Book Description
In 1656, Amsterdam’s Jewish community excommunicated Baruch Spinoza, and, at the age of twenty–three, he became the most famous heretic in Judaism. He was already germinating a secularist challenge to religion that would be as radical as it was original. He went on to produce one of the most ambitious systems in the history of Western philosophy, so ahead of its time that scientists today, from string theorists to neurobiologists, count themselves among Spinoza’s progeny.
In Betraying Spinoza, Rebecca Goldstein sets out to rediscover the flesh-and-blood man often hidden beneath the veneer of rigorous rationality, and to crack the mystery of the breach between the philosopher and his Jewish past. Goldstein argues that the trauma of the Inquisition’s persecution of its forced Jewish converts plays itself out in Spinoza’s philosophy. The excommunicated Spinoza, no less than his excommunicators, was responding to Europe’s first experiment with racial anti-Semitism.
Here is a Spinoza both hauntingly emblematic and deeply human, both heretic and hero—a surprisingly contemporary figure ripe for our own uncertain age.
Customer Reviews:
Too much speculation.......2007-06-27
Overall, I liked the book. I enjoyed the story Goldstein had to tell, particularly her own experience encountering and teaching Spinoza. However, I think the book fell short of my expectations and was, at times, too superficial of a presentation.
I was expecting more development of the connection between Spinoza's thought and the Marrano/Jewish tradition. Also, I was looking for more development of her argument that Spinoza played a major role in "giving us modernity".
The connections here were tenuous and more guessed at than established. Goldstein didn't go into enough detail in trying to make her case on either count. We get mostly loose connections between Spinoza and Marranoism. And on Spinoza's contribution to modernity we get even less. We get: Spinoza was influential on modernity because lots of freethinkers flocked to Amsterdam. Spinoza may have influenced Locke because he went to Amsterdam and left with stronger views on rational, tolerant, republican government. Thomas Jefferson owned a copy of Spinoza's work.
Nonetheless, Goldstein does make room for the stronger point of Spinoza's influence on modernity; namely that he was the first to systematically formulate the essence of modernity: reason, individualism, and freedom.
A good book with plenty of information to chew on, but too much speculation (and if one doesn't read the footnotes, one doesn't know she is speculating).
When philosophy become a voyage.......2007-05-12
This is a very nice (sometimes auto-)biographical novel about a philosophical voyage. The traveller is Baruch Spinoza whose influential ideas about God and separation between God and the State is narrated in a very engaging style. Rebecca Goldstein melts autobiographical, historical and philosophical levels of narration in in an enjoyable way. You are entertained and invited to think about a set of observations including Inquisition, diasporas, jews theology, Teens' life in the Big apple during the 60s, logic and qabbala.
However, this is not a philosophical book neither an introduction to philosophical concepts (some of them are presented in a debatable way); do not think you are reading a philosophical book: the best way to approach Goldstein's last work would be as a biographical reconstruction of a philosopher and his times, and how his ideas impacted on modernity.
Doubting jew.......2007-05-08
A great introduction to a fascinating man and his philosophy. I want to read more Spinoza now
a good read but ultimately not that satisfying.......2007-02-22
I think the author had a hard time deciding what she wanted this book to be. It makes a good start at a new historicist effort to understand Spinoza, but is too weak on his text to do that, so it ends up being just a history lesson (albeit an interesting one). It veers into memoir for a time, also interesting, but again too sparse to have much of a point. Then there is the explication of Spinoza's Ethics, but it's way too skeletal to be worth all the pages you have to read to get there. In the end the reader will have a good grasp of a sliver of European history, a decent idea of Spinoza's biography, and a wee bit of an understanding of his philosophy. If that's what you want, this book might be for you. But really it's a weak piece of popular philosophy that isn't going to be satisfying for a person who wants to grapple with Spinoza's thought.
A good read, but it's more about Jewish history than about Spinoza.......2007-02-07
In her title and throughout the book, the author acknowledges that Spinoza himself would not care for her approach, which gives his philosophy third or fourth place: less important here than his Jewish background, his biography, and the writer's own autobiography. This is all interesting and worth reading about, but in making the story personal the essence of his thought gets slighted. Spinoza would have wanted it to be all about the philosophy and nothing else -- but then who would read it?
For those readers interested in Spinoza's contribution to philosophy, the writings of British philosopher Stuart Hampshire provide a more lucid and focused introduction.
Book Description
"A colorful reinterpretation…. Stewart's wit and profluent prose make this book a fascinating read."—Publishers Weekly, starred review
Philosophy in the late seventeenth century was a dangerous business. No careerist could afford to know the reclusive, controversial philosopher Baruch de Spinoza. Yet the wildly ambitious genius Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who denounced Spinoza in public, became privately obsessed with Spinoza's ideas, wrote him clandestine letters, and ultimately met him in secret.
"In refreshingly lucid terms" (Booklist) Matthew Stewart "rescues both men from a dusty academic shelf, bringing them to life as enlightened humans" (Library Journal) central to the religious, political, and personal battles that gave birth to the modern age. Both men put their faith in the guidance of reason, but one spent his life defending a God he may not have believed in, while the other believed in a God who did not need his defense. Ultimately, the two thinkers represent radically different approaches to the challenges of the modern era. They stand for a choice that we all must make.
Customer Reviews:
Philosophy for the Mass.......2007-10-17
The book is aptly named, except for the fact that it includes "the fate of God in the modern world". God seems to survive despite our best attempts to rationalize her out of human experience(Spinoza) or act so badly that no one would want to believe in a God who had ardent followers like Leibniz. Anyway, I found the book to be a "good read", but I am interested in these philosophical musing. Those readers who have little background in relatively "modern" philosophy might get lost in the intellectual discussion of the major protagonists' thought, but the narrative is fascinating. I enjoyed reading about these fellows' lives and how they intersected on so many levels. Whether the author intended this or not, Spinoza seems to get the nod for "best in philosophy" and "best person" awards. Leibniz becomes the sore "loser" with a prideful chip on his shoulder. Apparently, Leibniz never ate humble pie?
Baruch Wins by a Knockout!.......2007-08-30
So many reviews already! Mine will be brief. Matthew Stewart's exegesis of Spinoza is brilliant, the clearest I've ever encountered, and should be taken as a challenge from the past by all adherents of "Intelligent Design". Leibniz is portrayed less sympathetically, indeed as a bit of an intellectual opportunist, as if Voltaire had not already convinced all the world that "Pangloss" was a hapless fool. Even if you, dear reader, are utterly indifferent to the theological/philosophical issues of the 17th C (which are still with us), you may well find this book as sprightly and engrossing as any historical novel.
Of Course We Should Care!.......2007-08-18
If you are honest enough to ask "why do I exist?" or "is there a God?" then you should care. These "old philosophers" affirm the enduring and ever-present tension between the power of reason to understand and the necessity of faith (or an approximation of such) to carry on and to cope. It is rational to struggle with such notions, irrational not to. To peer under the context and understand the motivations, personalities, and failings of those who rose to intellectual heights is to assure oneself of an appreciation of how the greatest of us have sought answers. To suppose such things not worth a care is to sleep through life.
Do we really care what old philosophers have to say?.......2007-05-18
The book is quite readable for the layperson. It is historically interesting, especially the interplay of notables of the era. There is too much repetition of the basic philosophic positions of the principals. The philosophy of both men has for the most part been dicarded by modern thinkers. It would be more interesting if the author had spent more space explaining how more latter day thinkers appraise the contributions of Leibniz and Spinoza. On the whole it was good. R Stageman
Opposing Views on Religion.......2007-05-14
On the back of the paperback's cover, the author, Matthew Stewart, is described as philosopher having sold off his consulting business to live a life of contemplation in Santa Barbara. Intriguing and interesting! Stewart has woven together the ideas and story behind two very distinct minds and world viewpoints. A life of contemplation has been very good for him.
Spinoza, the heretic, lived a simple life not seeking luxury or fame. His atheistic view of an inanimate God is largely viewed as the start of modernity. Leibniz was everything Spinoza was not. He was paragon of superlatives. Fashion-conscious, materialist, well-educated, and overly ambitious seemed to be intrigued with the ideas of Spinoza. After recognizing the consequence of Spinoza's ideas, he defended traditional beliefs. Leibniz was largely forgotten by the world after his death, even though he invented calculus at roughly the same time as Newton and influenced the philosophy of Kant.
I do wish the author took the time to use modern words when presenting some of the philosophical concepts. The language of the late 1600s and early 1700s is hard to conceptualize. For example, Leibniz postulated that the universe is composed of countless conscious centers of spiritual force or energy, known as monads. What the heck is a monad? A small complaint in an otherwise wonderfully executed and researched book.
Amazon.com
As he seeks to unlock the secrets of such things as joy and sorrow, Antonio Damasio pursues a unifying theory in Looking for Spinoza. Why Spinoza? The philosopher, whom Damasio calls a "protobiologist," firmly linked mind and body, paving the way for modern ideas of neurophysiology. Damasio examines this linkage, which ran counter to all scientific and religious thinking of Spinoza's day, and lays out the reasoning and evidence behind its truth. As he has in his previous books on the subject (Descartes' Error and The Feeling of What Happens), Damasio is careful to use clear examples from life to explain the often dry and difficult science of the brain. When he wants readers to understand, for instance, brain stem control of emotions, he offers an Oliver Sacks-style case study of a man whose stroke left him unable to keep from bursting into tears or laughter at inappropriate times.
Damasio also defines his terms, which is crucial, as he means something very specific when he says feeling ("always hidden, like all mental images") instead of emotion ("actions or movements... visible to others as they occur in the face, in the voice, in specific behaviors"). Using an impressive array of biological and psychological research, Damasio makes a compelling case for his idea of the feeling brain as crucial for survival and sense of self. But this isn't just a book about brain science. It's a record of an intellectual journey, a diary of Damasio's musings about history, philosophy, and Spinoza's life, all wrapped up in a simply astonishing explanation of a subject most of us don't give a thought to--the feelings that we live by. --Therese Littleton
Book Description
In the seventeenth century, the philosopher Spinoza examined the role emotion played in human survival and culture. Yet hundreds of years and many significant scientific advances later, the neurobiological roots of joy and sorrow remain a mystery. Today, we spend countless resources doctoring our feelings with alcohol, prescription drugs, health clubs, therapy, vacation retreats, and other sorts of consumption; still, the inner workings of our minds-what feelings are, how they work, and what they mean-are largely an unexplored frontier.
With scientific expertise and literary facility, bestselling author and world famous neuroscientist Antonio Damasio concludes his groundbreaking trilogy in Looking for Spinoza, exploring the cerebral processes that keep us alive and make life worth living.
Customer Reviews:
The Feeling Biologist.......2006-08-30
On the plus side:
It is good to have an advocate for the role of emotions and feelings in rational thought. There can be no doubt that both emotions and feelings have a crucial role to play in learning, discovery, persuasion, belief and insight; the challenge, which Dammassio is not equipped or inclined to meet, is to define the boundaries of the proper role of emotions in rational thought. It is not clear to me how Dammassio would advise members of a jury to weigh the evidence before them 'dispassionately'. Or perhaps he would advise that they shouldn't?
Despite the eccentricity of ascribing 'emotions' to single cell organisms, I appreciate Dammassio's distinction between emotions - dispositions organisms adopt, more or less automatically, in response to stimuli which serve to promote restoration of homeostasis, and feelings - dispositions of the mind in which perceptions of emotions expressed in the body, in turn modify those same emotions, and for which mental events can also act as stimuli. This sets up the suggestive and useful idea of the 'brain-body loop', including the 'as-if brain-body loop' where the stimulus is mental.
This conception allows Dammassio to explain how the whole body participates in thinking, by mediating processes in the brain. A feeling causes a change in the body (e.g. a tightening of the stomach in response to some cause of anxiety) which in turn produces the sensation of that same emotion (e.g., you feel your stomach tighten, alerting you to your anxiety). This is a very useful idea, and needs in fact the body is able to play this mediating role in brain activity of all kinds, not just feelings and emotions. Dammassio provides a strong argument for understanding the whole person as the appropriate unit for understanding thinking, not just the brain.
On the minus side:
What is it with this mixture of positivistic, almost Lockean, exposition of human biology, based on 'the latest discoveries of science', in the tradition of Comte, social Darwinism, Ernst Haeckel, Konrad Lorenz, Desmond Morris, Robert Ardrey and company, with, on the other hand, semi-biographical eulogies over the seventeenth century rationalist philosopher Spinoza? It's like the song-and-dance routines put on for pre-match and half-time entertainment at the football. I suspect that Dammassio is relying on a weakness of Spinoza to which he makes a passing reference, namely, that by simply saying that thought and extension are two attributes of the one substance, the difficulty of explaining how thought arises from the activity of material beings is simply by-passed. For this is just what Dammassio does.
Like any number of positivists before him, Dammassio finds that 'the latest discoveries of science' have at last given us an understanding of how mental images are formed ... all except for just that last step unfortunately, but that last link in the chain will doubtless be discovered within the next decade or two. Dammassio has the same problem as John Locke: if you see thought as simply the product of one material system interacting with other material systems, then you can push the boundary back further and further (either by speculation or by scientific investigation) but sooner or later you get to that point, and you either insert the homunculus to watch the "movie-in-the-brain" (as Dammassio calls it) or you just hope that that last step will be explained by new discoveries of modern science, just around the corner. Dammassio is sophisticated enough to avoid highlighting the contradiction with any reference to a homunculus, or a yet-to-be-discovered 'control centre' somewhere in the brain, so his ruse seems to be to insert a eulogy to Spinoza in lieu of an explanation.
And these 'mirror neurons', introduced to explain empathy, are complete fiction. This is not a claim that needs to be argued, the idea is pure fantasy and the claim to have found the location where they to be found is outrageous. No-one in the field believes it. 'Mirror neurons' are a disturbing step from biological explanation of biological phenomena to biological explanations of social phenomena, and with that, the incipient justification for medical intervention and social engineering as the cure for social problems.
All this could be harmless enough. If the object is to improve understanding of the working of the nervous system for the purpose of curing psychiatric illness or brain injury, it is a very worthwhile exercise. But the 'mirror neurons' alert us to the inevitable wider agenda.
For Dammassio, all social institutions are "mechanisms for exerting homeostasis at the level of the social group", and in fact all social, political and ethical phenomena are "extensions" of these processes within the organism, and have their "forerunners" in the social behaviour of wolves, birds and so on. In other words, puerile social Darwinism of the worst order.
Faced with self-serving naïvité of this breathtaking order, and with obvious fictions like the 'mirror neurons' making their appearance in what is presented as hard neuroscientific fact, one is then somewhat hesitant about accepting as good coin the rather appealing ideas about the role of body maps and emotions in the mediation of thought.
Dammassio also cleverly plays with the idea that all the phenomena of culture and human society are somehow less real than the facts of biology, self-aggrandizing illusions of animals who kid themselves that they have become something more. Thus consciousness and mind are "what we call mind and consciousness," (this phrase 'what we call' is used several times). Dammassio is clever enough not, like say Desmond Morris, to be explicit in this ploy, he just suggests to the reader without spelling it out.
The Mind is shaped by Nature to ensure survival of the Body.......2005-03-01
Spinoza was a remarkable 17th century philosopher whose Jewish family fled the Portuguese Inquisition to find refuge in Holland.
Spinoza held that `the mind' is simply a bodily process: it is not a separate entity from the body. Furthermore, he claimed that emotions, including spiritual emotions, are a body's signals to the brain: their purpose is to make the brain adjust the body's activities in ways that will bring it back to a state of balance with its environment.
Spinoza built up a strong case for saying so in various publications. This idea was a direct challenge to the religious authorities. He received 39 lashes and excommunication from his own synagogue for his pains. After his death, even the tolerant Dutch authorities banned publication of Spinoza's works.
Nevertheless, his ideas lived on and became a driving force of the Enlightenment a century later.
Antonio Damasio is Van Allen Distinguished professor at University of Iowa College of Medicine. As a neuroscientist in the forefront of modern research, he specializes in finding out how the brain detects both emotion and feeling. The brain is receiving billions of reports every second from every cell in the body. Neuroscientists can record these signals in particular circuits in the brain. The brain integrates these reports and the result is perceived as an emotion.
`Background' emotions work at a subconscious level and are noticed as states of well-being, instinctive dislikes -- and so on. `Primary' emotions are basic ones such as fear, disgust, sadness and happiness. `Social' emotions include shame, pride, envy and indignation.
In turn emotion gives rise to feeling -- an internalized emotion of emotion. All these processes can be recorded as neural maps in the brain as they occur. These emotions and feelings manipulate the body to behave in ways that enhances its self-preservation.
Damasio interweaves his neural science narrative cleverly with the thread of Spinoza's philosophy. There is a lot still to discover, but neural science is vindicating Spinoza's hypothesis: that our mental life is shaped by nature to serve the optimum survival of the physical body.
There is a powerful lesson to be drawn: this mental life is designed to work in forager groups in the African Savannah. Our lives today are so far removed from these conditions that we are continuously stressed by emotional signals occurring in inappropriate ways.
Today, we medicate our feelings with alcohol, drugs, and New Age therapies. However, the insights provided by neuroscience point the way to how we might structure our lives in ways that bring our bodies back into a state of harmony with our natures.
Damasio does not venture into how we might do this, but we at www.naturaleater.com will be tackling this question of evolutionary psychology on our website very shortly.
The clarity of truth.......2004-07-16
As his 2 other previous books, this book has the clarity and consistency of truth. The insight it gives on our personal mental world is simply beautiful. This is just one of those books that everyone should read.
darn good book........2004-06-06
Basicially, Damasio's book provides a solid, testable, specific, plausible and elegant hypothesis about emotion and feeling. I found the book to be fascinating and enlightening.
While I do not agree with everything he says -
(specifically his evidence regarding the difference between 'feeling' and 'emotion' seems to me to point toward 'feeling' occuring earlier, at least in some form)
the science is there to be tried and tested.
The other thing I didn't like about it was the writing style was too much in the philosophical vein for my personal tastes... but then science is philosophy, and the style is conciously chosen for that reason.
Overall a great read, though. The ideas presented far, far *far* outweigh the minor complaints I have about the book.
A survey of the impact of feelings on daily lives.......2004-05-03
Joy, sorrow and the feeling brain are considered in Antonio Damasio's Looking For Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, And The Feeling Brain, a survey of the impact of feelings on daily lives. Such feelings have often been considered too private for science to explain and have been largely ignored: neuroscientist Damasio draws on his own research and experience with neurological patients to consider how emotions support survival itself.
Amazon.com
"I do not presume to have discovered the best philosophy," Spinoza once wrote, "but I know that I understand the true one." Understanding the philosophy of Spinoza is not easy, to be sure, but The Cambridge Companion to Spinoza is intended to help. Aimed at the novice and the specialist alike, it contains 10 essays contributed by scholars who are among the foremost authorities on Spinoza's thought. "Taken as a whole," editor Don Garrett writes, "the essays in this volume present a detailed, coherent, and--I believe--accurate portrait of one of the most original and fruitful thinkers that humankind has yet produced."
The Companion is almost certainly the best anthology on Spinoza's philosophy presently available, and his major work, Ethics, is naturally at its center. Among the high points in Jonathan Bennett's compendious essay on Spinoza's metaphysics is his discussion of "size neutrality"--the claim that small things differ from large ones only in size--which is memorably described as "a blank check that philosophers wrote on Nature's bank and that did not visibly bounce until late in the 19th century." Other essays on Ethics deal with Spinoza's views on epistemology, the philosophy of science, the philosophy of mind, and--unsurprisingly--ethics. Concerning other aspects of Spinoza's work, Edwin Curley's essay, delightfully titled "Kissinger, Spinoza, and Genghis Khan," argues that Spinoza's political philosophy is essentially Machiavellian; Spinoza's contributions to theology and Bible scholarship are carefully dealt with by the late Alan Donagan and Richard H. Popkin. --Glenn Branch
Book Description
Benedict (Baruch) de Spinoza has been one of the most inspiring and influential philosophers of the modern era, yet also one of the most difficult and most frequently misunderstood. The essays in this volume provide a clear and systematic exegesis of Spinoza's thought informed by the most recent scholarship. They cover his metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of science, psychology, ethics, political theory, theology, and scriptural interpretation, as well as his life and influence on later thinkers.
Customer Reviews:
A Good Book - Not a Good Beginning.......2005-09-06
This is one of the best ordained books on Spinoza ever written. It has texts on the most important topics of Spinoza's philosophy, on the correct order, and with important commentaries concerning the entire spinozistic community.
There are however disadvantages in this books. One of them is Michael della Rocca's text on Spinoza's metaphysical psychology. It is a very bold article, with several bold statements; however, the order of della Rocca's philosophising is completely upside down, and some of his premisses prove that he did not understand the scope of Spinoza's metaphysics at all. Besides, it is too long and not very explanatory for people entering Spinoza's philosophy.
The same cannot be said on the brilliant texts by Don Garrett, by Edwin Curley (with the most famous title in the history of Spinoza's political studies), and of the always brilliant Wim Klever (who should be more translated in the english language).
Bottom line: I believe this is probably the most important book concerning the whole of Spinoza's philosophy in the english language. However, the manner how certain problems are introduced and resolved are far from being consensuous and some of them seem highly questionable. From this, one must conclude that this book is not adequate for people just entering Spinoza's philosophy: better to start with Spinoza himself, with some introductory guides, and with the old, but still excellent book by Stuart Hampshire.
An essential aid to students of Spinoza........2000-06-11
This fine volume in the Cambridge "Companions" series is an essential aid to readers of Baruch Spinoza. Edited by Don Garrett, it includes ten essays on Spinoza's life and thought by ten world-class Spinoza scholars (including the late Alan Donagan, to whom the book is dedicated).
Topics covered are various and pretty much exhaustive. W.N.A. Klever opens the volume with a summary of Spinoza's life and works; the closing piece by Pierre-Francois Moreau traces the influence of "Spinozism" from Spinoza's death through the twentieth century. The eight essays in between discuss, in turn, Spinoza's metaphysics (Jonathan Bennett), his theory of knowledge (Margaret D. Wilson), his natural science and methodology (Alan Gabbey), his metaphysical psychology (Michael Della Rocca), his ethical theory (Don Garrett), his political theory (Edwin Curley, in a piece strikingly entitled "Kissinger, Spinoza, and Genghis Khan," in which he argues that Spinoza was essentially Machiavellian), his theology (Alan Donagan), and his influence on Biblical scholarship (Richard H. Popkin).
The resulting collection is a clear and thorough examination of every essential aspect of Spinoza's thought. My recommendation to new readers of Spinoza: begin with Roger Scruton's fine little book in the "Past Masters" series, and then go on to this one.
Book Description
A new and complete translation in English of this modern text, with substantive apparatus to allow the student and serious reader to grapple in a meaningful way with this seminal text, which Dr. Yaffe describes in his Translator's Remarks: "the philosophical founding-document of both modern biblical criticism and modern liberal democracy...." As such, "it is also the philosophical founding-document of modern liberal religion."
Tools in the text for the serious reader include the translation, ample footnotes, Spinoza's annotations, an interpretative essay, glossary and other indices.
Average customer rating:
- Freeing Spinoza from the Stoics
|
Spinoza And the Stoics: Power, Politics And the Passions (Continuum Studies in Philosophy)
Firmin Debrabander
Manufacturer: Continuum International Publishing Group
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 Ethics & Morality
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
History, 17th & 18th Century
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Modern
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Political
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Religious
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Look Inside Nonfiction Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
All Deals
| Blowout Books
| Stores
| Books
Nonfiction
| Blowout Books
| Stores
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
ASIN: 0826493939 |
Customer Reviews:
Freeing Spinoza from the Stoics.......2007-06-23
As a Spinoza enthusiast, I've heard way too many glib efforts over the years to link Spinoza to the Stoics. Thankfully, we finally have a book -- and a very well written one at that -- that analyzes how Spinoza borrows from the Stoics and how his philosophy departs from theirs. DeBrabander's Spinoza comes across as altogether different from the model Stoic philosopher. Rather than burying the emotions beneath that Leviathan known as the Stoic capacity for "self control," Spinoza is shown to be a philosopher who respects the power of passions. In fact, DeBrabander's Spinoza embraces the passions as the "path to salvation."
Well, OK. I'm not exactly suggesting the hero of this book is a wine-woman-and-song hedonist. But I couldn't help but enjoy the vitality of the Spinozist philosopher portrayed in this book. It is infinitely more attractive than, say, the ascetic stereotype of the Spinozist depicted in I.B. Singer's "The Spinoza of Market Street."
"Spinoza and the Stoics" may sound like a narrow topic for a book, but it covers quite a range of topics. Politics, ethics, theology, and psychology are all discussed at some length. For me, the single greatest portion of this work is its ending, in which DeBrabander demonstrates that Spinoza should no more be thought of as a utilitarian than as a Stoic. I am slated to teach a Spinoza workshop next month and very much look forward to sharing with the group verbatim this book's beautiful and insightful conclusion.
Book Description
This anthology of the work of Baruch de Spinoza (1632-1677) presents the text of Spinoza's masterwork, the Ethics, in what is now the standard translation by Edwin Curley. Also included are selections from other works by Spinoza, chosen by Curley to make the Ethics easier to understand, and a substantial introduction that gives an overview of Spinoza's life and the main themes of his philosophy. Perfect for course use, the Spinoza Reader is a practical tool with which to approach one of the world's greatest but most difficult thinkers, a passionate seeker of the truth who has been viewed by some as an atheist and by others as a religious mystic.
The anthology begins with the opening section of the Treatise on the Emendation of the Intellect, which has always moved readers by its description of the young Spinoza's spiritual quest, his dissatisfaction with the things people ordinarily strive for--wealth, honor, and sensual pleasure--and his hope that the pursuit of knowledge would lead him to discover the true good. The emphasis throughout these selections is on metaphysical, epistemological, and religious issues: the existence and nature of God, his relation to the world, the nature of the human mind and its relation to the body, and the theory of demonstration, axioms, and definitions. For each of these topics, the editor supplements the rigorous discussions in the Ethics with informal treatments from Spinoza's other works.
Customer Reviews:
Key Document of West.......2004-04-01
This literally wonderful introduction to one of the world's great philosophers by one of his major English translators can be a revelation. It concentrates on The Ethics, the work in which Spinoza lays down his thoughts on God and emotions "geometrically." Spinoza took time out from this, his major work, to write the Theological-Political Treatise-a work which, by showing the Bible to be an historical document tied to its time, helped usher in the modern, free state with its separation of church and state, freedom of speech and freedom to worship. Spinoza's ancestors were persecuted in the Spanish Inquisition, moving to Portugal and then to Holland, which showed more toleration; yet Spinoza's own beliefs, based on the universality of reason, the proto-scientific philosophy of Descartes, and the political requirement for freedom to understand the universe without autocratic nincompoops who didn't know what they were talking about, led him to be excommunicated from the Dutch community of Portuguese Jews when he was 24. The Theological-Political Treatise meant at first for a small circle of Dutch Protestant friends, was a key document in the 17th century and that eventually led the civilized world (e.g., the founding fathers of the United States) to realize that, since biblical interpretation depended on a knowledge of history and language, correct understanding of the Bible and God demanded reason. Knowledge of God, as the early, non-institutionalized Protestants realized, was accessible to the individual without clerical interference. It could not be monopolized by a priestly caste but was available to any reader of scripture. Spinoza takes this radical idea one step further, showing that it is not monopolizable by any one sect and, indeed, that it is accessible through inner reflection without even reading the imperfect historical document known as the bible. Spinoza's God is Einstein's God, an awesome, rationally necessary being who does not interfere personally in human affairs. He is far too big for that. Indeed, "He" is impersonal, infinite in comparison to man's finitude. Spinoza argues, not always completely persuasively or without contradiction, that God can be intuited from first principles (he is a "substance" with "infinite attributes") as formally as Euclid could deduce that all triangles add up to two right angles. Ironically-due to the importance the Treatise had as arguably the most important single document in safeguarding the future of freedom to worship and the separation of church and state-Spinoza in the Ethics argues against freedom. Everything we do is necessary, since God, who includes all space ("extension" in Cartesian thought) and thought, is rationally constructed. There is no room for probability, choice, or non-causal factors. (This may be why Einstein to his death doubted that "He...plays dice"-i.e., the intrinsic statistical factor in quantum physics.) In a famous letter (# 58, to Schhuller for Tschirnhaus, included here) Spinoza argues that a thrown stone "while it continue[s] to move....is conscious only of its striving, and not at all indifferent, it will believe itself to be free, and to persevere in motion for no other cause than because it wills to. And this is that famous human freedom which everyone brags of having, and which consists only in this: that men are conscious of their appetite and ignorant of the causes by which they are determined." Although what appears to us as evil is made inevitable by this deep suggestion that free will is an illusion unbefitting of the real God (whose manifestation as thought and extension, the spiritual and the physical, are the two of his infinite attributes most accessible to us) accessible to reason, Spinoza adds (p. 269) "what of it? for evil men are no less to be feared, nor are they any less destructive, when they are necessarily evil."
Spinoza argues that primitive religious ideas and poetic language mask the beatitude of a God almost, but not quite coterminous with nature, who is far too great to be made in man's image. He is based on necessary principles, such as the sort intuited by Einstein in the thought experiments that led 100 years ago to the relativity of space and time and the convertibility of mass and energy-to nuclear weapons and the Nobel Peace Prize. We are part of nature. Although I take issue with Spinoza's (and Descartes', whom he was following) claim that nature never acts "for the sake of some end" (p. 198)-because the second law of thermodynamics clearly leads systems to end-states of equilibrium-it is fascinating to see how this deep prejudice-a tonic against superstitious humanity's earlier over-reliance on the concept of divine will-comes into nature. And I agree that final causes play no role in a truly infinitely existing being, as Spinoza posits of God (p. 198): "That eternal and infinite being we call God, or Nature, acts from the same necessity from which he exists. For we have shown...that the necessity of nature from which he acts is the same as that from which he exists. The reason, thereofore, or cause, why God, or nature, acts, and the reason why he exists, are one and the same. As he exists for the sake of no end, he also acts for the sake of no end. Rather, as he has no principle or end of existing, so he also has none of acting. What is called a final cause is nothing but a human appetite insofar as it is considered as a principle, or primary cause, of some thing." God-manifesting to our limited senses as Nature-is not to be taken personally. He is too great for that. One of the great documents in the west, key to understanding the progress of both religion and science.
Decent, usable translation.......2001-05-15
Curley does a decent job of translating Spinoza, although his penchant for identifying the Latin vocabulary with English cognates, almost without exception, sometimes lacks sensitivity to the content at hand. Both his introductory essay and selection of texts illustrate his peculiar, if not intriguing, analytical interpretation of Spinoza. For beginning readers of Spinoza, these issues will certainly not obstruct the view of Spinoza's extraordinary system. Advanced students who have not mastered their Latin, should consult Shirley or, dare I say, Elwes, for additional perspective on Spinoza's ideas.
Excellent selections, lucidly translated.......1999-06-08
This volume of excerpts from Spinoza's writings, selected and translated by Edwin Curley, provides a surprisingly accessible overview of the life and thought of rationalism's greatest "saint." Curley's translations are crisp, clear and accurate, and his selections well-chosen. The reader unfamiliar with Spinoza and with no background in philosophy is advised to begin with Roger Scruton's _Spinoza_ volume in the Past Masters series, also available from Amazon, and then move on to this extremely helpful volume.
brilliant analysis of God.......1998-02-12
The ethics and other writings of Spinoza are the works of pure genius. With the utmost logic, Spinoza shows point by point what is meant by God and how he operates. Spinoza shows that what is meant by God is reality itself. This agrees completely with the definition of God given by God himself in the Bible, who said "I am who am." God is reality itself. To say that Spinoza proved atheism by this book is to beg the question. Everyone who is intrested in knowing who and what God is, should read this book. He also shows what our relation to God should be. One of the greatest books on philosophy ever written.
Average customer rating:
|
The Ethics by Spinoza
Manufacturer: Cosmo (Publications,India)
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
Ethics & Morality
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Look Inside Nonfiction Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
ASIN: 8177554565 |
Amazon.com
Remarkably, given his importance in Western philosophy, there has never been a substantial English-language biography of Baruch (or, as he was later known, Benedictus) Spinoza (1632-1677) until now. Spinoza: A Life makes up for the lack, delving into the archival records of 17th-century Amsterdam to flesh out Spinoza's world in rich detail. The subject himself doesn't even appear until the third chapter; Nadler first provides historical background on the treatment of Jews during the Spanish Inquisition and their eventual resettlement in the Dutch Republic. Later chapters explore Spinoza's relationship to the Jewish community and the possible reasons for his excommunication in 1656, as well as the emergence of his philosophical system. Academically rigorous without becoming ponderous, Spinoza: A Life is splendid both as biography and history, and a worthy introduction to Spinoza's philosophy.
Book Description
Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677) was one of the most important philosophers of all time; he was also arguably the most radical and controversial. This is the first complete biography of Spinoza in any language and is based on detailed archival research. More than simply recounting the story of Spinoza’s life, the book takes the reader right into the heart of Jewish Amsterdam in the seventeenth century and, with Spinoza’s exile from Judaism, right into the midst of the tumultuous political, social, intellectual and religious world of the young Dutch Republic. Though the book will be an invaluable resource for philosophers, historians, and scholars of Jewish thought, it has been written for any member of the general reading public with a serious interest in philosophy, Jewish history, seventeenth-century European history, and the culture of the Dutch Golden Age. Spinoza: A Life has recently been awarded the Koret Jewish Book Award.
Customer Reviews:
Rationalist, existialist...or Vulcan?.......2007-06-06
Emotions are to be avoided, religion is inherently illogical, only rational philosophy can bring you contentment, free-will is a myth; these are the tenants of Spinoza and, yes, the credo of all Vulcans. All these years of trying to get a sense of Spinoza and 3/4 through the book the image of Mr. Spock came floating through the text. Think about it, if Spinoza was successful in changing the metaphysical paradigm of western civilization, we'd all be Vulcans today. Seriously, this is a good book for any serious Spinozists, and puts into context the genius and guts that was Spionza as well as the remarkable period of tollerance which was the golden age of the Dutch Republic. I would suggest reading Yirmiyahu Yovel's, "Spinoza and Other Heretics" for anyone interested in getting a sense of the Pre-converso environment of the Marranos.
Spinoza: A life.......2007-03-15
The book give a great details about the life during the inquisition time in Spain Portugal & Holland..
Is has a very good view about the terrible consequences of fanatics in the Catholic religion, and show why the world was intellectually almost paralyzed during the dark ages of the religion terror.
However, the book only give small inside about the wonderful philosophical thinking of Spinoza, is more a historic book than a philosophical one..
The most enlightened of Philosophers.......2006-09-19
Steven Nadler skillfully guides the reader not only through Spinoza's life but also through the turbulent times of the 17th century Holland. All the more useful ride to enable us to see the courage of an outstanding man, citizen, a brilliant philosopher who taught us that GOD is Nature and us. Great reading!
lost in facts.......2006-05-28
I simply could not relate to this book, a reaction which may or may not reflect an adequate idea.
By the name of Spinoza !.......2005-09-01
Baruch de Spinoza (1632-1677), an early figure of European Enlightenment like a Netherlands Descartes or Giordano Bruno, - he fought with his publications for the inauguration of modern times, influenced by sober reason - but still caught in the historical context of a society, which was ruled by the dictatorial interests of confessions and government cabals.
During Spinoza's lifetime (only 45 years) Amsterdam probably has been Europe's most alive, free and multi-cultural large city - the true mother of Nieuw Amsterdam = New York. As freely however, that anyone could philosophize, whatever he liked to sermonize - no, that wasn't possible staying completely unpunished.
Many of the perforce secret supporters of Spinoza (publishers, booksellers, authors) landed in the prison or in banishing. Most glaringly is the story of the brothers Johan and Cornelis de Witt, who had protected Spinoza, providing him with food, money and legal support: A furious mob of Monarchists and Calvinists in 1672 got them out of prison and carried out a lynching court in the style of that time: they mangled the bodies and pulled out the hearts, showing them full of triumph to the audience - many of the members of the aristocracy, sitting in carriages. A very anarchistic version of almost forgotten Inca- and Aztec-rites. Only with strive Spinoza's friends could prevent him from posting a placard near the site of the massacre, reading ULTIMI BARBARORUM (You are the greatest of all barbarians).
Spinoza's family, Jewish, harassed by the Inquisition, had escaped Spain like thousand others to find refuge in the Netherlands, which showed more toleration. Spinoza's first thinking results, which regarded the Bible as an historical writing collection of different humans (thus by no means written by God), led him to be excommunicated from the Dutch community of Portuguese Jews. The autocratic Sephardim rabbinical leadership wrote 1656 in beautiful calligraphic letters: "As to the judgement of the angels and statement of the holy we banish, curse, bewitch and condemn Baruch de Spinoza. Beware of operating with him verbally or in writing, beware of proving him the smallest favor, beware of reading his books..."
The remainder of his life (like an early forerunner of the famous Anne Frank, who was hidden by Amsterdam citizens from Nazi pursuance) Spinoza hid mostly in small grave chambers of rooms and he lost all the wealth of his family business. Secretly he was supported by friends. Additional he earned money by lens grinding (but the sharpening of glass caused an early death: the inhaled dust destroyed his lungs). Convinced of the correctness of his thinking he as long as possible continued writing, persistently and annoyingly - however anonymous.
He did not want to die in public at stake like his forerunner Giordano Bruno in Rome 1600. Spinoza was fascinated by the hypothesis of a Pantheism, first developed by the efforts of Giordano Bruno. In his "Treatise on the Emendation of the Intellect" he defined God as ruled by the same causes like nature ("deus, siva natura"). At that time neither the Jews nor the Christians had been ready to accept such dogmatic changes or at least to tolerate such opinions (which of course weakened the religious authorities).
A large city is - today like at that time - characterized by the fact, that trends in different parts of the society are not simultaneous. The aristocratic, bourgeois, working class or religious circles always have different speeds. The intellectual circles, sympathizing with Spinoza, seemed to live already in the 18th century.
Because Spinoza, inspired by Hobbes, also risked to formulate basics of a democratic society, he came immediately into conflict with the Netherlands Orangists, who controlled the state. The mob, brought to a level of puppets as well by the princes as by the clerical - the mob was not enlightenmentable by the shy and sensitive considerations of a cautiously hidden publisher.
We would have to thank Spinoza (if it would be possible) for his persistance, which helped to develop modern constitutions of states and stabilized the opinion, that a religion must not be monopolized, but, in the contrary, has to follow individual interpretations as well. With regard to September Eleven and the US-reaction against fundamentalist assaults we faster could decide, how to response. I think: not using military, but using reason: no religion should lead us to a Crusade or a "Reverse Crusade" anymore. Monopolizing trends of denominations should be stopped. By the name of Spinoza!
Average customer rating:
- Mr. Way Too Quickly
- Contra the Neo-Cons...
- Who knew this book could say all this?
- An excellent source for readers of philosophy
- How to write between the lines
|
Persecution and the Art of Writing
Leo Strauss
Manufacturer: University Of Chicago Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
Popular Culture
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Sociology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Culture
| Sociology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Political Science
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Judaism
| Philosophy of Religion
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Freedom & Security
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Human Rights
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
| Classics
| Comic
| Contemporary
| Literary
General
| Criticism & Theory
| History & Criticism
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Look Inside Entertainment Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Fiction Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Nonfiction Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Religion & Spirituality Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Literature & Fiction
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Nonfiction
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
The City and Man
-
What is Political Philosophy? And Other Studies
-
Thoughts on Machiavelli
-
On Tyranny
-
Natural Right and History (Walgreen Foundation Lectures)
ASIN: 0226777111 |
Book Description
The essays collected in Persecution and the Art of Writing all deal with one problem—the relation between philosophy and politics. Here, Strauss sets forth the thesis that many philosophers, especially political philosophers, have reacted to the threat of persecution by disguising their most controversial and heterodox ideas.
Customer Reviews:
Mr. Way Too Quickly.......2006-01-12
Mr. Quickly (see review below) is either a prankster or an idiot. He has confused the philosopher, Leo Strauss, with the composer Richard Strauss.
But his review was good for a laugh, at least.
Contra the Neo-Cons..........2004-12-05
Now that certain of his followers have risen to such unpredictably high prominence and stuck around, Leo Strauss is getting more attention. This is good. Strauss is a good reader of good books (esp. Spinoza and Aristophanes), but his legacy is more ambivalent than one might expect. He is more than simply the intellectual architect behind Reaganism. Here are some observations that give an idea of what I mean in Persecution and the Art of Writing:
First, something to like about Strauss: He proceeds from the beginning of this study with the assumption that knowledge has a social basis, that social factors produce "truth." This position actually puts Strauss much closer to Foucault, the Frankfurt School, and the Cultural Studies crowd than to, say, Paul Wolfowitz and others who seek to engineer social circumstances by force if necesary to meet their proclaimed truths; thus, "freedom" must be "spread" to Iraq. Strauss was not stupid, like these saps. (We'll leave non-Senator Alan Keyes out of this.)
In fact, Strauss saw the right-wing shouters and their exercise of free speech at the expense of everyone else's coming: "What is called freedom of thought...for all practical purposes consists of--the ability to choose between two or more different views presented by the small minority of people who are public speakers or writers." (23). Nuance be damned. "We made the right decision on Iraq." "Ignorance is strength..."
Second, a disturbing view. Strauss assumes that the suppression of ideas by those in power and the persecution of dissenters and intellectuals is okay. Why? "Persecution...cannot prevent independent thinking. It cannnot prevent even the expression of independent thought" (23), never mind that this contradicts the statement Strauss makes above that independent thinking doesn't really exist anyway unless you have an AM talk radio show. Strauss's thesis: "Persecution cannot prevent even public expression of the heterodox truth, for a man of independent thought can utter his views in public and remain unharmed, provided he moves with circumspection. He can even utter them in print without incurring any danger, provided he is capable of writing between the lines" (24). What follows from this? Because the savvy socialist can write allegorically, then, it's alright to oppress socialists, or feminists, or any other kind of grownup. One can also argue from Strauss that religious minorities may also be persecuted, since they ought to find a way to "behave" between the lines. This is disgusting, obviously.
History teaches us the danger inherent in this attitude. The case of Walter Benjamin is a good place to start inquiring, if you're interested. I'd rather find a way to do without persecution at all. A more productive vision might be: Free Inquiry and the Art of Listening.
May Allegory Strike Back, and "fit audience find, though few."
Who knew this book could say all this?.......2002-05-18
I bought PERSECUTION AND THE ART OF WRITING because I wanted an easy approach to whatever contribution Leo Strauss might be able to make to the understanding of political philosophy, and the idea that writers might be persecuted is fundamental to my understanding of what separates social thinking from what a philosopher might be capable of. The second chapter, which covers the topic "Persecution and the art of writing," is only from page 22 to page37 of this book. The Introduction attempts to provide a basis for understanding all the essays in this book "within the province of the sociology of knowledge." (p. 7). The final chapter, "How to Study Spinoza's THEOLOGICO-POLITICAL TREATISE," is the culmination of a series of articles, which first appeared in 1941, 1943, and 1948, that is primarily concerned with understanding the works of a few philosophers in a manner which might be helpful "for a future sociology of philosophy." (p. 7).
The particular work of Spinoza discussed was an attempt "to refute the claims which had been raised on behalf of revelation throughout the ages." (p. 142). Studying the Treatise is primarily philosophical because "the issue raised by the conflicting claims of philosophy and revelation is discussed in our time on a decidedly lower level than was almost customary in former ages." (pp. 142-3). Later it is admitted that Spinoza's own age did not have Spinoza's books to discuss. "The only book which he published under his own name is devoted to the philosophy of Descartes." (p. 152). "But Spinoza, who wrote for posterity rather than for his contemporaries, must have realized that the day would come when his own books would be old books." (p. 153). My own understanding of Spinoza is not helped by the fact that the longest quotations, in note 2 on page 143 and note 19 on page 153, are in latin. Note 13 on page 149 quotes Carl Gebhardt (Spinoza. OPERA, vol. II, p. 317) in German. I thought I was going to be able to understand it best when Strauss wrote, "To ascertain how to read Spinoza, we shall do well to cast a glance at his rules for reading the Bible." (p. 144). Philosophy itself might demand that the most modern conclusion on that effort would be: "For the same reason it is impossible to understand the Biblical authors as they understood themselves; every attempt to understand the Bible is of necessity an attempt to understand its authors better than they understood themselves." (p. 148). In the case of the Bible, the idea of revelation offers the consolation to people who never wanted to be considered its authors that the book was written by someone else, as the angel who dictated the Koran to its prophet is the ultimate target of the book THE SATANIC VERSES by Salman Rushdie in the most modern comic edition of this conflict. The only escapes which Spinoza would offer is "to potential philosophers, i.e., to men who, at least in the early stages of their training, are deeply imbued with the vulgar prejudices: what Spinoza considers the basic prejudice of those potential philosophers whom he addresses in the Treatise, is merely a special form of the basic prejudice of the vulgar mind in general." (p. 184). Given the facts of life for most people, this seems to be particularly bad news for the political, which could use a few intellectual connections.
An excellent source for readers of philosophy.......2000-10-25
An excellent text, Strauss explicates on his views of how philosophers in times of persecution will "hide" their most stunning and important ideas "between the lines" of their works. In this way, the authors avoid death, and also provide the deepest insight to only those intelligent enough to find it in the texts. Pay special attention to Strauss's chapter on the "Guide for the Perplexed:" not only is it an interesting read, but one can see Strauss himself using some of the same techniques that he claims authors of the past used. It's all a matter of trying to understand what he truly wants to tell us.
How to write between the lines.......2000-06-16
The title essay is a masterpiece I read once a month in the course writing journalism by day and reading of political comedy by night. By day it is extremely helpful keeping my job in a political environment not particularly conducive to complete freedom of expression at times. By night, coupled with Strauss's superb "Socrates and Aristophanes" is has proved a wonderful tool for unveiling meaning in Aristophanes, Rabelais, Cervantes, Sterne, Hasek, Garcia-Marquez, Kundera and the rest of the European comic tradition. I think his idea of a literary criticism "between the lines" based on ancient rhetoricians would be an extremely useful study for younger graduate students to follow - whenever such studies become possible again. The rest of the essays apply the theory of reading between the lines in interesting limit cases of persecution of political philosophy. They may lead the general reader to try such authors as Maimonides and Spinoza. Can't speak for specialists, not being one.
Books:
- Blind Eye: The Terrifying Story Of A Doctor Who Got Away With Murder
- Blue Like Jazz: Nonreligious Thoughts on Christian Spirituality
- Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon
- Candida Albican Yeast-Free Cookbook, The : How Good Nutrition Can Help Fight the Epidemic of Yeast-Related Diseases
- Carry a Big Stick: The Uncommon Heroism of Theodore Roosevelt (Leaders in Action Series)
- Cirque Du Freak #12: Sons of Destiny: Book 12 in the Saga of Darren Shan (Cirque Du Freak: the Saga of Darren Shan)
- Civil War On Sunday (Magic Tree House #21)
- Collected Papers on Mathematics, Logic, and Philosophy
- Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity
- Critique of Pure Reason
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Garde Manger, The Art and Craft of the Cold Kitchen
- Water Dog: Revolutionary Rapid Training Method
- Mixing Colors: 3. Dry Techniques
- The 10 Things You Should Know About the Creation vs. Evolution Debate
- The Killing of a President: The Complete Photographic Record of the Assassination, the Conspiracy, a
- This Side Of Paradise
- The North Pole Was Here: Puzzles and Perils at the Top of the World
- On the Job: How to Make It in the Real World of Work
- Seven Fat Years
- The Messenger of Magnolia Street: A Novel
The Courtier and the Heretic: Leibniz, Spinoza, and the Fate of God in the Modern World
Maimonides (Jewish Encounters)
The Wicked Son: Anti-Semitism, Self-hatred, and the Jews (Jewish Encounters)
The Life of David
Incompleteness: The Proof and Paradox of Kurt Godel (Great Discoveries)
