be able to learn from this man; I just hope that with time my images will be equally compelling.
If you love B&W photography, get this book. You won't regret it.
Used price: $13.89
Buy one from zShops for: $13.89
I suggest to all the kennedy fans to buy it.
The one down side to Robert Kennedy's efforts is that he often sublimated his own identity, interests and needs so as to promote his brother. It is only in the tragic aftermath of President Kennedy's death does Robert Kennedy fully emerge as his own person. The same hard work ethic he applied behind the scenes is shown to the public at large. Robert Kennedy does indeed find his voice and his forte, which is commanding the interest and attention of his public. The man who would be president in 1968 becomes a symbol of hope -- he is the voice representing the disenfranchised, the minorities and those living in poverty. He is the man who becomes personally involved with a large segment of the population that had, up until recent history been excluded from many public fora. It is to Robert Kennedy's credit that he makes himself aware of such issues. Indeed, this book treats the brothers with respect and as with any work about Robert Kennedy, one is always left with the question of what would have been had this man lived to be elected president in 1968.
List price: $44.95 (that's 30% off!)
Used price: $31.42
Buy one from zShops for: $31.24
(...)
"The Conferences" of John Cassian are perhaps some of the most powerful commentaries on the eremetical, monastic, and spiritual ways of life ever written -- and they are all too often left unappreciated in today's world. This was not always the case. The great saints, monastics and mystics of the medieval period read and respected this work extremely highly.
The "Conferences", set up as though Cassian was in dialogue with the great hermits of his day (and in some cases, perhaps he actually was) deal with the various issues, choices, and crises which beset all Christians -- not merely those to whom the grace of the religious life has been given.
This is a book to be digested slowly, one "conference" at a time and to be meditated upon -- not to be rushed through.
Highly recommended.
Used price: $1.79
The issues discussed in this Essay were at the base of the formation of political theory in the Western world, during the centuries of enlightenment. Locke's effort in the case of this Letter (of the 4 he wrote, this is the first one, published in 1689 in English, from a text published some months previously in Holland) was the rescue of religious tolerance vis a vis political powers and structures, and the recognition of the need for a sphere of private religious freedom, legally guaranteed and exempt from the interference of political power.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: When Locke wrote this Letter, there was still controversy regarding the definition of the concepts of liberty of conscience and religious freedom. In fact, the first step of the ladder is represented by the idea of religious tolerance. The starting point of analysis, at the time, came from the observation of the fact that certain degree of intolerance has always existed (religious, political, racial) in the human nature. If one analyzes the origin of religious intolerance in the western world, it stems necessarily from the fact that every Church or denomination, claims with more or less clarity to be the sole bearer of the truth. In this context, what could be the meaning of "tolerance" as a concession or pretense ? To recognize to the dissidents and minorities the possibility to coexist peacefully in a certain society, without having to renounce the external manifestations of their beliefs. But the need for religious tolerance can only make sense in a society where a dominant religious majority has the power to impose onto others its dogmas, either directly (a theocratic government) or through secular political power (the papist states).
On the other hand, the concept of religious freedom implies the recognition for the individual of the natural right to freely profess and express his beliefs, without the intervention or interference of political power or Government. Accordingly, whilst tolerance had been considered historically as a "concession" granted by the dominant religious movement or Church to other religious minorities, religious freedom appears in the Western civilization only once the political power is separated from the religious community. And here the Reform had its influence.
LOCKE'S TOLERANCE: Against this background, the problem of tolerance appears to Locke as a political problem, based on his conception of the State as a society born out of the consent of free men. In his State, it is logical to deny the political power, the possibility to interfere in private matters. Locke defends religious tolerance recurring to several arguments.
Politically, war and factionalisms are not the product of religious differences, but of human intolerance. In other words, it is not a requisite for the State, in order to function, to have a unified religion. From the religious standpoint, the Church is a free and voluntary assembly. No man can be forced by the magistrate to enter or remain in a specific Church or religious denomination. Only if we freely follow the mandates of our conscience, we follow the road to salvation. Thus, all political efforts to force us to adopt the "true faith" are vain and anti-religious.
Persecution, in itself, is not Christian and Locke concludes that in all matters related to the faith, violence is not an adequate or acceptable mean to gain followers.
Religious freedom, therefore, is a natural right of the individual and truth cannot be monopolized by any single religious denomination or person.
RESTRICTIONS: Does Locke really advocate absolute freedom for all men of every sect or religion when he writes: "Absolute liberty, just and true liberty, equal and impartial liberty, is the thing that we stand in need for"?
Not really. Tolerance has to be just, but practicable, in accordance to public interest. Therefore tolerance cannot condone ideas that are contrary to society or to moral rules required for the preservation of society. Doesn't Rome require submission from a catholic prince to a foreign power? For Locke, there is no real distinction between Catholics and atheists, from the political standpoint.
CONCLUSION: For Locke the only limits to religious freedom are the need to avoid damage to other individuals and the preservation of the existence of the State. On the other hand, such a freedom is only viable as a consequence of the secularization of politic and the separation between Church and State. I TRULY RECOMMEND THIS SEMINAL WORK. Time has not taken away certain lessons that are to be learned, if we want to live in a better world, a more tolerant one. GOOD ANTIDOTE AGAINST FUNDAMENTALISM.
In the letter, Locke argues that all religious practices should be tolerated unless they are a threat to the proper functioning of the state. Some specific practices are not tolerated - Locke perceives the Catholic allegiance to the Pope, at that time, not only a religious leader, but also an influential foreign political leader, as a threat to the state, and he believes that atheists cannot be trusted by the state, since they have no higher power to whom they can swear an oath. Locke does not tolerate these individuals, because of his (inaccurate) perceptions of them, but religion is still not the basis for their non-toleration. (In the sense that others who are inherently untrustworthy, or bowed to a foreign ruler, would also not be tolerated, regardless of their religion).
The toleration of some other practices is situational. For instance, a state that normally has no law against individuals slaughtering animals (for food, et al) cannot prevent a religious sect from sacrificing an animal, but if that same state, needing meat for its troops in a time of war, bans all private citizens from killing animals, then this ban applies likewise to the sacrifice of animals as part of religious worship. This is not a state of license, in that the civil government does not actively promote a variety of (or for that matter, any) religious practices, but it is a state of negative liberty, in which the state remains neutral to the religious content of religious worship. Specific sects or acts of worship can be banned if they are "prejudicial to other men's rights" or they "break the public peace of societies," but they cannot be banned on religious grounds.
Some critics have argued that Locke's Letter is no longer very relevant: he deals only with religious toleration, and religious toleration is widely accepted and practiced in the modern Western world. However, the historical context of the Letter suggests it retains its relevance. In Locke's day, religion was not the dormant issue it is today; rather it was the most controversial issue of public debate. Before Locke, toleration was just something the underdog wished for in order to survive until he gained power over everyone else. Locke, however, goes beyond this pettiness and creates a theoretical defense of toleration as an extension of his political theory. While Locke probably did not imagine the controversial issues of political debate today, the broad basis for his defense of religious toleration implicitly justifies other sorts of social toleration in the modern world.
If a state is created for the purposes and by the methods Locke suggests in his Second Treatise, then the men who consent to form such a state retain a significant negative liberty of belief and action. Any of these beliefs or actions must be tolerated by the state unless they fail Locke's criteria for religious toleration, namely, unless they are "prejudicial to other men's rights" or they "break the public peace of societies."
If possible, I would recommend trying to find a copy of the Routledge edition of this work (ed. Horton & Mendus), which includes critical reactions to Locke's Letter. However, Amazon currently lists it as out of print. Whatever edition you can find is worth reading: the need for toleration is as great in our own time as it was in John Locke's, and his contribution to the debate is likewise as valuable now as it was then.
Used price: $27.75
Collectible price: $58.24
Buy one from zShops for: $39.99
Used price: $0.95
Collectible price: $9.95