5 comments about I Married the Klondike.

1. I read this book during a travel threw canada in 1985 especially Atlin in the yukon. I like all biographics books which are the witnness of the story of the world.



2. This is the true story of a woman who moved to the Yukon in the days of the Gold Rush - she went to be a schoolteacher for a couple of years, married a prospector, and wound up raising a family in one of the most spectacular - and harshest - places and times in North America. Laura Berton writes with humor and insight, and has produced a most entertaining book which is interesting as biography, as history, and as just a fun read! Laura also produced one of the most prolific authors in Canada today - Pierre Berton, author of FLAMES ACROSS THE BORDER and THE DIONNE YEARS. This is a book that deserves to be more widely read!



3. If you ever plan to come up to Dawson City, Yukon you will want to read this book. Mrs. Berton gives an insight to the Goldrush town of Dawson City. I can say that you will still find the house she lived in and some of the houses that she describes in her book. As a resident of Dawson City it is nice to have read a book that is truly about what life was and is in Dawson City.



4. Ms. Berton's account of life in Dawson from 1907 to the 1920's is too late to tell the story of the Klondike gold rush. Instead it tells of life in a small northern community that has seen its hey-day come and go, describing it's traditions and lifestyle in such detail you soon feel as though you've lived there too.

   The descriptive passages are excellent and the book contains several colorful tales of individual struggles, her own and others'. I was a bit put off by the enormous number of names of people she met in the Yukon but didn't find I needed to remember them all to enjoy the book. If you have read the history of Dawson during the gold rush in other books, this is a great afterword that describes many notable figures' lives following the rush, answering several 'whatever happened to so-and-so' questions.

   I remember our elementary school library encouraging children to read it, but given its richness of detail and adult perspective it's anything but a kid's book. Despite her matter-of-fact writing style, Ms. Berton's story is emotionally engaging and a great portrait of life in northern Canada.




5. Like most people my age, I've seen old movies depicting the Gold Rush, but they were nothing compared to this delightful account of the author's experiences in Dawson and Whitehorse, in the Yukon. From page one to the end, I FELT the cold of the North, learned about the vegetation and moreso, shared in the life of the pioneers AFTER the Gold Rush. Such hearty men and women gave of themselves in the search for gold, few, very feew becoming rich. Yet, they all seem to have enrichened my life thanks to their determination and stamina despite all odds. To read of the social differences that the citizens upheld in Dawson gives one a thoughtful look at the upper classes, who brought their prejudices with them to Dawson. Yet, with time, as the gold became more and more rare, the population dwindled and with it the many differences, which had segretated the classes. Abandoned homes, run-down shacks, empty stores finally gave way to social values, which brought the remaining residents together. As the author mentions, one could not walk down the street of Dawson without saying "hello" to everyone since the life of one touched the life of the others. With only 800 persons left in town, all knew one another and social standing gave way to familial attitudes. It was no longer necessary to give the telephone operator a number, only the name of the person to whom one wanted to speak need be mentioned and the phone rang at the other end. Tragedy and hardships took hold of the life of everyone, but friendship and helpfulness prevailed as their numbers dwindled. A beautiful read, which has opened my mind and heart to these pioneers, who are our ancestors.

4 comments about Jacques Derrida: A Biography.

1. I enjoyed this book, a good clear introduction to Derrida's life and work.
   A good insite into Philosophy.



2. For anyone interested in Derrida, the man; for anyone new to Derrida's thinking and finding it difficult (this book will help clear things up for you); for anyone who wishes to read an interesting biography about a philosopher with an a strong impact academic institutions during his own life time - this is book is it. I found Powell's monograph well-written, interesting and insightful.



3. Derrida's biography may not only face scorn from those who do not admire him, but also from those who expect a biography to mimic Derrida's so difficult books. Given the hatred Derrida's work faces in his life and death, a half-way step towards reconciliation with resistance to deconstruction, such as this book is, is of supreme benefit.
   
   
   
   To my mind, this biography offers a good introduction to Derrida's thought and life. It gives to the uninitiated the first step toward Derrida. It consistently invites the reader to actually read Derrida's works, and therefore, even where its own readings are partial and too brief, they point to the importance and the meaning of Derrida's works.
   
   
   
   If there are readers who wish to learn about Derrida and modern philosophy, and about much besides, including the question of what the meaning of life is, and what thinking is, then I do not know of a better book with which to begin. I also think it will be a good antidote to the over-enthusiasm of those who think that Derrida's revolution has already happened, and that it needs no further efforts. Derrida's work requires those willing to go their own way, and not simply to mimic Derrida's style and his frame of mind.
   
   
   
   The more widely this book is read, the more it will be possible to see and hear philosophy being done in the present day in a relevant way.



4. Badly written: "Derrida was never restrained in print about what he saw as the shortcomings of his contemporaries in the efforts they made to embody their ideals." (p. 35).
   Not a biography as much as a sketchy summary of Derrida's works. The "biographer" didn't have access to Derrida's private papers (correspondence, etc).

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.

5 comments about Descartes: The Life and times of a Genius.

1. I found it to be an excellent book.



2. This is a very readable, enjoyable and informative book. Professor Grayling takes a lot of time putting Descartes into his proper historical context, which I think is essential to understanding him, or any philosopher. Even abstract ideas don't develop without any reference to what is going on at the time. The problem of reconciling faith with the nascent scientific revolution, the relation between the new anatomy and the locus of the mind, and religious wars of the 17th century were pivotal to the evolution of Descartes' thought. Grayling naturally emphasizes Descartes' philosophical ideas rather than his mathematical or scientific ones, though these also are discussed. Grayling also gives us as good a look as we can get at the motives and preferences of so private a person: the expensive green silk suit that he bought in hopes of securing a title show us a man who is vain rather than austere, despite his reclusive life in the Netherlands, for example. HIs arrogance was as expected, but not his pettiness towards, for example, Beeckman. And that he composed librettos for Queen Christina was a real surprise.



3. I found Grayling's "Descartes" to be an interesting read from a pure biographical perspective. Although I have an interest in philosophy, Grayling writes in a way that reasonably intelligent laypersons can understand. Unfortunately, though, Grayling treads very little new ground, relying on past biographers of Descartes to do the legwork for him. The only new ground the author treads is relaying the proposition that Descartes was a spy. I actually find this plausible for two reasons: one, it explains Descartes' travelling; two, Descartes doesn't talk about his travelling much in his writings. These two factors give Grayling's hypothesis some weight. Grayling doesn't take too much time expositing Descartes' philosophy, but in an appendex he does give a brief introduction to it. Like I mentioned, the author does rely on other biographers for information, but that fact doesn't take away from the quality of the book. One fact that Grayling kept mentioning was that Descartes seemed to want to portray his ideals as acceptable to the church, and also to have his beliefs fit into the framework of "orthodox" theology of the time. I wondered why Grayling kept hitting on this point so many times, and then I came to the following conclusion: Grayling wants to excuse Descartes. One would imagine that if Descartes applied his method to the idea of the existence of God, one would conclude that it would be necessary to doubt, or even reject, the existence of God. Descartes never stated that God didn't exist, nor did he (as far as I know) even doubt it. By not stating that he doubted it, Descartes attempted to stay on good terms with the church. Descartes' later politiking shows me that he was concerned with ensuring his own safety, both physically and financially, which is fine. Grayling doesn't go this far in the book, but I think it is a necessary and unavoidable conclusion; I'm just surprised Graying didn't call Descartes out on it. To conclude this review, Grayling's bibliography is strong, giving the reader lots of roads to travel if one wants to explore the subject further, which I plan to do.



4. This book brings up a very intersting set of connections that seem to explain a lot. True to program this book's focus is on biography instead of philosophy. But the biographical insights are well worth the read on their own. There is a good summary of Descartes' philosophical position in the first appendix. One surprise is how little mention there is of Spinoza especially in those sections that presents Descartes' impact on those who followed him. All in all, this is an excellent book to recommend to those students that want to spend some time on Descartes in an introductory course.



5. This book is an extremely well written historical (rather than scholarly) biography, but fails to really present the substance of Descartes' ideas and theories. I also have the following criticisms, in no particular order:
   
   1) I was taught to write in clear simple English. To read this book, you'd better have a dictionary handy. The book, understanably, is written in British English, not modern American English. This is not a fault, but the reader should be aware.
   
   2) This book covers Descartes' journeys theroughout 17th century Europe. Accordingly a map of 17th century Europe, with the cities Descartes visited or lived in would have been invaluable.
   
   3) An Introduction or Appendix discussing at some length the the SUBSTANCE of Descartes' books would also have been invaluable.
   
   4) This book mentions many, many persons in Descartes' life. A brief Appendix commenting on the more critical of these persons would have been helpful. Also, the book sometimes notes that certain characters played key roles in Descartes' life, but sometimes fails to provide much depth about such roles.
   
   5) The book notes that Descartes was held in high regard by other contemporary scholars and intellectuals. Based solely on Mr. Grayling's book, I fail to understand why. But I think that's more a failing of Mr. Grayling's book.

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.

4 comments about Sartre: The Philosopher of the Twentieth Century.

1. Sartre: The Philosopher Of The Twentieth Century is an impressively researched biography by French provocateur Bernard-Henri Levy of Sarte, the famous French novelist whose existential works held up a mirror to reflect the confusion of the twentieth century. Presenting the events of Sartre's life that worked to shape his intellectual and political views; Sartre's fascinat-ion with Freud and psychoanalysis; and the enduring qualities of literature, Sartre: The Philosopher Of The Twentieth Century is a very highly recommended addition to 20th Century Philosophy Studies in general, and insightful, essential reading for students of Sartre's life, thoughts, and works in particular.



2. Sartre: The Philosopher of the Twentieth Century by Bernard Henri Levy (Polity Press) 'A whole man, mode of all men, worth all of them, and .any one of them worth him' This was how .Jean-Paul Sartre characterized himself at the end of his autobiographical study, Words. And Bernard-Henri Lévy shows how Sartre cannot be understood without taking into account his relations with the intellectual forebears and contemporaries, the lovers and friends, with whom he conducted o lifelong debate. His thinking was essentially a tumultuous dialogue with his whole age and himself. He learned from Gide the art of freedom, and how to experiment with inherited fictional forms. He was a fellow-traveller of communism, and yet his relations with the Party were deeply ambiguous. He was fascinated by Freud but trenchantly critical of psychoanalysis. Beneath Sartre's complex and ever-mutating political commitments, Lévy detects a polarity between anarchic individualism on the one hand, and a longing for absolute community that brought him close to totalitarianism on the other. Lévy depicts Sartre as a man who could succumb to the twentieth century's catastrophic attraction to violence and the false messianism of its total political solutions, while also being one of the fiercest critics of its illusions and shortcomings.



3. For the French Bernard Henri Levy the philosopher of the century is the French Jean Paul- Sartre.
   My guess is however that for the professional philosophers of the twentieth - and now twenty- first century the 'philosopher of the twentieth century ' was Wittgenstein.
   As for Sartre he in some way seems to me less a philosopher than a 'philosoph' a kind of French Enlightentment man- of - letters capable of pouring out an endless stream of words on any contemporary subject. Not truly a scholar, but also not a philosopher in the deepest and most profound sense- not one who presents us with a metaphysic which somehow aims to explain the world. But then two of Sartre's intellectual forebearers( The great philosopher of anti- philosophy, of non- systematic thinking, Kierkegaard- and the 'philosopher for whom it was no longer enough to understand the world but rather necessary to change it- Marx) broke the old mold of philosopher as 'understander of all' that I have just presented.
   Moreover( against what I have just claimed) it might be pointed out that Sartre wrote two major 'philosophical works' his early 'Being and Nothingness ' and his later 'Critique of Dialectical Reason ' which have the kind of verbiage that the great philosophical systems do.
   Only here I would maintain that by the time that they were written this way of philosophizing was already irrelevant. As I understand it, and its possible of course to understand it otherwise 'philosophy' had taken flight to a different direction, a different form of discourse.
   In any case Sartre, to my mind was a person who at least in his early years had a 'real idea' of what he was doing. In his early development of 'atheistic existensialism' he presented a way of seeing things which many today would readily concur with. We are thrown into the world , and we have no essence. And our life is the making of those decisions those acts of freedom by which we turn existence into essence. Radical contingency and accident rule the world, and mankind in its ' projects' and with its freedom tries to shape a meaning of its own in an essentially meaningless universe.
   Bernard Henri Levy celebrates Sartre for this first- stage of his philosophy. He is more critical about what it is very easy to be more critical about , the latter stage, the stage in which Sartre was the ready political dupe of Communism. This was too the stage in which Sartre justified all kinds of violence .It was the stage in which the world came to see the ugly side of Sartre. The 'intellectual' who had never been in the line of fire, who as Malraux said was getting his plays put on with the approval of the Nazi censor during the Second World War. The intellectual Sartre who sung the praises of the Soviet Union and Castro's Cuba. This is the Sartre who is not the ' philosopher of the twentieth century' but one of its political dupes and fools.
   There is another ugly side to Sartre which BHL does not really see that way. The relationship to Beauvoir was one in which both exploited those weaker than themselves , for their own sexual and voyeuristic enjoyment. This 'user' Sartre connects of course with that other side of Sartre's philosophy , his "hell is other people' side. Sartre could not really keep friends , or be a very considerate helper to anyone. Words, words, words on the page and from the mouth. Ironically BHL talks about Sartre coming to at the last stages of his life an acquaintance with the work of the French Jewish philosopher Levinas whose star has been on the rise for some time now. For Levinas it all begins with 'the other' and the ethical is the basis of the philosophical. A different conception from the Sartrean one entirely.
   All this is not to dismiss Sartre but rather to suggest that Levy perhaps overvalues him a bit, as he might too slightly overvalue himself.
   An excess of 'amour propre' on the side of the subject and perhaps also the author of this work.



4. Levy needs help. This book is incoherent and poorly constructed. Except when Levy takes a detour to unload on Heidegger, which he does wonderfully and with real passion, he meanders all over the place. The book is full of non sequitors and bizarre assertions. It is not clear at all what his point is. Must be in here somewhere.
   
   Editing: Zero Stars. Someone needed to have a quiet word with Bernard-Henri. Sentances running 39 lines are a bit much. Where is the verb?
   
   Copy Editing: Five Stars. Very Clean.

1 comments about The Harmony of the World (Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society) (Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society).

1. I bought this book as brand new and was surprised when it was delivered with a weird sticky substance in various places on the cover. In trying to remove the substance I only caused more damage to the cover. My three diamond rating is due to Kepler being awesome, not Amazon. If you buy this book brand new make sure it is in mint condition or get a compensation from Amazon.

No comments about Michel Foucault (Reaktion Books - Critical Lives).

2 comments about Dialogues and Letters (Penguin Classics).

1. Great book. This collection by penguin includes a piecemeal assortment of some of Seneca's work. This was my introduction to Seneca so I can't speak to its representation of his work.

   The essays and letters read in the classic proscriptive style of stoic philosophy (see especially the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius). It was filled with succinct proverbial exhortations that are memorable and penetrating. Seneca and the stoics provide more psychological self-help than most contemporary books in that genre. There is a reason some authors are still read after 2000 years. A quick read and for a worthwhile investment in time--at least for those who are new to Seneca.

   Some of my favorites:

   It is better to be despised for simplicity than to suffer agonies from everlasting pretense. Still let us use moderation here: there is a big difference between living simply and living carelessly.

   We should also make ourselves flexible, so that we do not pin our hopes too much on our set plans and can move over to those things to which chance has brought us without dreading a change in either our purpose or our condition, provided that fickleness, that fault most inimical to tranquility, does not get a hold of us.

   The greatest obstacle to living is expectancy, which hangs upon tomorrow and losses today.




2. If Seneca was not the greatest philosopher of the Silver Age, then he was the most reasonable and practical thinker Rome ever knew. For his natural, straight-forward system of applied ethics made philosophy a way of living for the whole of the Roman populace. Truly, it was not just the singular privilege of educated wealthy aristocrats and politicians to realize the Stoic ideal, but it was also within the power of uneducated slaves and lower-class-citizens to embody those virtues as well, as the example of Epictetus clearly shows. Now, here presented in this piecemeal selection of Seneca's works, one may first come to meet this exemplar of Stoicism face-to-face in every genre he ever wrote in, with the exception of his Tragedies and his only extant Satire entitled, The God Claudius. Furthermore, these short extractions from Seneca's relatively immense corpus of writings are rich in allusion and anecdote, and they are packed with profoundly helpful advice on how to endure life's hardships and how to enjoys life's benefits to the fullest as well. This little volume will be a great introductory source for Roman Stoicism and it will compel readers to pursue the greater portions of Seneca's superb works. One may discover the complete surviving body of Seneca's writings in text and translation within the invaluable editions of the Loeb Classical Library (Harvard).

2 comments about Great Souls: Six Who Changed a Century.

1. very interesting biographies of wonderful people. i give this book as a high school graduation present in hopes that the recipient will become a great soul



2. The brilliance, charm and compassion of David Aikman shows clearly in his narratives of these bigger that life individuals who have left their mark on the world.
   The writing is compelling...the reader is drawn into the text as if he/she were present at the time.
   The moral is of course that the only thing that matter in this life is GOD.