1 comments about The Humor of Kierkegaard: An Anthology.

1. The editor of this book says it is not meant to present a systematic , serious investigation of Kierkegaard's humor. Rather it is presented for the general reader as a kind of introduction to Kierkegaard, and his droll, imaginative humor which the editor believes is the greatest of any philosopher.
   Having read a fair amount of Kierkegaard in my time I would say that his humor is real, ironic and smile- raising. It will not get anyone rolling in the aisles.
   Yet the wit, again the irony do help make Kierkegaard an amusing writer- and this when his emotional range goes far beyond this.

5 comments about Ecce Homo: How One Becomes What One Is (Oxford World's Classics).

1. The striking power , the unique individuality of Neitzsche's writing is like no other. He is close to being the greatest of all aphoristic philosophers. And his writing has a strength, an intensity that profoundly strikes the reader.
   In this 'summa' of his own thought made before he went off into his last years of complete non- communicability he summarizes his major works, and discourses on and on about the subjects which most disturb and obsess him.
   One would like to see in this obvious work of genius something worthy of praise alone. For Neitzsche is courageous, he is bold, he is daring and his daring is a daring to truthfulness , in irony even about himself, or what he knows about himself.
   Yet there is a message which is conveyed in the work beyond the straightforward meaning of the page. It is in the tone and in the stance. It is in the hysteria and the hatred. And this is where my objection to Neitzsche comes.
   For if he was an opponent of Wagner, and would have despised with all his soul the complete misinterpretation of his message made by the Nazis ( Their collective racism was far from his teaching as I understand it of what the 'overman' should be) the very tone of his hatred and hysteria, the very pose of all knowing certainty , the firmness of his tone and voice certainly transmit something that most hatefilled and evil movement absorbed.
   For the rest, for the lonely individuals finding in Neitzsche some deep solace( "The thought of suicide enables me to get through many a rough night") for the critics of certain forms of Western thought, Neitzsche might provide a more excusable message.
   But the style is also the man, and the man who wrote 'Ecce Homo' was not only not to be compared to the first Christian, he is in some deep human terms , less than wholly commendable.
   God should give us kinder and saner geniuses.



2. Ecce Homo is a book written by a man of genius, solitude and an overwhelming insight to the times in which he lived.
   In his depiction of the society that has come and past, it's striking how much the people of then are like the people of now. When he spoke of the judgement, misunderstanding and blatant disrespect based solely on an image, he spoke of the cliques of the modern day. When he spoke of the shallow, moral-filled strong arms that controlled society, he spoke of the society of today. Thus the life of a philosopher.
   In this book, he reflects on his past. It is his version of an autobiography. He talks of past works, reinstates his beliefs with more clarity, and of other admired artists/philosophers and their works that have impacted him.
   The book is almost like an essay, with his old beliefs coming to light and covering new grounds, new theories put on the table and a strong voice that makes for a delivery that was anything but shaky in disposition.
   What I liked most about Ecce Homo was Nietzche's unflinching conviction to his unpopular perspective on religion, morality and life. Amongst his strong points were his ideas or one liners that leave you pondering after you have put the book down for the night. Also powerful was his voice that reflected his mental state at the time in which Ecce Homo was "conceived". Not to mention his plea for all followers of his readings to learn from him, expand due to him and then forget him. To disconnect the connection and move on. To claim the new ideas as only your own.
   There was nothing to hate about the book as far as I am concerned. I have read several of his works, and where they showed his weaknesses as being against society, this final work has really summed up the man well. It leaves no doubt in your mind as to where he stands and who he is. And given his fate, I'd be happy to have this be my final testament if I were him.
   I highly recommend this read to all with an open mind; to anyone who is bored with standard teachings or beliefs; or anyone who is lonely as hell and can't see the beauty and clarity to such circumstances.



3. Nietzsche entitled his chapters brazenly: "Why I Am So Wise", "Why I Am So Clever", "Why I Write Such Good Books", followed by his discussion of his individual works, and then "Why I Am Destiny". It has been suggested that Nietzsche may have been experiencing the early symptoms of his mental (and physical) decline at the point of writing this work, and his complete mental collapse was to occur soon thereafter. The titles of the chapters in Ecce Homo seemed to be self-indulgent, pointing towards Nietzsche's impending insanity, but after reading Ecce Homo, I had to think that this portrayed arrogance and superiority functioned (at least partially) as a mockery of the narcissistic nature of autobiographies, of which The Confessions by Rousseau offers a good example.
   A proof of this sarcastic intention is this sentence from the Preface of Ecce Homo: ""Under these circumstances I have a duty against which my habits, even more the pride of my instincts, revolt at bottom--namely, to say: Hear me! For I am such and such a person. Above all, do not mistake me for someone else!" This sentence shows how Nietzsche acknowledged the limits and self-indulgent dangers of an autobiography. At the same time, Nietzsche did use the autobiography as a medium to strengthen and emphasize his thoughts about Christianity, Western morality, modern culture, anti-Semitism and the German people.
   The chapters in Ecce Homo attempt to show Nietzsche's philosophical progression as he began his career as a philologist, the influence of Wagner on his early life, his subsequent break with Wagner, and his later writings. Nietzsche also includes commentary on his own writings, particularly his Zarathustra and shows the opposition between the Dionysian and the Apollonian.
   Ecce Homo is a self-portrait in writing. When discussing his image of himself, Nietzsche states that he is a philosopher "who is not an Alexandrian academic nor an Apollonian sage, but Dionysian", meaning that Nietzsche insisted that his suffering, and the scorn he received by his critics, was not noble but tragic. In this regard, the wording of his title was not meant to draw parallels with the Christ, but suggest a contrast, that Nietzsche truly is "a man." Nietzsche's point is that to be "a man" alone is to be more than Christ.
   "Ecce Homo" is Nietzsche's philosophical autobiography that attacks the unselfish ideal, metaphysical abstractions, and traditional views of morality. What I liked most about Ecce Homo was Nietzsche's unflinching conviction to his unpopular perspective on religion, morality and life. Amongst his strong points was his plea for all followers of his readings to learn from him, expand due to him and then forget him. To disconnect the connection and move on. To claim the new ideas as only your own.



4. Nietzsche's literary addendum to his philosophical oeuvre is, at its root, a radically modern autobiography. Written weeks before his collapse into paralysis, these are the final reflections of cogency from this great thinker; the sections are indeed self-inflated and passionate, with titles like `Why I am So Wise,' and `Why I am So Clever,' etc. However, Nietzsche is finally dubious about his reputation and whether or not he will ever be truly understood. He insists that his name "will be associated with the memory of something tremendous," and indeed it would. His work sought to expose the power structures of old societies and to expose the moral systems of Christianity. Nietzsche's tone is eerily prophetic as he insists that "there will be wars the like of which no one has ever seen," his stylish prose rings of a bold yet hysterical urgency. However, at the foundation of Nietzsche's thought is one of the great and subtle tensions in philosophy, the idea that his negating and destroying are "conditions of saying Yes." This is the difficulty of Nietzsche, who is all too easily categorized as the "Will to Power" philosopher of the modern period. We are still catching up to his profound insight, and this self-analysis should be a window into his genius and original intentions.



5. Duncan Large's new translation of Ecce Homo for the Oxford World Classics series is excellent: it is as authoritative and accurate as it is fresh and easy to read. Anyone teaching this book, especially, or even recommending it to others, should tell them about this version. It lends an entirely different flavor to the German, exactly what a new translation should do. Though Roger Hollingdale's version is the most solid, in my view, and Walter Kaufmann's the most forceful, this translation seems to get at the precariousness, the grotesqueness of the German, and particularly the tension it establishes with the tradition of autobiography.
   The biggest change Large adopted was to use the second person singular pronoun much more for the German "Man." Thus, for "Wie man wird, was man ist," the famous subtitle of the little volume, we do not get the more traditional translation with the impersonal "one," as in Hollingdale's rendition "How One Becomes What One Is," but the much more interesting and simple "How To Become What You Are."
   The effect is remarkable when it is dispersed across the entire book. It is an entirely different--and I think more interesting--experience of reading.
   Though some crucial things are lost (and every version, Kaufmann's especially does this), Large's translation, I think, benefits in the end for being so very bold. Hollingdale saves some key words better perhaps than Large, who interprets them more, it could be said--and interprets them precisely by going back to the roots of the German words, which should not in itself be seen as an act of fidelity to the source text's meaning, as is so often taken to be the case in philosophical translations of German (though this allows you, the reader, to reinterpret them more easily). But it should be noted that Large is *much* more close to the sentence structure than Hollingdale, which, in Nietzsche, as well as in most German and French, is often much much more crucial than we think it is (just pick up Barbara Harlow's unbelievably horrible rendering of Derrida's *Spurs*, which absolutely decimates this fact about Derrida's text, if you want a good example of what this produces: a translation that is nearly unreadable and extremely misleading at times).
   Usually, though, any of these deviations with respect to the accepted translation as represented by Kaufmann and Hollingdale is done with a lot of thought on Large's part--it is only thus that it could be so bold in the first place. Take, for example, his refusal to leave Nietzsche's "Ressentiment" in the French--that is, translate it by "resentment:" at its first appearance he appends a note, saying
   
   The standard English translation "ressentiment," characterizes it as a loan-word from the French, but Nietzsche spells it with an initial capital [this is true in fact always, mj], stressing that he considers it to have been successfully adopted into the German language (which gives all nouns initial capitals)--by contrast with "décadence," [another frequent word that is French in origin], for instance.
   -Note to page 13, p. 101.
   
   Few would have the guts, I think, to do this to such a well known and oft quoted concept, but Large both does it and shows that it is right.
   The fundamental boldness of this translation, though, lies in that basic gesture I am circling around above, which uses "you" instead of "one." Why this is so bold is that it fundamentally increases the danger of intimacy, of the cancellation of distance--which anyone who knows Nietzsche will tell you is absolutely crucial to him (cf. the famous passages on the "pathos of distance" in the Genealogy). Not only does it increase the danger for us, but also for Nietzsche himself: if it is true that this book is Nietzsche telling himself his life--the various "you's" in the text, which can be interpreted as Nietzsche somewhat referring to himself, show how constantly the pressure is there to maintain some coherence, to will the relation of himself into some economy, some shape, and yet at the same time not have it collapse into self-identification. Giving us some sense of this danger might, by itself, be Large's translation's greatest triumph.

5 comments about Lives in the Shadow: with J. Krishnamurti.

1. The first book of K's I ever read was in the Sixties, when I was still a teenager; the last was in my late 40s, as I prepared to enter a doctoral program in philosophy. I read the Sloss book at about the time I was in contact with the Krishnamurti Center in Ojai, which I was planning to visit. I was struck by how various people who had known K aped his manner of writing and speaking; it was both pathetic and humorous at the same time. This was one indication to me that not all was as advertised in the realm of the Enlightened.
   
   So, what did I think of this book? It did indeed come as a revelation, because as some other reviewers have noted, K at various times in his talks and dialogues made passing reference to himself as knowing nothing about sexual feelings, etc. Was he a hypocrite--just another of the procession of "horny gurus" that we have seen pursuing starlets in the West? Was K, as one author suggested, a man who had somehow compartmentalized his own mind, so that the left hand did not know what the right had done?
   
   It doesn't "wash" to say that the teachings and the man are separable, because as Kierkegaard noted, an assertion of fact by a liar is not the same thing when asserted by someone who intends to be truthful. Intention matters, and certainly no less in spiritual matters (!) than in the other, more "mundane" aspects of existence.
   
   Forget Krishnamurti, but not this book: it is a useful, cautionary tale to all who undertake spiritual learning at the feet of any person.



2. I just finished this book in July 2007.I had read most of K's books by the early 1980's and had developed a certian affinity with his way of looking at life in its complexity and complete nakedness.I think K expressed alot of insights into the human condition in ways that knowone else quite has.
   He really knew how to take the paint down to the metal as it where and get you to look at things objectively through the process of elimination and sincerity.
   That said I also think any idea that humanity could come to live in the mental and spiritual framework he portrayed was completely naive on his part.Paradoxically I believe in turn that made him feel somewhat superior to others when they challenged him or couldn't grasp his words.
   I think this book portrays all of that very well and the fact that not only could humanity not live this out but ultimately neither could K.
   Much like the greek philosophers I believe he contradicted himself in his own idealism and really didn't understand the true nature of human selfishness including some of his own.
   I don't believe Radha was being vindictive by writing this book and I think she really loved K dearly and struggled with these contradictions in K's life herself for many years.
   There is no doubt that she takes a few little diggs at K throughout the book but she also portrays the beauty and complexity of the life her family had with him and the overall picture she paints I believe is is quite honest,heart felt,true and clear.
   The book also gives some very clear detailed insights about K's up bringing from childhood on that are quite fascinating psychologically.
   "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" which please believe me I am not trying to do here but as much as I appreciate K in certian ways I still feel he was a bit of a prima donna and lived a very cush,pampered and spoiled life.The funny thing to me is that I had always intuitively sensed this since long ago and this book very much confirms these thoughts.
   As insightful and perceptive as K was I think in the end he was as human, frail and fractured in his own way as all the rest of us and so may God Bless Krishnamurti and rest his soul.And as K always use to ask what is love? and as the good book says.
   
   4 Love suffereth long, and is kind; love envieth not; love seeketh not itself, is not puffed up,
   
   5 doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not its own, is not provoked, taketh not account of evil;
   
   6 rejoiceth not in unrighteousness, but rejoiceth with the truth;
   
   7 beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.



3. Radha Sloss wrote this book primarily to expose Krishnamurti's affair with her Mother, Rosalind Rajagopal, therefore if someone is looking to learn more about K's life, this book will not provide him/her with much insight. It is obvious that Radha is basically a spokesperson for her Mother and her attitude towards Krishnamurti, though he was like a Father to her, turns into contempt and resentment as the affair begins to fall apart. Rosalind's letter exchange with K. is not available for legal reasons and though it seems conceivable that they did have an intimate and affectionate relationship that lasted for many years, it also becomes quite obvious that Rosalind was extremely jealous, possessive and obsessed with K. and this book served her as a way to vindicate her pain after the affair ended. It's sad that such private matters had to be exposed, especially for K., who was already dead when the book was published and could not respond to any of the allegations. Krishnamurti himself never claimed he was chaste; he just claimed his private life wasn't important. His intimate relationship with Rosalind based on mutual love and friendship shows no contradiction or hypocrisy in his teachings. It is important to understand that it wasn't really an affair, since Rosalind and Raja never had a true marriage (right after Rosalind gets pregnant Raja in fact announces to her that there is no need to live as man and wife anymore, and many passages refer to Raja's tacit consent to this romantic relationship between his wife and K.). Raja's and Rosalind's marriage seemed more of an arrangement based on a profound bond of friendship, friendship that had indeed existed between all three of them (K., Raja and Rosalind) for many years before any romantic bonds were established.
   I read the book in hopes of learning more about who K. was, but felt a bit disgusted with the petty details of personal conflicts which Radha was trying to settle in the public eye.



4. Despite Krishnamurti's repeated misgivings about hero worshiping of Gurus, we're back to square one. What personal difference does it make to an individual whether Krishnamurti was a philanderer or a monk? Why should one be bothered with his presumed shortcomings, when he always carefully distanced 'the speaker' from the message? Did he ever ask for the reader's, or the listener's approval of his personality? Did he ever say 'follow me'?
   
   If someone begins to idolize him after reading his work, and is later shattered to read criticism ( that might be true ) of his person- then the whole point of Krishnamurti's writings is lost on the reader. If one cannot differentiate between the message and its bearer, (s)he does not yet possess an unperturbed mind to dispassionately contemplate.
   
   Let's face it- the greatest human beings are imperfect and fallible. Their greatness is not in the absence of, but despite their failings. Even Ram(a), considered to be an ideal man, the greatest spiritual figure in Indian lore, made questionable decisions. Those great men after whom the major religions are based, also will find critics.
   
   People have asked of Krishnamurti- 'If he cannot live it, who can?'
   And if they cannot separate the man from the message, have they asked of themselves- 'If this were true, and if I could not forgive this man after all he has done, who could I forgive?'



5. It's hard to say and understand....because when I read about Krishna's life story...not Krishnamulti; but the real one. He also had a spritual lover, Redha (??) and later on he married to a beautiful princess and had four children. I guess in India or Hindu you do allow to get married even you're a God reborn or holy man. In fact the existance of this affair asnswered the question why Krishnamult didn't attend their wedding. He probably already attracted to her when they were together. He seemed easily attracted to young caucasian women in his early years. He did say he was longing to be a monk (sansyi ??) and be alone, away from the human beings during those years. To my humble opinion, if your mind is so full of God and love Him so much then you can not love another physical human being...a woman or a man and have a physical sex relationship with this person. I believe in his teaching or his words...the path is formless and pathless. He did awakening the Kudalini engery and made his way to see the masters, Beloved ones....but nothing can last forever, that's life. Life is a strange thing and no one can predict the outcome. Should the result be different if he married R.R and ended the affair? Maybe not...cause maybe they would end up to have a divroce. We are all human and we made a mistake one way or the other. We can see K. as a teacher and maybe teacher also allow to make mistake. Maybe we can accept it if we don't see him as God. He is not God, never was and never will be.
   
   K. is just a messager. He sent out the messages from the other dimension for those who tries to make a break through to see it. That's what he decided for himself the purpose of life. We all need to have a pruspose to live on. We should see it as a tragic he has made such a mistake and dimming the light and feel sympathy for his loss to the power of woman....temptation. The scandal itself and it's consequence is the biggest punishment he has asked for and deserved. Be compassionate.

3 comments about The Way Things Are: Conversations with Huston Smith on the Spiritual Life.

1. Among the most sought after religious writers of this century, author of The World's Religions and Why Religion Matters, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, Huston Smith is a reference library of the rites, rituals and beliefs of world religions.
   In The Way Things Are Conversations with Huston Smith, author and editor Phil Cousineau records twenty three interviews in which Smith debates his thoughts and theories with renowned scholars, theologians and journalists. This new compilation encapsulates both his personal contemplation, and public conversations, regarding religion and spirituality in contemporary society.
   Brought up in China by Christian missionary parents, Smith describes his first contact with religion as one of simple trust. "We are in good hands and in gratitude of that fact it would be good if we bore one another's burdens."
   A frequent reference of Smith's is to his concept of a primordial tradition. By forming a list of the common elements within all religions, he has uncovered what he calls the spine of religion. Informing our similarities, while warning us to "Beware of the differences that blind us to the unity that binds us", he encourages readers to see beyond personal beliefs and acknowledge others relationship to divinity.
   This unity, or single religious root, should not be confused with the modern trend of religious pluralism. He banks on the integrity of individual traditions, rather than the scotch-taped spiritual beliefs of pluralism, which have left people alienated from their traditional roots. "The moral is to find some tradition and to steep one's soul in it. To me it is immaterial which tradition; it is of maximum materiality that it be a tradition."
   An area of concern for Smith is the ever-encroaching "Newtonian view.", in which all reality is relative. A reality of relativity provides no room for the existence of an Absolute, the foundational element of religion. Without an Absolute we are left floundering with what Smith describes as an unlivable philosophy, based on the technically competent but metaphysically impoverished methods of science. "Scientism", the religion of science, or oracle we now look to establish truth, leads us further into isolation, cynicism and despair.
   Conversations with Huston Smith guide the reader, using both religious traditions and scientific discovery as signposts, on the quest toward the greater mysteries. Revered for his insight and wisdom, this book is a tribute to Smith's life work and a challenging read for any curious seeker. Though cynics may be adverse to the constant reverence and faith Huston Smith places in God, reading The Way Things Are may result in a basic trust that things are as they should be.



2. If you are like me and have read nearly if not all of his other books--then you may also have wondered, "Okay, but what do you really think? That is, Mr. Smith, what have you concluded about the reality and nature of God, the one true religion, and other questions, etc?" I searched for a personal website, blog or something of his and still can't locate. So I tried this book. Some of these questions I found answers to which was fabulous. But really definitive answers are lacking. Questions that compared one religion to another--he sidesteps--basically refuses to answer. So bottom line, there's nothing new in here from his books, just in a much more conversational (question and answer) format. As a final note, I won't give the book away, but what I have deduced from reading all the interviews in the book, is Mr. Smith himself has studied religions, lived among other religions, but has not come to know God. Truly God is not religion. Most of you know this if you are reading here. Again, I can only go by the most recent interviews, he does not seem to have come to a point where he is living a life based on a back and forth relationship with God. For that, I will take a leap here--again working off these questions and answers and assuming he is answering them honestly and from his heart-- and say that he is not a mature believer--he attends Christian church at this point but he really didn't seem to grasp what mature non-religious Christians understand about Jesus. I've learned a lot from his books but I have to say I've needed to fill in many blanks by seeking other writers or people themselves--such as my Hindu friends. I've learned more about what it means to be Hindu by knowing them than reading books. I do hope this helps. I wish you the best in your own search and understanding. God will lead you if you ask.



3. The way things are would be even better if there were more people like Huston Smith.
   
   This book is a window into the "winnowed wisdom of the human race," and the lifelong insight of a deeply devout and humble man that has spent his entire life seeking truth wherever it may be found, while upholding the sacred traditions of mankind.
   
   Smith is a perennialist in the tradition of Aldous Huxley (who he knew personally) and a traditionalist in the vein of Frithjof Schuon, who sees truth as principial, primordial, absolute, unowned, and variegated. Smith mentions that Schuon was instrumental in his own personal understanding of several religions.
   
   The book is actually a series of private conversations with various other seekers of truth and one will feel as if you are sitting in a zen garden sipping a nice cup of coffee while the bluebird sings in the background. The Way Things Are is also an easy read as it does not dwell long on any theoretical or philosophical depths. This is more of an inspirational book with many sweet gems of wisdom.
   
   I found myself feeling more at ease with the world as every possible important subject known to man is discussed with heartfelt sincerity and from personal religious experience for Smith spends every morning praying a Muslim prayer, performing hatha yoga, and reading a passage from the Holy Bible. On Sundays he is typically found worshiping in his Methodist church. Smith has also spent time with a Zen roshi, with Native American worship, using entheogens with Huxley and Leary, and his daughter has married a devout Jew with whom he observes Shabbat.
   
   You will be hard-pressed to ever find another person that is as well-versed and personally experienced in the richness of world religion as Smith, and yet Smith also speaks from several decades as a professor at prestigious universities, and as a son of Protestant missionaries to China (where he spent his childhood).
   
   Smith gives us his final advice from his roshi, "Infinite gratitude towards all things past; infinite service to all things present; infinite responsibility to all things future," to which I can only say a hearty AMEN.
   
   This book is highly recommended.

3 comments about Kant's Life and Thought.

1. Over the past few years, I had increasingly developed an interest in the Kantian system. I had approached several of Kant's most important works in order to gain an understanding of his thought, but I found that I often struggled to make clear sense of many of his ideas. Although I had obtained a basic knowledge of his philosophy and some lasting insights from these works, I found that Kant's method of presentation often presented some difficulties regarding a complete understanding of them.

   Ernst Cassirer's book provides the student of philosophy with an excellent elucidation of Kant's system of critical thought and both the characteristics of this philosopher's personality and the currents of thought that were prevalent during and preceding his lifetime that led him to develop the philosophic views for which he is well-known. Cassirer also amalgamates Kant's theoretical, ethical, and aesthetic aims into a whole system that reflects Kant's fundamental philosophical outlook. A great deal of material containing many subtle and frequently misconceived points is presented in a very clear, though well-detailed, way. Cassirer's discussion of the Critique of Judgment, a book that has long stupified many readers, is especially thought-provoking. The impression one receives of Cassirer's deep admiration is understandable given the astonishing intellectual depth and breadth of Kant's achievements This book is highly recommended for anyone seeking a more profound understanding of Kant's life and works.




2. One of the mysteries of the rise of the modern world is the sudden appearance of the grand phase of German philosophy beginning with the work of Kant, as his thought suddenly flowered late in life with his precipitous Critique of Pure Reason. Like an echo reverberating across the ages, Kant's breakthrough both recovered and surpassed the height to which philosophy had reached in Plato. This thunderclap just at the takeoff of the revolutionary passage to a new era is the prelude to an entire new universe of thinking, and joins the world of science, the Enlightenment, with a world as ancient as the Upanishads and as futuristic as Quantum Mechanics. Cassirer's philosophical biography is one of the clearest and most cogent introductions to the Kant's life and work and is a classic in its own right.



3. It has been so long since the original German version of this biography of Kant was written by Ernst Cassirer in 1916 (and first published in 1918, due to "the delay inflicted by the war on the progress of the edition of the complete works," (p. 2) according to the Foreword by Ernst Cassirer dated August 14, 1918) that it might be considered quite proper that the recent biography of Kant by Manfred Kuehn deserves to be much more modern in its point of view. My review of Kuehn's book emphasized how modern Kant ought to be considered for someone who lived in his times. Kuehn also put a major emphasis on Kant's desire for perpetual peace, a topic which might have been considered questionable for anyone writing in German at the time when Cassirer was writing this book for use as a supplement to the study of Kant's complete works.

   I should admit that I have not attempted the study of Kant's work in the manner for which this book is meant to be a guide. I might even be considered too political to be offered a position on such a faculty, so I have no expectation of ever becoming a professional philosopher, and furthermore, I might even be so comical that I would dare to consider Cassirer and Kant as representative of philosophers in the way that Merry and Pippin were typical of hobbits in the movie cycle, "The Lord of the Rings." The set of 4 DVD disks covering the first movie, "The Fellowship of the Ring," allows easy access to specific points in the movie, and scene 44, "The Breaking of the Fellowship," on the second disk, shows the two hobbits (knowing that Frodo Baggins was the only important target) acting as decoys, crying, "Hey! Hey, you! Over here!" Logically, this follows scene 40, "The Fighting Uruk-hai," in which Saruman declares his creation, the Uruk-hai, a perfect creature for war, much as Prussia is described as a highly disciplined place during Kant's life in this book. Philosophically, Kant's writings, which reflect his use of thought processes, can be selected and their relevance to "The whole moral voice of the Enlightenment, as it lived in the purest and greatest spirits," (p. 83) are here demonstrated as logically as Pippin and Merry's exclamations, "It's working!" "I know it's working! Run!" could be considered a histrionic reflection of the admiration for tactics similar to the praise for Kant's philosophy which this book exhibits.

   This book also exhibits an eagerness to bring God into every discussion in a manner which has become much less popular as the experience of the godly has been tied detrimentally to the likes of Osama bin Laden in the last hundred years or so. My interest in the early part of the book was primarily in comparing the competing Cosmologies of that time. Kant's early work, UNIVERSAL NATURAL HISTORY AND THEORY OF THE HEAVENS (March 14, 1755), which was dedicated just three months before Kant became a doctor of philosophy on the strength of his treatise, DE IGNE (ON FIRE), was not well known in his time because "The publisher had gone bankrupt while the work was in press; his entire warehouse was sealed up, and therefore this book never came onto the market." (p. 40). In attempting to think beyond the laws of motion which had been established by Newton for a Kantian cosmogony which Kant derives from such laws, "The planetary world in which the sun, acting with its powerful attraction from the center of all the orbits," (p. 47) is considered the cause of the planetary system, and particularly accounting for "the `unanimity of the direction and positions of the planetary orbits'." (p. 49) Kant also uses this explanation "in order to think of it as in proportion to the power of the Infinite Being, it must have no limits at all." (p. 47). Newton could have come to the same conclusion about the origins of planetary motion "if instead of seeking the physical bases of the system of astronomical phenomena exclusively in its present state he had turned his gaze backwards to the past of the system, if he had pushed forward from the consideration of the systematic state of the universe to its systematic becoming." (p. 49).

   The big jolt in Kant's cosmology was caused by his attempt to comprehend a heavenly system of a different kind, described in Part 3 of the second chapter of this book. "The Critique of Dogmatic Metaphysics: DREAMS OF A SPIRIT-SEER," (pp. 77-92) on Kant becoming "aware of the marvelous tales surrounding the `visionary' Swedenborg, which led him to immerse himself deeper into Swedenborg's work, the ARCANA COELESTIA. We use this account here not to repeat it, but are content to make reference to it. Who will seriously believe that because he had bought the eight quarto volumes of Swedenborg's works, at a considerable outlay of trouble and expense, Kant would have decided to perform a literary analysis on the book?" (p. 79). Kant's book on Swedenborg "appeared anonymously" (p. 78) and he was determined that "I shall never become a fickle or fraudulent person, after having devoted the largest part of my life to studying how to despise those things that tend to corrupt one's honesty." [Kant to Mendelssohn, April 6, 1766] (p. 79). Swedenborg's ARCANA COELESTIA might still be considered a work in which the dreams of a religious writer were collected with more enthusiasm than anyone prior to Freud had shown for understanding his dreams, and Kant's problem stems in large part from Swedenborg's understanding of his dreams being considered an explanation of heavenly forces, or more often, of the conflicts between heavenly and hellish spirits. Cassirer is willing to venture "that the whole idea of the spiritual is due to habit and prejudice, rather than to exact scientific analysis." (p. 81). Lacking such habits, modern people can read this book for a philosophical guide to how Kant's thought went on from that point, or spend their time watching hobbits, with the 4 DVD disks that show how the "Lord of the Rings" movies were made, or make countless other choices. People who believe this book might spend a lot of time studying Kant, as the author certainly did.

4 comments about Paramhansa Swami Yogananda: Life-portrait and Reminiscences.

1. FOR ANYONE WHO READ YOGANANDA'S AUTOBIOGRAPHY AND OTHER WRITINGS THIS BOOK GIVES A LOT OF INSIGHT INTO HIS EARLY LIFE IN INDIA AND WHAT HE EXPERIENCED WHEN HE FIRST CAME TO AMERICA. ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS I RECOMMEND THIS BOOK IS BECAUSE IT IS WRITTEN BY SOMEONE WHO KNEW YOGANANDA IN PERSON AND SOME OF THE INFORMATION CONVEYED FALLS OUTSIDE THE "PARTY LINE" PROMULGATED BY SELF REALIZATION FELLOWSHIP; I.E. IT SHOWS THAT YOGANANDA HAD A HUMAN SIDE WITH MANY PROBLEMS AND CONFLICTS TO RESOLVE AND HOW HE HELPED AND WAS HELPED BY OTHER PEOPLE.



2. First of all, I must warn future readers who revere Yogananda and consider him as their guru, would find this book quite difficult to read. The author, who is a disciple of Sri Yukteshvar, presents a very impartial and honest account of Paramhansa Yogananda. This account also includes unflattering behavior of the great guru while he visited India in 1935.
   
   Before I proceed further, one should realize that the author has great reverence for Yogananda and gives him credit where credit is due. However, the author also revels to the reader that Sri Yukteshvar was not always pleased by Yogananda's behavior when he returned to India. Of course, this new information was not available to the public in the "Autobiography of a Yogi" written by Yogananda himself.
   
   This is an important revelation as well. This shows that if a person is Self-Realized and has attained a high spiritual understanding, he/she will still be prone to errors of judgment, behavior and understanding.
   
   In conclusion, the reason why I gave this book a 5 star rating is because of the new and not always positive information about Yogananda. This shows that Yogananda is "human" after all. I would not recommend this book to most SRF members who view Yogananda as their guru as the information would be pretty hard to digest. However, if a person who admires Yogananda and reads this book with a deep sense of understanding and still revers Yogananda, then this book is for them.



3. The original Autobiography of a Yogi is uniformly positive and inspiring, with institutions and initiatives simply popping into being.
   
   In this book, written by a close associate and contemporary in India, more insight is given into what it took (warts and all) to make Yogananada's early projects happen on a human level, with the teams of characters assisting, particularly Swamis Dhirananda and Satyananda.
   
   It also sets the context of a Calcutta profoundly influenced by the Babaji line of gurus as well as the Ramakrishna/Vivekananda line.
   
   I do not believe this book diminishes Yoganandaji, quite the opposite it shows his ultimate success with the challenges of team and project building on a human level, as well as the divine level, already so beautifully encapsulated in the Autobiography itself.



4. Paramhansa Yogananda swami - more data.
   
   The actual source of data or person who wrote this book was in competition with Yogananda in as much as he made himself out to be a chosen one to spread Kriya Yoga possibly without true authority.
   This often happens in new religious movements.
   
   A well known disciple of his in Canada, has also been attempting to do the same thing, while attempting to insult Yogananda.
   Can the claims of such persons be trusted?
   I have met this person and was not impressed.
   There are so many that want to be powerful and famous, that want to appear as if they really
   Know something special, in religion this goes on very often .
   I would not recommend reading this work either...

1 comments about Alvin Plantinga (Contemporary Philosophy in Focus).

1. One can really deepen their understanding of Plantinga's principles by reading what other comptemporary philosophers have to say about his work.
   I believe Plantinga has broken a lot of new ground, and it is fascinating to see how other leaders in the field are digesting his work. This work also contains Plantinga's notes on his speech regarding "A Dozen or So Arguments for God."
   My highest recommendation. As a non-trained neophyte in the world of philosophy, I found this book very rewarding in putting some context to Plantinga's work. I would not recommend reading this review, however, without first reading Plantinga himself. In particular, I would recommend "Warranted Christian Belief" and "God and Other Minds."
   A number of his essays are also online.

5 comments about Machiavelli in Hell.

1. Let me say first that I did not find this book difficult to read or comprehend, as some reviewers have implied it might be. It was, and is, a scholarly work, but Grazia makes the material lively, interesting, and above all understandable. Each thread in the tapestry that he weaves around the life and philosophy of Niccolo (as he calls him throughout the entire work) is discussed separately but folded back into the whole at regular intervals.

   Grazia introduces us to Niccolo Machiavegli (Machiavelli in the Tuscan style) in Chapter 1, a figure often reviled in later ages. From Chapter 2 onward we are treated to an analysis of his works, political, social, and dramatic in the context of an overarching political philosophy. What I found most interesting about Machiavelli In Hell is the interleaving of Niccolo's life with this analysis. He becomes a person rather than the one-dimensional cutout we are often given in school texts - a man of feeling, ideals, and intelligence. With some persistence and careful reading you can it make through this book with a greater understanding of what Niccolo gave to later generations, or even his own. It is not a substitute for The Prince, The Art of War, or the Mandragola but an introduction.




2. I give this book an easy 5 stars. This is much less intimidating than many of Nicolo's own writings... De Grazia is interested in his subject, fun, and ultimately very sympathetic to Machiavelli. The book shows how Machiavelli was a poet, a lover, a (really good!) comic playwright, and a champion of democracy, in addition to being one of the founding fathers of political science. I've read the majority of Nicolo's surviving work, often in the Italian, and De Grazia truly portrays him as he was... a courtier after Castiglione's model who (even after his death) suffered more than his share of the "unremitting malice of fortune." READ IT!!!



3. To those of you looking for an easy read on Machiavelli, I recommend going somewhere else. This book isn't going to skimp on the scholarly side just to make it easier to read for others. This is an intelligent book for an intelligent reader. Grazia intricately weaves together the mindset of Machiavelli as we see him through his many works and letters to friends.
   
   At first I was a little disappointed, perhaps because I was looking more for the momentous doings of Machiavelli. Yet, as I worked through the sheer volume of this biography (not by number of pages, yet rather by the number of words per page) I began to grow and respect Grazia as I slowly began to realize who Machiavelli was and how his thoughts and ideas influenced so many. His thoughts are his astounding accomplishments and those we certainly see here.
   
   For those interested in reading an intellectual book, definitely read this one. Machiavelli always believed that a person becomes a learned person through reading. For someone who agrees with this mindset I would wholeheartedly recommend this book to anyone that has intelligence enough to want to learn rather than those readers who simply are looking for an easy read.



4. Da Grazia's intellectual, noetic style and sometimes peculiar authorial habits require some getting used to, but this is a decent, comprehensive, well-researched biography. I received my copy as a Christmas gift, and I do not regret taking the time to read it. Having done so, I feel like I know much more about the famous author of "The Prince" (which, I suppose, many folks used to have to study in school "way back when"), as well as much more about Machiavelli's unique circumstances, historical milieu, and overall literary output. Da Grazia, who I understand is an academic scholar, does a good job of putting a sympathetic, human face on his subject while simultaneously weaving together the disparate, rather derivative strands of influence and interesting life experiences that resulted in the incremental development of Machiavelli's reasoned and subsequently highly influential political/moral paradigm.
   
   However, I was a bit surprised and unsettled to learn that this biography was awarded a Pulitzer Prize in 1989. It's a good book, but, in my opinion, not that good! But, perhaps I am confused. I thought that standards were extremely stringent regarding such recognition, but maybe I am mistaken or somehow "old fashioned" and becoming increasingly clueless. Maybe the standards were tougher a few years ago and, like so much else, have since become somewhat "watered down". It seems, that in this day and age, in which so few people regularly read books of quality, much less write them, it's all just amounts to one more of those "signs of the times".



5. De Grazia's book on Machiavelli is an example of a kind of old-fashioned intellectual study one rarely finds these days: a close reading of the original texts--all of them, from "The Prince" to the least known of the letters--unencumbered by secondary sources and filled with arcane details that gradually build to a comprehensive and exacting overview of the man and his life. It is not an introduction for the uninitiated; rather, it's an explicative guide to all Machiavelli's works and a cohesive summary of the unique worldview imagined by this archetypal Renaissance man.
   
   More specifically, it tries to reconcile the goal (in political terms) of the "common good" pursued by the ideal ruler with the morality (in theological terms) of the "evil acts" this same ruler must sometimes perform to achieve this goal. In its crudest terms, the question is: How can the "good" (e.g., successful) prince avoid going to hell? "It is permissible to say good of evil," according to De Grazia's reading of Machiavelli, "if that evil is but seeming evil and converts to a true good." The qualities of such actions become "means, tools, instruments, detachable from the person using them." Nevertheless, the prince "has to steer a course between cruelty and compassion"; his action must be accompanied by "grace and glory." And in the end, the virtuous leader whose worth is misunderstood in this life will be rewarded in the afterlife; indeed, God prefers political action to spiritual activity.
   
   Along the way to reconciling Machiavelli's moral philosophy and his political philosophy, the author provides so much more: a solid biographical account of the episodes and experiences that influenced Machiavelli's thinking, the contemporary realpolitik that limited and often determined his advice to rulers and mentors, a portrait of the whimsical side of a man whose comic works have been neglected in recent decades (especially the farcical "Mandragola," a satire ripe for rediscovery).
   
   Overall, for a literary-biographical study of such picayune detail, De Grazia's work is surprisingly readable--and, at times, unexpectedly funny. But its one fault major is the total lack of an introductory outline of the book's somewhat meandering journey through Renaissance history, culture, metaphysics, and etymology; I fear that many otherwise interested fans of Machiavelli may give up after the chapter devoted to the single phrase "God more a friend to them than to you" in all its possible variations and meanings and interpretations. It's really quite unclear until much later where the author's arguments are headed or why they are important, and the organization of the book as a whole makes sense only after one has finished it.
   
   Still, if you're truly interested in what Machiavelli "meant" to his contemporaries (and especially if you are hunting for a book unscarred by the political axes wielded by many of his modern interpreters), this is probably the best study available.

5 comments about Street Zen: The Life and Work of Issan Dorsey.

1. I found this book extremely inspiring. The life of Issan Dorsey is a must read for anyone who has ever felt dragged down, left out, and mentally or physically ill. That should include everyone!



2. I read the reviews of this book before purchasing it. As a queer writer in Spirituality and Religion I have a great deal of sensitivity about heterosexist bent towards gay characters and history. So, David Sunseri's review of the book sat perched on my shoulder as I read this book.
   
   Having finished this book I have to say that I am left seriously questioning Sunseri's criticism of the book. It is a wonderful story and a tender account of a remarkable person. Having read this book and appreciating the care given to speak to the myriad parts of Issan Dorsey's (full) life story, I have to wonder if Sunseri isn't speaking from a place of internalized homophobia. Nowhere did I find the "sensationalizing" of homosexuality that Sunseri and Harper Leah (?) mention.
   
   In fact, I am now left to believe that Sunseri and Leah would prefer a completely sex-free, queer-free reading of Dorsey's life.
   If the book had sensational parts, that's because parts of Issan Dorsey's life were sensational and outrageous. That's not heterosexist bias dear ones. Heterosexist bias would be to "clean up" those stories and de-queer Dorsey. Fortunately Schneider doesn't suffer from any such prudery.
   
   A closer reading of Sunseri's reviews show what is clearly a bitter bias towards anything involving the entire Soto Zen community. Sunseri states that quite vividly in his review of Robert Winson's "Dirty Laundry."
   
   Fortunately, I don't suffer from that bias. I approached this book wanting to know more about this intriguing person, Issan Dorsey, who, by all accounts, wasn't afraid to embrace the totality of his life's existence and who has left a legacy of caring for others in need.
   
   Do not miss this book if you're interested in a truly remarkable story of a Gay pioneer and spiritual elder. It is not the complete story. But it is one of the stories and it deserves to be read. Perhaps members of the Hartford Zen Center complaining about the lack of Issan's "teachings" in the book could get off their zazen pillows and publish them. I'm sure they have more access to it than anyone.



3. My impression from this book was it was a story of a present day Bodhisattva.
   A story of a man whom lived life fearlessly. Who lived as a Herman Hesse's Narcissi but in reality not between book covers. In this book I felt was a true betrayal of the concepts of the Bodhisattva. Issan seems to have had spontaneously.
   
   
   Earlier statements of cheapness is sad.Value statements betray a judgment and lack of Bodhisattva sentiment. Was Milarepa's story a cheap story? The fact that murderer he was? Or is it part of the story of that Bodhisattva's life? I find Issan Dorsey's life neither cheap or over blown. I have known others with similar lives so the fellow whom judges this book as " straight " has a "bent" view. Again cheapness ...well it saddens me to hear a student of Dharma make such a statement.



4. I enjoyed this book, and nearly gave it four stars, but I felt that it was missing something.
   
   There was a little too much of the dark history. I know it was setting the stage, but I found that it went from depressing to numbing. Perhaps that's my own baggage: Having known drag queens, drug addicts, drug dealers, and hustlers, I guess I could have skipped over most of the first half of the book.
   
   The intimate details of death towards the end of the book were powerful, and appreciated. Again, perhaps it's just me, but it was refreshing to hear such honest detail without the author becoming gruesome or patronizing. Death, without the facade we in America often use to hide from it.
   
   Two things I would have enjoyed: (1) More details about the author's relationship with Issan, e.g., more conversations they had had simply as friends; (2) Samples of Issan's talks and teachings.
   
   Still, a good book about a great man.



5. I read this book because I heard about a renowned Buddhist named IssanDorsey at a dharma talk. I'm gay myself, and hearing that Issan Dorsey was also a gay man made me interested in finding out about his life. So, I popped his name into a search engine, and ordered this book from amazon.
   Up until recently, my relationship with religion in general has been a bad one. The tendency of Western religions to preach hate toward my kind has made it all but impossible for me to participate in any of them. Legislators on both sides of the political aisle have used religion as a vehicle for either passing laws to restrict my freedom or turn a blind eye to these efforts, for fear that any support for my community would render one 'unelectable'. None of this has made for a very good advertisement of religion for my community.
   Buddhism struck me as being fundamentally different, and when I read this book, I realized just how different it was. Issan Dorsey was from my side of the tracks, and instead of preaching self-loathing to him, Buddhism taught him how he could make a major difference in the lives of those who needed him the most.
   I'm pretty inspired to give this Buddhism thing a try now. I've never heard of a religion that doesn't judge people before. Maybe this is the one for me.

3 comments about Rorty and His Critics (Philosophers and their Critics).

1. Take the single most entertaining and engaging philosopher that the academy can today boast, add a few colleagues who have pointed (and sometimes passionate) arguments to pursue with him and serve at the hands of one of his protégés - and you have Rorty and His Critics edited by Robert B Brandom.

   This book is very stimulating, enormously erudite and not a little complicated. Here Rorty is hauled over the hot coals and its his task to defend himself against (and, occasionally, to further expedite) the arguments of his interlocutors; these figures include such heavyweights as Habermas, Davidson, Dennett, and Jacques Bouveresse. They argue and debate back and forth over various things that the interlocutors have at issue with Rorty. These include the status of "truth" as against "justification before ones peers", the supposed inescapability from "reality" and, in the best piece from the book, written by Bjorn Ramberg, what a "Post-Ontological Philosophy of Mind" might be and, indeed, might lead to. In response to this latter piece Rorty seems to bend his pragmatic line just a bit closer to the realist one in what I hope might become a classic quote of his: "What is true in pragmatism is that what you talk about depends not on what is real but on what it pays you to talk about. What is true in realism is that most of what you talk about you get right." The book begins with a helpful introduction by the editor (a former graduate student supervised by Rorty with his own chapter engaging Rorty in the book as well) and a paper by Rorty which argues that justification is more useful than "truth" since at least you can recognise the former when you have it (and what you can't recognise when you have it is useless anyway).

   The collection of questions as arguments put to Rorty and his responses seems, to me, to make Rorty work at his thinking. It makes him explicate and also explain his pragmatic turn of thought in response to a new set of papers and I, for one, am thankful for that. The book is hard going. Those not used to philosophical debate or microscopically logical argument where you can trap your opponent in seeming errors which undercut her thesis are going to find themselves quickly caught up in something which seems to be overpowering them. This is a book that should be read at leisure, poured over, taken in deeply and mused upon. It will require not a little effort. At the end of the process Rorty still does not think that there is a "Reality" out there for us to get right "Because there are no norms for talking about it". But I, for one, am glad that I have had the opportunity to read this book and it has made me sharpen up my own thinking too.

   PoSTmodERnFoOL




2. This is by far the best book about Rorty on the market, however it is certainly at the more technical end of the spectrum. Since Rorty's own prose elsewhere is frequently accessible to a wide audience, the prospective reader of this must be forewarned that the essays by his challengers and his responses are all more technical than much that he has written recently.

   On the other hand the quality is high throughout, with fewer "cheap shots" by his opponents than in other collections about him, and much material that is really first rate. Even though the book is centered on Rorty and his responses, the quality is high enough that it really is a dialogue on the issues that he has been concerned with, and which are quite central to philosophy today.

   If your taste for Rorty is not just for the lighter fare and you have some background in philosophy to bring to this, then this is richly rewarding.




3. I am not a big fan of Rorty's work, but this volume is excellent. It contains articles by top-notch philosophers (with Rorty's responses) that hits on topics ranging from truth and objectivity to epistemology and pragmatism.

   I consider the most important articles as the following: Davidson, "Truth Rehabilitated," Putnam, "RR on Reality and Justification," (excellent); McDowell, "Towards Rehabilitating Objectivity," (excellent); Brandom, "Vocabularies of Pragmatism," M. Williams, "Epistemology and the Mirror of Nature," Conant, "Freedom, Cruelty, and Truth: Rorty versus Orwell."

   I highly recommend this anthology.