Book Description
The Statesman is Plato's neglected political work, but it is crucial for an understanding of the development of his political thinking. It continues themes from the Republic, particularly the importance of knowledge as entitlement to rule. But there are also changes: Plato has altered his view of the moral psychology of the citizen, and revised his position on the role of law and institutions. This new translation makes accessible the dialogue to students of political thought and the introduction outlines the philosophical and historical backgrounds.
Customer Reviews:
Poor translation and worse interpretation of an important work.......2006-11-22
Plato's Statesman is an important but extremely difficult dialogue. Don't buy this edition of it. The advanced student of Plato will simply find that Robin Waterfield's very readable translation is not close enough to the Greek for serious study. The beginner, on the other hand, will probably have his understanding of Plato's thinking permanently stunted by the inane, arrogant, and innacurate commentary that Julia Annas provides in the introduction and copious footnotes throughout. Her interpretation reflects two very problematic methodological biases: (1) the assumption that the Eleatic Visitor, the dialogue's main speaker, is simply a mouth-piece for Plato's own views, and (2) the certainty, to put it bluntly, that Plato was a moron. If, as Annas seems to contend, Plato was really "unaware" of the glaring gaps in the argument that he has the Visitor present, then he ought to be relegated to the trash-heap of intellectual history, post-haste.
One does not need to revere Plato - or even agree with him - in order to read his works with an open mind. For anyone interested in doing this, I recommend instead Seth Bernardete's translation, published as "Plato's Statesman: Part II of the Being of the Beautiful." Although it is more difficult to read, this difficulty is a fair reflection of the depth and complexity of Plato's challenging political ideas.
Book Description
The Being of the Beautiful collects Plato’s three dialogues, the Theaetetus, Sophist, and Statesmen, in which Socrates formulates his conception of philosophy while preparing for trial. Renowned classicist Seth Benardete’s careful translations clearly illuminate the dramatic and philosophical unity of these dialogues and highlight Plato’s subtle interplay of language and structure. Extensive notes and commentaries, furthermore, underscore the trilogy’s motifs and relationships.
“The translations are masterpieces of literalness. . . . They are honest, accurate, and give the reader a wonderful sense of the Greek.”—Drew A. Hyland, Review of Metaphysics
Customer Reviews:
Brilliant.......2004-11-11
Benardete's translation is very literal. His commentaries on each of the dialogues is insightful and his introduction that is a commentary on the major hippias is incredibly helpful.
Book Description
Theaetetus, the Sophist, and the Statesman are a trilogy of Platonic dialogues that show Socrates formulating his conception of philosophy as he prepares the defense for his trial. Originally published together as The Being of the Beautiful, these translations can be read separately or as a trilogy. Each includes an introduction, extensive notes, and comprehensive commentary that examines the trilogy's motifs and relationships.
"Seth Benardete is one of the very few contemporary classicists who combine the highest philological competence with a subtlety and taste that approximate that of the ancients. At the same time, he as set himself the entirely modern hermeneutical task of uncovering what the ancients preferred to keep veiled, of making explicit what they indicated, and hence...of showing the naked ugliness of artificial beauty."—Stanley Rose, Graduate Faculty Philosophy Journal
Seth Benardete (1930-2001) was professor of classics at New York University. He was the author or translator of many books, most recently The Argument of the Action, Plato's "Laws," and Plato's "Symposium," all published by the University of Chicago Press.
Customer Reviews:
Plato's most disturbing political dialogue.......2004-11-12
This book, the culmination of Benardete's masterful translation of what Jacob Klein was pleased to call `Plato's Trilogy,' includes not only a translation of `The Statesman' but also a superb commentary with notes. (Benardete, btw, is something of a rarity these days, a `non-political' student of Leo Strauss.' This `trilogy' (as Klein would say) in question consists of 3 dialogues; Theaetetus, Sophist, Statesman. But, as Benardete points out, the Sophist and Statesman belong together as a pair. The singular appearance of the Eleatic Stranger - some translate `Stranger' as Visitor - and the near silence of our Socrates, the inability (or unwillingness) of Plato to give us a third dialogue (as seemingly `promised' at 217a) called `The Philosopher,' all this points to the unique pairing of Sophist and Statesman. Benardete also points out that these 2 dialogues are the only ones with specific and "explicit allusions" to each other.
In turning away from the Sophist and turning towards the Statesman we are leaving the rarefied heights (and obscure depths) of theory, and its imitators, for the `lowly' everyday world of political/social life. Indeed this `turn' can perhaps be said to be foreshadowed in the Sophist (at 247e) when the Stranger makes a remarkably `Nietzschean' definition, "I'm proposing, in short, a definition (boundary mark): `The things which are' are not anything but power." Being as Power! Plato is not Nietzsche, however. Plato always hedges. The `proposal' is perhaps only made to convince some so-called `improved' materialists to leave their `artless' materialism. But later, when speaking to some `friends of the forms,' who are `idealists' like Socrates, the logic of this dialectic forces the Stranger (249a) to say, "But, by Zeus, what of this? Shall we easily be persuaded that motion and life and soul and intelligence are truly not present to that which perfectly is, and its not even living, not even thinking, but august and pure, without mind, it stands motionless." Thus materialists and Idealists are `forced' to concede that being is the ability to affect and be affected.
Later, at 249c-d, the Stranger will speak of this arrangement in such a manner that it reminds us of compromise between two warring parties. But compromise, and the seeming impossibility of enduring compromise, brings us towards the very heart of the Statesman. Socrates is going to die. (It is tragically fitting, perhaps almost necessary, that Benardete ends the final installment of his commentary on the Triptych Theaetetus/Sophist/Statesman with the words "Socrates is about to go on trial.") Death, the threat of death, hovers above these pages as it does around political life. "The Statesman is more profound than the Sophist" Benardete (p III.142) correctly reminds us. It is profound for several reasons. Benardete brings at this point to our attention just one: "Virtue consists in the strife of the beautiful with the beautiful." The metaphor/image/standard for morality in the Sophist - health - is replaced in the Statesman by beauty. ...Perhaps it is true that `we have beauty so we don't die of the truth' as Nietzsche somewhere remarked. But he fails to mention that we now die of beauty instead of truth.
The two types of beauty that are at war are courage and moderation. "Dialectics, it seems, is the practice of resolving the strife between moderation and courage." Benardete, I think correctly, indicates there is, and can be, no final reconciliation between them. Indeed, it seems there is no natural mean between them. "Nature might herself be neutral, but her apparitions are always skewed and cluster around either one of two partial kinds." Men and women are emblematic images of courage and moderation, the ever-present reminder that they can never simply be the same.
But the City can, in theory, also be either moderate or courageous. A city of the first sort, "moved by the spirit of accommodation, such a city ends up enslaved, its unwilled and inadvertent cowardice hardly separable from its stupidity." A city of the second type, "in contrast, looks at every other city as its enemy. Its' insight is too keen. The otherness of the stranger [foreigner] is for it so absolute that it must be constantly engaged in war, until it brings upon itself either its enslavement or destruction." This last, the beautiful error of courage, could only not be an error if the courageous city never lost. "The Stranger disregards the possibility that such a city might never fail and thus achieve a universal empire." But this is the beautiful modern dream of Kojeve and his universal homogenous state; it is not the dream of the Stranger or, I think, Benardete and Plato.
Not that a universal state is, for Benardete at least, impossible. "But apart from the difficulty that it [the courageous city] would then be forced to turn against itself if it were not to give up its own nature, the myth [of the Reversed Cosmos, 268e] has taught us that God alone is capable of universal rule, and even he is periodically forced to abandon control. Excessive moderation then, is more a danger to the city than the hubris of courage. The nature of things is more disposed to check the tyranny of a part over the whole than the enslavement of a part to a part. We perhaps might believe that the Stranger in this regard is a shade too hopeful." It seems that while Benardete thinks the Universal State, ala Kojeve, is technically possible, it would be a calamity. It would not be entirely an exaggeration if we were to observe that the major difference between `non-political' or philosophical Straussians and those Straussians actively involved in politics is that the latter no longer believe that the Universal State is necessarily a calamity.
Be that as it may, Benardete points out that while the city executes, exiles or disgraces those courageous natures that oppose it, the moderate it merely enslaves. This only seems, btw, to contradict what Benardete said earlier about moderation being a greater danger. The greater danger to the city qua city is moderation; the most dangerous individuals, however, are always courageous. "The city cannot afford excessive courage; it cannot dispense with excessive moderation." But the binding of "moderation and courage, which the paradigm of weaving [279e] implies, cannot be accomplished politically."
Indeed, we turn from the political to the biological and psychological. Intermarriage (of the moderate and courageous) and education (for common opinion) replace (or augment) pure politics, as the proper form of the paradigm of weaving. "The Stranger's solutuion, then, really amounts to this: the true King assigns the members of courageous families to the city's army, and the members of moderate families to its lawcourts." Benardete doesn't here mention it but in this manner the City itself, the institutions of the city itself, are forced to mimic the Guardians we meet in the Republic; they are fierce to enemies but gentle towards friends. Benardete then observes that "the Stranger does not even hint at which families are to supply the rhetoricians of the city." Or which family supplies the weavers or true Kings.
Benardete fills the penultimate paragraph with observations on how it is very difficult to get the members of the different families (courageous and moderate) to love each other. One can convince them that the `mixed' marriages are best but one cannot make a married couple into lover and beloved by education alone. "Insofar as Eros is love of the beautiful, and not identical with sexual desire, these most suitable marriages are against the grain of Eros." Each `family' sees itself only as beautiful. But the city requires that each family marry its non-beautiful other. "And, likewise, since the divine bond of the city consists of opinions about the beautiful, just and good, which are for the wise statesman nothing but prescriptions for the health of the city, the city through the law incorporates in its ruling families as little satisfaction of the requirements of pure mind as of the needs of Eros." Thus the laws of the city satisfy neither the mind nor the eros of citizens. ...But the city is healthy; and the citizens bodies are protected and sated.
"The law, said the Stranger, is like a stupid and willful human being. We now know what this means. The law combines the vice of moderation with the vice of courage and thus passes itself off as the perfect weaving into the web of justice of the beautiful with the beautiful. But the true synergy of mind and Eros in soul was the impure dialectics of Socrates, and Socrates is about to go on trial." By `impure' dialectics Benardete means a dialectic that is a mixture of moderation and courage. The philosopher Socrates is about to die so the city can live. The city, or, if you prefer, its laws, are an inverted philosopher. The city and its laws are stupid and willful, while the philosopher is both moderate and courageous. ...In any city Socrates would die.
Average customer rating:
|
Form and Good in Plato's Eleatic Dialogues: The Parmenides, Theatetus, Sophist, and Statesman
Kenneth Dorter
Manufacturer: University of California Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 General
| Ancient
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Criticism & Theory
| History & Criticism
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Ethics & Morality
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Greek & Roman
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Ancient
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0520083318 |
Book Description
In this innovative analysis, Plato's four eleatic dialogues are treated as a continuous argument. In Kenneth Dorter's view, Plato reconsiders the theory of forms propounded in his earlier dialogues and through an examination of the theory's limitations reaffirms and proves it essential. Contradicted are both those philosophers who argue that Plato espoused his theory of forms uncritically and those who argue that Plato in some sense rejected the theory and moved toward the categorical analysis developed byAristotle. Dorter's reexamination of Plato's insights implies an important new direction for modern philosophical inquiry.
Book Description
In this book an eminent philosopher presents a rich and provocative analysis of the Statesman, one of Plato`s most challenging works. Stanley Rosen contends that the main theme of this dialogue is defining the art of politics and the degree to which political experience is subject to the rule of sound judgment (phron_sis) and to technical construction (techn).
Customer Reviews:
Theoria, Phronesis, Techne, Nomos and Circumstance.......2006-08-30
This is an extremely profound meditation on the failure of Theory and Practice to ever sync up; the Eleatic Stranger turns from celestial Theory (i.e., Philosophical Speculation, Science as Wisdom) to earthly practice; from the Ideas to techne (merely technical 'theory', i.e., a craft). Man is no longer the erotic lover of the Ideas, but rather the fabricated animal, or, the animal in need of fabrication to be complete--to be civilized. Humans, of course have a nature, as Rosen points out, "to be partially constructed is already to possess a nature." But we are not natural like deers or wolves. The rules of civilization are imposed. But there are no (certain) rules regarding the creation of civilization. Thus there is no foolproof technique, no adequate Theory, to construct a civilization given an unknown future. In other words, the people and their politicians, and perhaps even our philosophers, are faking it. In a world in which the rulers are guessing as much as the ruled, the question becomes who, in each instance, guesses best. So, who can be trusted with the fabrication of civilization?
Well, since each case will need to be judged on its own unique merits, each action, though grounded in tradition and/or Theory, will be based, at best, on an informed guess. There is no science of politics because there is no science of the future. "Because phronesis [right judgment] rules without laws but by making a judgement that is unique in each case, or at least determined in each case by the particular circumstances that cannot be known in advance, it is impossible for the Stranger or anyone else to give a logos, in other words, a detailed description or account, of phronesis or its decisions." Or, in plain English, political knowledge (as Science) is impossible, which is why the Stranger doesn't bother entertaining questions to which answers don't exist. But not anyone can rule. Plato, and his philosophical epigoni, will tell `Noble Lies', what we can perhaps refer to as myth and ideology, in order to care for the human herd.
Why? Because without someone defending the human herd from the elements (seasons and storms), beasts (wolves), and, as we all know, other human herds (barbarians), humanity itself may well cease to be civilized. But since there is no Science of the future why turn to philosophers ('True Kings')? Because the people, even the peoples' leaders, know less, and are worse, than philosophers. Just as ship captains or doctors know more about the sciences of navigation and health, so too philosophers know more about humanity than the average citizen, or, for that matter, the average king. So, perhaps philosophers know more than the people, but are they better? The Eleatic Stranger tells the story of an assembly that decides it "will no longer submit to this abusive conduct [of captains and doctors] but will ourselves legislate about medicine and navigation, whether or not we know anything about these matters." Of course, as Rosen points out, the story is a parody of democracy, but all parodies point to something real.
The reason that the people (i.e., non-philosophers) can't rule is not merely their lack of technical expertise--remember, the Stranger is not denying the utility of technical skill, only its all-encompassing efficacy--but their unruly souls. Even if the people were technically competent they would still be unfit for rule because of their lack of self-control, their slavery to passion. This is why philosophers are better. Rosen will note, "it is extremely odd that, precisely while showing the unruliness of the multitude, the Stranger talks as if it were due to a lack of technical knowledge. This is a thesis of the scientific Enlightenment." Rosen is right to draw our attention to the modernity of the Stranger, at times he speaks as if he had read Condorcet or Adam Smith, so strong is his certainty that the human situation is manipulable! Rosen's point, however, is that once you know that the people have unruly souls it becomes irrelevant how much skill the people have, or can learn. Knowledge doesn't make bad people better; it makes them dangerous. Thus the people's leaders, with their 'knowledge', may be the most dangerous of all.
Let us recapitulate, phronesis is unattainable, or, what in the long run amounts to the same thing, unpredictably attainable. We never know when we will be graced with a philosopher. Technos is within reach of a few, but, since it is not wisdom, it is merely an ersatz phronesis. Those that aren't truly wise rely on (a merely technical) theory. But even technos will never be within reach of the many. Now, that is why we have Nomos, or law, which is a cheapened form of a debased wisdom (technos). Rosen tells us that, "[the Stranger] begins by assuming that the laws should be changed whenever circumstances make it reasonable to do so." Since everything changes, laws that once were useful, and therefore good, become enormities. The greatest enormity being that once the people have been taught, perhaps we should say trained, in a certain way of life, it becomes almost impossible to change them, to turn them in another direction. Again, phronesis is the best, but since philosophers aren't always around when you need them, we resort to technos, but since merely technical theories and their rules are subject to continual revision, with said revisions not always either teachable or an improvement, nomos (law) becomes our last resort, but, as Rosen observes, "conservatism is at best only a tactic," a miserable war of attrition until a philosopher or a merely technical ideology (or myth) appears with the knowledge or force necessary to cause change. It is interesting to note that Rosen here seems to understand philosophical conservativism as permanent revolution.
So, philosophers tell noble lies, myths and/or ideologies in order to make civilization possible, which, perhaps, is nothing more than putting off the day of ruin. As Rosen says, "A myth is a story, it is a fiction, something that is not true. And yet this untruth, which we hesitate to call a falsehood, is able to communicate deep truths." One is forced to wonder if myths do communicate deep truths, or simply cause deep truths to be embodied, or lived, by the people. The Stranger, when choosing metaphors, will compare the craft of the statesman to weavers, doctors and gymnasts, crafts that operate on the body and its behavior. As Rosen says, "Politics is oriented toward the body; but philosophy, or the genuine art of statesmanship, is oriented toward the soul." One is tempted to ask if philosophy cares for the citizens' bodies because they have no souls? This would go a long way in explaining why modern philosophy, with a clear conscience, turns humans into mere artifacts. Humans are things anyway. Or, as Nietzsche said, "We are entering the phase of the modesty of consciousness." It amazes us that to this day one can meet people who read those words as libratory! The coming practitioners of human husbandry will know how to evaluate those words far better than we do...
But this is the difference according to Rosen, between ancient philosophy and modern philosophy (i.e., ideology). Ancient phronesis defended the human body against nature, beasts and men in order to create a space in which philosophical care for the soul was possible, or at least available. Ancient philosophical interventions were defensive. Modern philosophy (i.e., ideology) has gone on the attack and wishes to change the nature of both man and world. Thus we can say that the 'right' of ancient philosophers to rule rests on their self-control. Phronesis rests on moderation, not the 'philosophical mania' of Theory. While modern philosophy cum ideology rests on the 'philosophical' mania of a merely technical theory.
...But what, exactly, is the difference between an 'offensive' and 'defensive' philosophical construction, if as the Eleatic Stranger seems to maintain, there is no erotic vision of the Ideas vis-à-vis phronesis? If Theory is irrelevant to human action, as the Stranger also seems to maintain, then the difference between offensive and defensive philosophical constructions is entirely circumstantial...
Perhaps there are some problems that do not have answers. The richness of Rosen's analysis can only be hinted at in a review like this. There is utterly no edification at all in this book.
a masterful guide through a suprisingly nuanced dialogue.......2006-08-18
Rosen is among the best Plato commentators available. His text on the Statesman carries the same strengths and weaknesses of his other book-length discussions of Platonic dialogues: his close attention to many seemingly minor details often makes the flow of an argument within a single chapter difficult to follow, but this same attention to detail places him well beyond commentators who build an interpretation based only on details convenient to their predisposed take on the Platonic corpus.
Further, even at points where the reader may have difficulty following how certain points have relevance to Rosen's over-all interpretation of the dialogue, there are suprisingly insightful comments that connect the dialogue in question to other important works and authors.
Book Description
Plato, the great philosopher of Athens, was born in 427
BCE. In early manhood an admirer of Socrates, he later founded the famous school of philosophy in the grove Academus. Much else recorded of his life is uncertain; that he left Athens for a time after Socrates' execution is probable; that later he went to Cyrene, Egypt, and Sicily is possible; that he was wealthy is likely; that he was critical of 'advanced' democracy is obvious. He lived to be 80 years old. Linguistic tests including those of computer science still try to establish the order of his extant philosophical dialogues, written in splendid prose and revealing Socrates' mind fused with Plato's thought.
In Laches, Charmides, and Lysis, Socrates and others discuss separate ethical conceptions. Protagoras, Ion, and Meno discuss whether righteousness can be taught. In Gorgias, Socrates is estranged from his city's thought, and his fate is impending. The Apology (not a dialogue), Crito, Euthyphro, and the unforgettable Phaedo relate the trial and death of Socrates and propound the immortality of the soul. In the famous Symposium and Phaedrus, written when Socrates was still alive, we find the origin and meaning of love. Cratylus discusses the nature of language. The great masterpiece in ten books, the Republic, concerns righteousness (and involves education, equality of the sexes, the structure of society, and abolition of slavery). Of the six so-called dialectical dialogues Euthydemus deals with philosophy; metaphysical Parmenides is about general concepts and absolute being; Theaetetus reasons about the theory of knowledge. Of its sequels, Sophist deals with not-being; Politicus with good and bad statesmanship and governments; Philebus with what is good. The Timaeus seeks the origin of the visible universe out of abstract geometrical elements. The unfinished Critias treats of lost Atlantis. Unfinished also is Plato's last work of the twelve books of Laws (Socrates is absent from it), a critical discussion of principles of law which Plato thought the Greeks might accept.
The Loeb Classical Library edition of Plato is in twelve volumes.
Average customer rating:
|
Metaphysics and Method in Plato's Statesman
Kenneth M. Sayre
Manufacturer: Cambridge University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
General
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Greek & Roman
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Political Science
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Greece
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Nonfiction
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
ASIN: 0521866081 |
Book Description
At the beginning of his Metaphysics, Aristotle attributed several strange-sounding theses to Plato. Generations of Plato scholars have assumed that these could not be found in the dialogues. In heated arguments, they have debated the significance of these claims, some arguing that they constituted an ‘unwritten teaching’ and others maintaining that Aristotle was mistaken in attributing them to Plato. In his previous book-length study on Plato’s late ontology, Kenneth Sayre demonstrated that, despite differences in terminology, these claims correspond to themes developed by Plato in the Parmenides and the Philebus. In this study, he shows how this correspondence can be extended to key, but previously obscure, passages in the Statesman. He also examines the interpretative consequences for other sections of that dialogue, particularly those concerned with the practice of dialectical inquiry.
Average customer rating:
|
Method and Politics in Plato's Statesman (Cambridge Classical Studies)
M. S. Lane
Manufacturer: Cambridge University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
Constitutions
| Government
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Greek & Roman
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Political
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Ancient
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Political Science
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Political Theory
| Political Science
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
History & Surveys
| Philosophy
| Humanities
| New & Used Textbooks
| Stores
| Books
General
| Philosophy
| Humanities
| New & Used Textbooks
| Stores
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
ASIN: 0521582296 |
Book Description
This book is a philosophical analysis of Plato's dialogue the Statesman. Dr. Lane finds that rather than being transitional between the Republic and the Laws, the Statesman deserves a special place of its own--the dialogue emerging as a text that proposes a new conception of knowledge, authority, and the relationship between them. This investigation transforms our understanding of the Statesman and its fellow dialogues.
Average customer rating:
|
Myth, Metaphysics and Dialectic in Plato's Statesman
David A. White
Manufacturer: Ashgate Pub Co
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
General
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
History & Surveys
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Metaphysics
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Political
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Ancient
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Political Science
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0754657795 |
Books:
- Polio: An American Story
- Ready, Set, Grow!: A What's Happening to My Body? Book for Younger Girls
- Recipes for Life After Weight-Loss Surgery: Delicious Dishes for Nourishing the New You (Healthy Living Cookbooks)
- Red Scarf Girl (rpkg): A Memoir of the Cultural Revolution
- Roman Dusk: A Novel of the Count Saint-Germain (St. Germain)
- Rome Sweet Home: Our Journey to Catholicism
- Same Kind of Different as Me: A Modern-Day Slave, an International Art Dealer, and the Unlikely Woman Who Bound Them Together
- Second Acts: Creating the Life You Really Want, Building the Career You Truly Desire
- Simone de Beauvoir: A Biography
- Spectroscopic Methods in Bioinorganic Chemistry (Acs Symposium Series)
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- The Next Global Stage: The Challenges and Opportunities in Our Borderless World
- If You Give a Mouse a Cookie
- Birthday Wishes
- Exchanging Our Country Marks: The Transformation of African Identities in the Colonial and Antebellu
- Hardcore Zen: Punk Rock, Monster Movies, & the Truth about Reality
- Rescue
- In the Absence of the Sacred: The Failure of Technology and the Survival of the Indian Nations
- 2007/8 Guide to Association Web Sites: For Recruiters and Job Seekers
- Competitiveness Through Strategic Success
- Girls From Da Hood 2
The Republic (Penguin Classics)
The Laws of Plato
Sophist
Early Greek Political Thought from Homer to the Sophists (Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought)
The Laws (Penguin Classics)
