Product Description
Sir Anthony Kenny's engaging new multi-volume history of Western philosophy now advances into the modern era. The Rise of Modern Philosophy captures the fascinating story of the emergence, from the early sixteenth to the early nineteenth century, of the great ideas and intellectual systems that shaped modern thought.
Kenny introduces us to some of the world's most original and influential thinkers and helps us gain an understanding of their famous works. The great minds we meet include René Descartes, traditionally seen as the founder of modern philosophy; the great British philosophers Hobbes, Locke, and Hume; continental thinkers such as Spinoza, Liebniz, and Hegel; and the towering figure of Immanuel Kant, who perhaps more than any other made philosophy what it is today.Kenny first tells the story of modern philosophy chronologically: his lively, accessible narrative brings the philosophers to life and fills in the historical and intellectual background to their work. It is ideal as the first thing to read for someone new to this wonderfully creative period. Kenny then backtracks to look closely at each of the main areas of philosophical exploration in this period: knowledge and understanding; the nature of the physical universe; metaphysics (the most fundamental questions there are about existence); mind and soul; the nature and content of morality; political philosophy; and God.
The book also features many intriguing and beautiful illustrations which evoke the human and social side of philosophy. Anyone who is interested in the evolution of modern thought will find this a book a treasure. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Good Addition to Good Series
`The Rise of Modern Philosophy' is the third of four volumes in Anthony Kenny's `A New History of Western Philosophy' recently published by Oxford University Press. For those unfamiliar with the author, Kenny is a leading contemporary scholar that has previously written noteworthy texts on Aquinas, Descartes, and Wittgenstein amongst others.It is the second text in the series that I have read (I previously read Volume 1).

On the positive side it is the best single-author overview of Western philosophy of which I am familiar, more readable than Copleston and more evenhanded than Russell. Kenny is a talented writer with an impressive knowledge of the Western tradition, able to tell the story of philosophy is an integrated and insightful manner.As is becoming popular in introductory texts Kenny blends a chronological and subject matter approach, over viewing the period chronologically in the first third of the book then looking at specific subjects in more detail in the latter part (e.g. ethics, epistemology, metaphysics).This would seem to be a helpful approach to the newcomer; providing some important historic context before delving into specific material in detail.

On the less positive side, while I feel Kenny's work deserves a wide audience I am uncertain if it will readily find one. Those with sufficient background to follow the discussion may pass on the book, while those unacquainted with philosophy may find that the text moves too fast and somewhat opaque.Indeed given the tremendous amount of great thinkers in this period and the limited space available some important thinkers get rather short shrift (e.g. Hegel).Finally, from a physical perspective the paper is glossy, giving it a `fluffy' feel and making it difficult to read it certain lightening conditions (reflection).

Overall, this is a good work by an excellent philosopher. Despite some drawbacks it is a helpful book and I will likely pick up the remaining two volumes.

a fair work, but not for beginners
at a bit over 300 pages, this survey of philosophy encompasses roughly from the 16 th century on up to Hegel in the early 19 th century.the first 3 chapters are a survey of the thinkers of this time frame that made important marks on the philosophical scene.the rest of the chapters are broken up into themes taking a look at a particular concept; knowledge, physics, metaphsics, god, ethics, etc.,and how it was dealt with in the time frame considered.

this is a good book, a solid study, but it is not for beginners.Kenny knows his subject, but while he may have been aiming for a helpful survey, he seems to assume too many things of the reader. for someone coming to philosophical study new, this would be a rather arduous book to work through.for those already having a fair deal of philosophical study under their belts, this book is a well done tour and refresher of many of the main contours of philosophical thought for the time period it deals with.

Early Modern Philosophy
Kenny's books are as accurate as they are perceptive. This is no rush through the early stages of modern philosophy, but an accurate summary of what each of the major figures had to say, and then a perceptive analysis of the philosophical consequences. Kenny makes reading the history of philosophy great fun. ... Read more

Product Description
Philosopher Roger Scruton offers a wide-ranging perspective on philosophy, from logic to aesthetics, written in a lively and engaging way that is sure to stimulate debate. Rather than producing a survey of an academic discipline, Scruton reclaims philosophy for worldly concerns. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (11)

A master articulation of the state of philosophy
Whether you agree or not with his politics, Scruton has done an indisputably great job in this book surveying, expressing, and relating all the various currents in modern philosophy. He is especially sensitive to the modern divide of the science-oriented, analytic, anglophone tradition from the humanities-oriented, phenomenological, continental tradition, appreciating and criticizing each in turn. And it's an absolute delight to read, which is saying a lot for modern philosophy!

500 Repetitive Pages
I felt that all I learned in the 500 page summary was about Frege, Kant, Strawson, Descartes, Wittgenstein, Aristotle, and Russell.Maybe they were "Modern" once.One page on Existentialism.A couple pages on Nietzsche.One page on Deconstructionism under the the "Devil" chapter.Hardly anything on Marx.The chapter on the Soul never mentions immortality or God, just the mind. The chapter on Freedom never mentions Fromm.He mentions "American Psycho", but not Kristeva or Paglia.

An Excellent Overview of Philosophical Thought
"Modern Philosophy" provides an excellent overview of philosophical thought. Ideas are organized thematically and relationally - not chronologically and hierarchically. The author employs a dialectical and evenhanded approach in which views and opposing views are presented, analyzed and synthesized. The reader is rewarded with many insights and "aha" moments.

The book is well-written and very engaging. It is highly recommended for the individual who is seeking a thought-provoking survey of philosophy.

Among the Very Best Overviews
This books leaves me with mixed emotions. On the positive side, it's the only book I know of its kind, covering almost every topic of modern philosophy. And, for the most part, it is highly accessible and remarkably clear (philosophy of language can be opaque, but that's inherent in the field). On the con side, not enough attention is paid to ethics and politics (Scruton himself is somewhat of a conservative/communitarian), and the topic of aesthetics could have been more informative. Another con is that Scruton tells the reader in advance that his own opinion will seep into the discussion, but that he'll designate it as such. Well, yes, his opinion does creep in, but it's rarely distinguished as his own. Yet, for all these quibbles, I cannot imagine a better introduction to the discipline of philosophy as it is practiced in Anglo-American circles - but without the arcane and often obtuse language. It is remarkably broad in scope, accurate in depiction, clearly mapped, and fairly thorough for an overview. If one wants an introduction into how Angophone philosophy is practiced, I cannot recommend a better book.

Very Useful for Intermediate Students
I purchased Scruton's survey as an first-year undergraduate student who was eager to learn just about everything there is to learn about philosophy, and it proved very useful to me throughout my undergraduate career.And it's heartening to flip back through this book and see that I've actually learned a good deal in time I've spent studying philosophy.Before long I may know enough to write a book of this sort myself--not that I have the patience or talent for exposition that would be required to do so.

The aim of this book is to provide a synoptic overview of the concerns and central arguments of philosophy from the seventeenth century to the present.It covers, at least briefly, just about everything that modern philosophers talk about, it displays broad historical erudition, it provides the reader with a sense of how the concerns of contemporary philosophers connect to the history of modern philosophers, and its extensive reading guide gives the reader some helpful suggestions about where to go in the literature for further work on the topics discussed here.It is, moreover, quite good at introducing the basic issues and positions, both of contemporary philosophers and their early modern counterparts, in metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of language, and philosophy of mind.And, although this isn't intended as a work of history, Scruton manages to present most of the major ideas of the most significant figures in modern philosophy (e.g. Descartes, Hume, Kant, Hegel, Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, et al.).

Scruton's subject matter here is broad, to say the least.He discusses just about every subject about which philosophers have had anything to say in the last four hundred years.This book has sections about God, about free will, about morality, about politics, about science, about knowledge and belief, about minds and their relations to bodies, about language and its meaning, about space and time, about mathematics, and about quite a few more things.Indeed, there's simply too much covered here for Scruton to connect all the material and provide much structure to this book.So it's perfectly fine to treat this book as something like a reference work, and to dip into whatever section one finds interesting while ignoring much of the rest of the book.But, for people with little background in philosophy, it would help to begin by reading the fifteen or so chapters straight through.These chapters, which comprise roughly the first third of the book, outline the basic historical and contemporary philosophical ideas that the reader needs to understand most of the rest of the book, and they constitute a pretty good introduction to the material in metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of language, and philosophy of mind that you need to know to understand the rest of the material here.

Despite Scruton's professed intentions here, however, this text is probably too complex and too compressed for the absolute beginner.Even working with five hundred pages of space, he's forced to cram quite a bit into a short space.Scruton acquits himself well, of course, but it's simply not possible to explain these things as thoroughly as beginners are probably going to need them explained.He tends to cover in twenty pages what most introductory books cover in two hundred.And while this makes his book an invaluable resource of information about philosophy, it also precludes the sort of patient exposition that might be necessary in presenting this material to beginning students of the subject.

I'd recommend this book to people with some background in philosophy who'd like a single-book overview of the subject, and to intermediate students looking for a comprehensive reference work that you can actually read.And if you're unusually ambitious, you might try this as an introduction to philosophy.If you can master everything in this book, you'll almost have the equivalent of an excellent undergraduate education in philosophy.(You'll just need to learn some formal logic, and it wouldn't hurt to learn some additional material in ethics and political philosophy since Scruton's coverage of these areas is somewhat more superficial than his coverage of metaphysics and epistemology.) ... Read more

Product Description
This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery. ... Read more

Product Description

Product Description
Part of the Blackwell Readings in the History of Philosophy series, this survey of late modern philosophy focuses on the key texts and philosophers of the period whose beliefs changed the course of western thought.

• Gathers together the key texts from the most significant and influential philosophers of the late modern era to provide a thorough introduction to the period.
  
• Features the writings of Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Leibniz, Kant, Rousseau, Bentham and other leading thinkers.
  
• Examines such topics as empiricism, rationalism, and the existence of God.
  
• Readings are accompanied by expert commentary from the editors, who are leading scholars in the field.

Customer Reviews (1)

Where is the "Commentary"?
I was looking forward to lengthy commentaries on "essentail readings in late modern philosophy."This is a good compilation of philosophical texts from the late modern era, e.g., Part I-Empiricism: John Locke, George Berkeley, David Hume; Part 2-Critics of Empiricism: G. W. Leibniz, Samuel Clarke, Thomas Reid; Part 3-Kant's Critique of Rationalism and Empiricism; Part 4-Args. for the Existence of God: Samuel Clarke, William Paley, David Hume, Immanuel Kant; Part 5-Political Philosophy: John Locke, David Hume, Jean-Jacque Rousseau; Part 6-Moral Philosophy: Samuel Clarke, Davide Hume, Richard Price, Adam Smith, Immanuel Kant, Thomas Reid, Jeremy Bentham, Mary Wollstonecraft.While these are, indeed, essential readings, WHERE IS THE COMMENTARY ON THESE READINGS as the subtitle suggests: "Essentail Readings WITH COMMENTARY"? (emphasis mine).Trained as a biblical scholar, maybe I was expecting commentary that philosophers do not do (I had in mind the kind of commentary that one does on the letters of Paul or the gospels).The only thing that I can see commentary-wise are brief introductions to each Part, but this is really nothing unlike what you might find in a college primary reading text book.I was expecting detailed commentary AFTER EACH reading, but you do not get that here.You only get an introduction to each Part, then the readings, and that's it.No detailed expository commentary that discusses each reading and what each author means by what he says and why.That is why I give this, and the others in this series, only 2 stars.Again: WHERE IN BLAZES IS THE COMMENTARY?It ain't here.Or is it, and is this what philosophy profs call "commentary"? ... Read more

Product Description
The leading anthology of its kind, this volume provides the key works of seven major philosophers, along with a rich selection of associated texts by other leading thinkers of the period thoughtfully chosen to enhance the reader s understanding of modern philosophy and its relationship to the natural sciences of the time. Texts are provided in their entirety or in substantive selections.

Enhanced in its second edition by the addition of selections from Montaigne and Reid, as well as judiciously expanded selections from the works of Newton and Hume, Modern Philosophy remains the preeminent text for the teaching of modern philosophy. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

good collection
there's not much to say about this because it's a collection but they did a good job at picking out the philosophers from that era.

Great Guy Books was great
Because of a change of class, we were unable to use this book, but working with GreatGuyBooks on the return was great.Thanks again.

Great Resource:
I found Ariew's anthology of modern philosophical texts to be very helpful. The compliation of various philosophers is concise and well put together. One thing I would comment on is the binding of the book, I wish the book was made in such a way that it was easier to preserve. However, the content included does justice to the beauty of modern philosophy (albeit some major texts from Spinoza's Ethics were excluded). It is a fantastic read that includes major actors in modern philosophy whos ideas acted more as stimuli to the major philosophers of the era-thus Bacon, Galileo, and Newton affecting philosophers such as Descartes Hobbes, Leibniz, Hume and Kant. I would suggest this as a beginners anthology to those interested in the history and development of philosophy in the modern era.

Comprehensive and inexpensive anthology
I used this anthology in the late 1990's for a course I was teaching in the history of modern philosophy.I will be teaching the same course in the Spring of 2009 and I will be using the same textbook.It is comprehensive.And students will appreciate the fact that it is relatively inexpensive.Hackett does it again!

Great excerpts, good format, good reading.
Modern Philosophy -- full of writings from philosophers such as Locke, Kant or Spinoza -- can be seen as a daunting period of philosophy.I read this book as a text for a modern philosophy class, and found that it is avery competant editing of these difficult texts.The anthology begins with"premodern" writings of Galileo and others, goes throughDescartes (with a selection of criticisms of Decartes' work from hiscontemporaries), and then goes through the work of other modernphilosophers such as Locke, Berkeley, Spinoza, Libeniz, Kant, and others. The editor does a wonderful job arranging texts to illustrate the back andforth dialog and critisms among the philosophers.In addition to theselection of texts, there are wonderful notes scattered throughout the textto help alleviate much of the confusion that can arise after reading someof the quite lengthly writings of some (many! ) modern philosophers. Perhaps on an aesthetic (non-content) sidenote -- the book itself isexcellent.When I was reading a section, I did not have to worry aboutpages flipping on me, because the binding is very flexible.In additionhighlighters don't bleed through the page -- a wonderful plus to a greatanthology!I would highly recommend it. ... Read more

Product Description
In this classic introductory work, Scruton takes us on us on a fascinating tour of the subject, from founding father Descartes to the most important and famous philosopher of the twentieth century, Ludwig Wittgenstein. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

The Perfect Introduction To Philosophy
Philosophy surveys tend either to ignore important nuances and therefore become just plain wrong, or pay attention to those details and therefore become impossible to read.This book, however, manages to provide a robust introduction to each major philosopher of the modern period, along with some pieces of what came before it, in a very short, readable way.

Scruton walks you through each philosopher's most important arguments, how those arguments come together into conclusive philosophies, and where those philosophies fit into the broader scheme of the whole history of philosophy.His clarity and brevity make this book accessible to any interested beginner, and his attention to important details in the flow of philosophy gives this book an audience within the ranks of the previously initiated.To put it succinctly:He both rigorously understands his subject and communicates very smoothly, which makes this book the absolutely perfect introduction.

I recommend this book to anyone who wants to learn a whole lot about philosophy, and to any undergraduate who wants to ace his philosophy classes.

Rigorous and exciting
I was convinced to buy this book by browsing through its chapter on Marx. Scruton's own political views lie on the Right, but his treatment of Marx's philosophy is among the best of this length that I have read anywhere. And that goes for other philosophers from Descartes to Wittgenstein who are discussed in this book. Scruton does not expect his readers to have any prior knowledge of philosophy, but neither does he patronise them. He expects them to think hard, and discusses the difficult points with great clarity rather than glossing them over.

However, as the first chapter makes clear, this book is best seen as a historical introduction to philosophy rather than a 'history of ideas'. Those who wish to understand the evolution of philosophy in its social and historical context will have to supplement this book with other sources.

An excellent introduction to modern philosophy
If you want to discover the pleasures of philosophy, then read Roger Scruton's books. In addition to this title, I recommend "The Intelligent Person's Guide to Philosophy" and "Modern Philosophy." Scruton has an uncanny ability to convey even the mostdifficult concepts with clarity and grace. His "Short History ofModern Philosophy" is worth reading for two reasons: 1) it is a modelof fine expository writing; and 2) it is an accessible overview of modernphilosophy that will provide a foundation for further study of the centralphilosophers. I wish Scruton's books had been available when I was readingphilosophy as an undergraduate. ... Read more

Product Description
The Cambridge Companion to Early Modern Philosophy is a comprehensive introduction to the central topics and changing shape of philosophical inquiry in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. It explores one of the most innovative periods in the history of Western philosophy, extending from Montaigne, Bacon and Descartes through Hume and Kant. During this period, philosophers initiated and responded to major intellectual developments in natural science, religion, and politics, transforming in the process concepts and doctrines inherited from ancient and medieval philosophy. In this Companion, leading specialists examine early modern treatments of the methodological and conceptual foundations of natural science, metaphysics, philosophy of mind, logic and language, moral and political philosophy, and theology. A final chapter looks forward to the philosophy of the Enlightenment. This will be an invaluable guide for all who are interested in the philosophical thought of the early modern period. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Excellent companion
This is one of the best CUP companion's I've encountered. In a series of topically-oriented articles, leading scholars of the period provide helpful and interesting overviews of the major developments in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century European philosophy. Fortunately, this volume avoids the epistemologically-centered approach that characterized the historiography of earlier generations. Instead the reader is provided with systematic and insightful treatments of the central trends in a variety of fields--from metaphysics and philosophy of mind and action to moral theory, political philosophy, and theology. Attention is also given to shared methodological commitments and the larger cultural context. Pitched at just the right level of difficulty, this collection will prove useful to professors, grad students, and advanced undergraduates. A genuine resource. ... Read more

Product Description
Modern Jewish philosophy emerged in the seventeenth century, with the impact of the new science and modern philosophy on thinkers who were reflecting upon the nature of Judaism and Jewish life. This collection of new essays examines the work of several of the most important of these figures, from the seventeenth to the late-twentieth centuries, and addresses themes central to the tradition of modern Jewish philosophy: language and revelation, autonomy and authority, the problem of evil, messianism, the influence of Kant, and feminism. Included are essays on Spinoza, Mendelssohn, Cohen, Buber, Rosenzweig, Fackenheim, Soloveitchik, Strauss, and Levinas. Other thinkers discussed include Maimon, Benjamin, Derrida, Scholem, and Arendt. The sixteen original essays are written by a world-renowned group of scholars especially for this volume and give a broad and rich picture of the tradition of modern Jewish philosophy over a period of four centuries. ... Read more

Product Description
Evil threatens human reason, for it challenges our hope that the world makes sense. For eighteenth-century Europeans, the Lisbon earthquake was manifest evil. Today we view evil as a matter of human cruelty, and Auschwitz as its extreme incarnation. Examining our understanding of evil from the Inquisition to contemporary terrorism, Susan Neiman explores who we have become in the three centuries that separate us from the early Enlightenment. In the process, she rewrites the history of modern thought and points philosophy back to the questions that originally animated it.

Whether expressed in theological or secular terms, evil poses a problem about the world's intelligibility. It confronts philosophy with fundamental questions: Can there be meaning in a world where innocents suffer? Can belief in divine power or human progress survive a cataloging of evil? Is evil profound or banal? Neiman argues that these questions impelled modern philosophy. Traditional philosophers from Leibniz to Hegel sought to defend the Creator of a world containing evil. Inevitably, their efforts--combined with those of more literary figures like Pope, Voltaire, and the Marquis de Sade--eroded belief in God's benevolence, power, and relevance, until Nietzsche claimed He had been murdered. They also yielded the distinction between natural and moral evil that we now take for granted. Neiman turns to consider philosophy's response to the Holocaust as a final moral evil, concluding that two basic stances run through modern thought. One, from Rousseau to Arendt, insists that morality demands we make evil intelligible. The other, from Voltaire to Adorno, insists that morality demands that we don't.

Beautifully written and thoroughly engaging, this book tells the history of modern philosophy as an attempt to come to terms with evil. It reintroduces philosophy to anyone interested in questions of life and death, good and evil, suffering and sense. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (17)

Insights into psychopathology
Most interesting discussion in book is under Ch 4, Homeless.Previous chapters can be omitted.Author posits many pithy remarks, as in the following: "before it ever happened, who could suppose that human beings would be extinguishable like vermin (i.e. the Holocaust), or transformed into living bombs (i.e. September 11, 2001)."

Relativize the Relativizers, Debunk the Debunkers
Dr. Neiman has produced a competent "history of [the problem of evil in] modern philosophy" from Leibniz to John Rawls.Speaking of Rawls, Neiman obtained her doctorate studying with him.Other relevant biographical information about Neiman is that she left home in her teen years to protest the war in Vietnam, and recently wrote a piece on Culture War for the leftist Huffington Post.None of these ad hominem (feminam?) observations disqualify "Evil," but they set it in context.

My problem is that throughout the book, Neiman refers only to "the problem" of evil.A problem is a question, either more simple or complicated, that has a specific, concrete answer, that either you will eventually attain to, or at least someone else has or could.

But evil is not a problem.No matter how long one studies it, one will never be able to completely conceptualize or lucidly verbalize evil.That is why I think the best category under which to analyze evil is 'mystery.'Of course, those of the same enlightenment background as Dr. Neiman will balk at such a word, presuming that they have banished 'mystery' to its primitive corner.But it is possible to use the word mystery not about a 'whodunnit' novel, and not about a religious cultic experience.A mystery is a profound philosophical question, like love, death, personhood, etc., about which one can do much reflection, gather much light, rule out absurd propositions, but which ultimately cannnot, due to the nature of the subject, be encapsulated in concepts or contained in words.That was the enligtenment's dream, dashed upon the rocks of the Judaeo-Christian mystery of original sin, as best observed at Auschwitz and Hiroshima in the so-called modern 20th century.

Typical of this genre, on p. 335 Neiman equates the Middle Ages with the Dark Ages, an undergraduate mistake, yet one normal for those who think everything prior to Spinoza was bad, everything after him was good.

Methinks that enlightenment scholars, even at this very late date, doth protest the death of God too much.That may be true on the narrow strips of land of western Europe, and both coasts of the USA, but virtually nowhere else.Nieman, and other fans of the enlightenment (which brought our culture the lovely French Revolution, whose grandchild was the Bolshevik) seem wistful that we are now in the post-modern age, when we take the positive insights of the enlightenment (of which there are many), and blend them with the perennial insights of Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome.

Modern thought?:More like recently irrelevant.
Discussing evil, without serious consideration, of the thinking of theologians, like Gregory A Boyd (Evil and the Problem of Satan), is just not keeping up with current thought.Other secular philosophers have acknowledged the new revitalization, of Christian thought.Oh well. bc

"Banal" Evil, Moral Responsiblity, and Interent Wrong
Evil in Modern Thought: An Alternative History of Philosophy

Not being a philosopher, I write only to offer a thought about the apparent view that "unintentional" or "banal" evil is not "evil."Although I have heard it stated in the abstract before, seen in the present context, that view is quite shocking.

Assuming a fully competent actor, evil should be defined not only according to the intentionality of acts (perhaps limited to acts whose nature or consequences are defined as evil either by spiritual or natural law on the one hand or positive law or moral authority as "evil"), but also, alternatively, in neutral terms of moral responsibility, without regard to the actor's subjective state of mind.To say that every person has moral responsibility is to say that each person has an obligation to know, or at least to investigate and decide upon, the moral quality of his or her acts, particularly whether the acts' nature of consequences are subject to being characterized as evil.An act done intentionally that would be evil because of its nature or consequences thus would be evil for the same reason when done without reference or regard to its moral quality.

By comparison, we award punitive damages in many jurisdictions not only where a party's acts are intentional, but also where they are done recklessly, which includes indifference to the rights and interests of others.It is true that many jurisdictions distinguish between malice murder and other types of killings based on the actor's state of mind, but pressing that distinction into service to justify a definition of evil assumes that only intentional murder can be called evil.

The Holocaust of course involved intentional killing.Factually, evil was inherent in the Holocaust as an event of history because of the intentionality of the leaders of the Third Reich; analytically, even assuming that some of the instruments of the Holocaust were "mere cogs,"the suggestion that their acts were not evil ignores moral agency and responsibility in at least two senses:the moral responsibility that is an inherent element of our "humanity"; and the moral agency that such persons almost certainly possessed and exercised in a manner that would be evil under both historical spiritual and modern utilitarian definitions.It is plausible to suppose that the "mere cogs" were indifferent to the nature or consequences of their actions, and in that case the evil inheres in that refusal to exercise moral responsibility.Neither being an historian, I would have to account for any evidence to the contrary, but the idea that the mere cogs were somehow ignorant of the nature of their actions (whether signing the orders or turning on the petcocks) lies on the laugh-line somewhere between implausible in context and ludicrous on its face.But even assuming that that might somehow have been the case, the evil lies in the mere cogs' failure to exerise moral agency.

The above may resolve to a definition of evil that turns on the nature or consequences of the act under scrutiny, in the same sense as the early tort of trespass was defined in the English common law, solely according to its consequences. It may well be that my starting-point of non-intentionality may be an artifact of my responding to a proposition that turns on intentionality, and that the "nature or consequences" of an act may suffice to justify labeling it as "evil."Such a test might be structured according to deontological values or, as Professor Neiman's proposal for the "modern rule" appears to be, utilitarian values.The former would seem to permit a priori judgments, whereas the latter might now.Beyond the taking of life (and leaving aside the death penalty and just war, which present other issues, it is useful to consider whether the following, for example, amount to evil:environmental damage of sufficient magnitude; and independent, state-sponsored, and state-perpetrated terrorism (the last according to the French usage of "terroriste" during the French Revolution, being a reference to government officials engaged in official acts.At the end of the day, to talk about 9/11 as an "evil" act apparently without concomitant consideration of whether some of the responses thereto have been "evil" is a best a serious defect in the development or application, or both, of a definition of evil, in the same sense that the penchant of United States officials to talk about the "evil" of terrorism without a searching inquiry directed at their own actions is a serious defect of politics and authority.

They Way Philosophy Could Be Done But All too Often Isn't
Nieman argues that philosophy, historically speaking, is not about epistemology, as most of the textbooks claim, but that philosophers from Descartes (Leibniz) all the way into the 20th century had a different view in mind.No less than eminent New Testament scholar NT Wright has recommended this book as outstanding in surveying the issues and making the case for the thesis that theodicy is the centerpoint of philosophical questioning in the 17th through the 20th centuries.To quote him, from his own book on "Evil and the Justice of God," Wright calls Nieman's book "brilliant."(See page 20) Having read the book and been absolutely appreciative of her argument, and the clarity with which she makes her case, I have to say that Wright's judgment is correct (as I am convinced that most of his judgments are). Buy the book, its worth it. ... Read more

Product Description
This popular introduction to modern philosophy features question-based chapters with a stimulating debate-style format, and intersperses primary sources with commentary. Each chapter deals with a fundamental question about human existence, exploring the subject through representative readings by classic, modern, and contemporary philosophers--with at least two contrasting perspectives for each main position.What Is Philosophy? Am I a Body and a Mind? Am I Free or Determined? What Grounds Do I Have For Belief in God? On What Principle Do I Judge Things Right or Wrong? When Should I Obey the Law? What Things Shall I Call Art? When Can I Say "I Know?" What Is Science? Positivism to Post-Modernism. Applied Ethics (medical ethics, business ethics, environmental ethics). Making Sense Out Of Life (a multi-cultural perspective).For anyone interested in modern philosophy. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

good service
my book was one day late, i contact them and they refunded my shipping money back. the book was in an excellent condition actually it was better than what i expected to be.if you have any problem they will respond to you within 24 hours.i liked their service.

Easy Reading
Overall the book is very easy to follow if you are new to Philosophy world. I recommend this book to those getting into philosophy or if you just want a good overview of philosophy without getting lost in the literature. Philosophers are presented in chronological order: it starts with Socrates and ends in the present. ... Read more

Product Description
LOGIC AND PHILOSOPHY: A MODERN INTRODUCTION, 11E is a comprehensive introduction to logic that is both rigorous and user-friendly. Numerous carefully crafted exercise sets accompanied by crisp, clear exposition take you from sentential logic through first-order predicate logic, the theory of descriptions, and identity. As the title suggests, this is a book devoted not merely to logic; you also will encounter an abundance of philosophy. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (6)

Good value
This book was a great value, fast shipping, and very easy to order on the site.

Great condition- fast delivery
Delivery was fast without any issues, and the product came as described.Would recommend.

ExcellentBook!
This book covers many different aspects on logics, from basic to advanced levels. It has many exercises and examples which make it easy to understand the different concepts presented. I'd suggest it for both teachers and students.

Exellent Introduction to Logic
This review refers to the seventh edition of this book; I suspect that the later editions advertised by amazon.com are even better.
This is a clear, comprehensive, well-organised and friendly introduction to logic. Part one of the book is on sentential logic, part two is on predicate logic, and part three is on traditional logic, inductive logic and modal, epistemic and deontic logic, among other topics. The book thus focuses on sentential and predicate logic, and the sections on modal, epistemic and deontic logic introduce these fields very briefly.
The parts on sentential and predicate logic cover symbolisation, truth tables, truth trees and derivations. The material is explained clearly, there are walk-though examples, glossaries, and exercises, with answers to even numbered exercises available at the back of the book.
The title of the book suggests that it is an introduction to both logic and philosophy. Of course, logical competence is crucial to the pursuit of analytic philosophy, and there are also sections on the problem of induction and philosophical problems with symbolic logic, but there are few other philosophical topics discussed. One must look elsewhere for an introduction to other philosophical problems, where one can begin to apply the logical techniques imparted by this book.
Popular introductions to logic with similar coverage to this book include Gensler's "Introduction to Logic" and Copi's "Introduction to Logic". I recommend either of these books or this book as an introduction to logic.

Best Book I've Read on the Subject
This is the third textbook I've read since taking Logic and Critical Thinking in college more than ten years ago.All three of the textbooks I've owned have been very powerful tools in teaching what forms the basis for mathematical and scientific proofs.However, this one by far is the most accessible.Because logic is a mathematical field, abstract mathematical principles can be difficult to grasp.Furthermore, texbooks in general are rarely entertaining.Kahane and Tidman have done an incredible job not putting the readers to sleep.At no point is doing a chapter penance for being interested in logic. ... Read more

Product Description
Unlike those who view Heidegger as an idealist, Taylor Carman asserts that Heidegger is best understood as a realist and offers a new interpretation of his major work, Being and Time. Among the book's distinctive features are an interpretation explicitly oriented within a Kantian framework (often taken for granted in readings of Heidegger) and an analysis of Dasein in relation to recent theories of intentionality; notably those of Dennett and Searle. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Being" is a revealing way of seeing; it is world disclosive
I read this book for a graduate seminar on philosophy.Taylor Carman's book helps to illuminate one of the most influential philosophical books of the twentieth century, Martin Heidegger's "Being and Time," which deconstructs phenomenology. Heidegger's kind of phenomenology has to do with the idea of phenomenon, which means something that appears and shows itself. His criticism of traditional philosophy is that it gets started with categories, concepts, and notions, departing from the way human comprehension of this world first shows itself. This is Aristotelian and Aristotle is an enormous influence on Heidegger.

Yet, there is something very radical going on here, and that is the idea of "being" is connected to meaning and negativity. In the history of philosophy, being has a positive concept, something that "is" thus, the opposite of being is none being. Heidegger wants to show how the meaning of being is distorted by this understanding of being as a purely positive concept, as a "thing" a full present entity. For Example, he also very much critiques in modern art, the modern conception of objectivity, the world is transformed into an object independent of art, of its significance, its meaning, or interest in it. This was due in large part because of modern science, and its strong sense of objectification converting nature into a set of mere objects, time, and space that are measurable and analyzable through scientific means. Meaning, importance, and significance for Heidegger equals value; science and nature have none of this as pure objects. Therefore, anything of meaning, and of significance would be transferred into the subject it would be simply the human estimation, nature itself has no meaning or significance in that respect.

Heidegger critiques this scientific model. As he says in his phenomenology, "Well how is it that human existence first understands itself? Here he is talking about things that are very ordinary and complex. We are in a world that has significance, it is meaningful to us, it matters to us, it fits into our interests in such a way that we are absorbed into its significance. So, when we come across the world, first and foremost it is not a mere object that is standing apart from us or our mind, but rather it has significant elements of our environment that fit into our lives. Some things are significant, or they are useful, or dangerous, or satisfying, etc. What Heidegger wants to say in his phenomenology is we have to pay attention to this way of being. Therefore, first and foremost he says "being" matters, it matters to us. "Being" is a significance, it is not just a bare object or a bare fact. Heidegger doesn't accept this idea of subject on one side and object on the other side, that means that when humans have their understanding of the world, it is not just a human projection, it is not just a human construction. It is a revealing way of seeing; it is world disclosive. The meaning of the world wouldn't happen without us, because we are the ones that find it meaningful. Therefore, it is most important to understand that for Heidegger there is no object subject distinction. The term he uses to illustrate his idea is "Dasien" which means "human existence," Heidegger chooses it because he doesn't want to deal with the subject, or mind or consciousness, he wants to use a word that does not subjectivefy things. He uses "Dasien" as "humans being there" in this world and not just staying apart from it.

Humans are a being in the world, a term he uses is, "we dwell" in the world, we don't come across it as some bare thing in the world we "dwell" in it. Therefore, "meaningfulness" is a primary notion of being. Secondly, the meaning of "being" is connected with the notion of negativity. This is the notion of "being" moving toward death, and anxiety. Thus, the way that humans understand being is in part because of opposite of non-being and death is a perfect example of that. Humans are distinct because we understand that we are mortal, that we die. We are aware of death even when we are not in danger, which means we understand being and our world. Heidegger made a lot out of the fact that the Greeks understood this, that they were mortals, and that was no accident he thought. That death is a primary aspect of what it means to be human. If you are aware of death as he says, then you can be aware of the meaning of life. The meaning of life comes to us because we understand that we are finite, that we are mortal and not in control.

Another way to understand Heidegger is a wonderful analysis of the idea that the word "being" has become a noun in philosophy, like first things of beings, or things that are. Yet Heidegger says in the Greek language and other western languages this idea of "being" grammatically in language is derived from a verb, the primary verb "to be." Moreover, as a verb it is tensed which means it has to do with time. All verbs are tensed, even Aristotle said, "That is the difference between a verb and a noun." The difference between a verb and a noun, a verb is something that has to do with time, not just action, but time. That is why all verbs are tensed as future, and past. The very fact that time is another perfect indication of negativity, because time is ever changing, ever moving, and when we are in the present, the past is time of negativity it is no longer. When we are in the present, the future is kind of negative it is not yet. Yet we understand these negatives as meaningful, that is why we can get upset about the past that it is not happening anymore, and why we can become excited about the future even though it hasn't happened yet, they have meaning to us.

Another important feature of Heidegger's book is where he takes on the notion of skepticism. Skepticism is a classic problem in philosophy, it is really fostered by Descartes and Hume, and it has to do with the subject/object division. Skeptics argue that the mind is on one side of the fence, the outside world is on the other side, and the mind is something that comes across the world and just processes it, according to its categories of thinking, this is a very common modern construction of skepticism. If this skeptical construct were true, then it is very possible for someone to ask the question; "well how do we know that our minds that are on this side of the fence can ever really know that it is accurately talking about what is on the other side of the fence? If it is separated like this, how can we be sure that what we think about is actually the case? Heidegger is not talking here about ordinary skepticism, like wonder or "I am not sure" kind of skepticism; but what Heidegger argues against is the kind of radical skepticism, which asks, can we be sure of any of our knowledge. This idea plays on two objects, the subject object divide if we are on this side of the subject how can we ever know we are accurately talking about something. Secondly, is the certainty because the skeptic is someone who says well, "I really want to find with 100% certainty, and if I can find any reason for doubt then I am not going to commit. Heidegger says this is a classic philosophical problem that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Because, no existing human self could ever radically call into question its environment and this world. It doesn't make any sense. You can call into question this or that aspect of it, but never the whole thing and never to say; "well it's possible that what humans say about the world may not have anything to do with the world." Even Descartes and Hume knew this was perverse, but they said this is what philosophy has to do. Radical skepticism is perverse to Heidegger. Skeptics like Descartes and Hume if right why are they writing to an audience. The very practice of skepticism undermines the idea of skepticism. Heidegger says, "Well if our practices betray the project of skepticism, which even Hume admits, he says I would go mad." You can't live as a radical skeptic. This skepticism can apply to things like morals and beauty values and artistic things, because they don't satisfy strict standards of knowledge and certainty.

To reiterate, it is important to know that Heidegger primarily wants to say that the meaning of being, is something that humans are involved with in a significant meaningful way, and it can't be either subjective or objective, those two ideas he says are polarizations that both account for how the world matters to us. The fact that it matters to us means it can't be a pure objective thing. Secondly, the fact that what matters to us is our world not just our opinions and our inner dispositions mean it can't be just a subjective thing. We are absorbed in the world; we are caught up in it. Heidegger's phenomenology wants to give voice to these notions rather than start with the modern categories of subjectivity and objectivity.

I recommend this work for anyone interested in philosophy, epistemology, and ontology.

A Brilliant Book!
Carman's book is not only brilliant but entertaining.Amidst an amazing range of references, he fearlessly takes issue with virtually every other major interpreter of Heidegger, and the sparks do fly!For analytic and continental philosophers alike, this is an adventure in philosophical reading not to be missed!

A good study
This book is a fine piece of scholarship, and it certainly stands out amongst other commentaries on Heidegger's thought, most of which are plagued by ideological tendentiousness and unclarity.Carman's book avoids both of these failings, and for that reason alone is well worth a read.

The guiding thesis of the book is that Heidegger's "analytic" in "Being and Time" should be understood as the provision of "hermeneutic conditions," i.e. the conditions under which human beings are able to interpretively make sense of the world.Focusing particularly on Heidegger's views on language and intentionality, Carman makes a fairly good case for this reading.

The main problem that I found in this book is that, by tying Heidegger's researches with contemporary Anglo-American thought so closely, Carman winds up distorting the real originality of Heidegger's thought.Heidegger's thought is so deeply unlike virtually everything else that has come along in the last 200 years that it is a mistake to assimilate his work to that of other philosophers. Commentators and readers alike need to keep Heidegger's own admonitions about his work in mind while reading him; this is a man, after all, once told his students that it was his "personal conviction" that his "hermeneutics" is not philosophy at all (Summer 1923), and who later said that "It is my belief that it is all over for philosophy" (Winter 1923-1924).

That said, Carman's work is an eminently readable, well-argued study that ought to be a paradigm for other scholars.While I have my doubts about attempts to make Heidegger into an analytic philosopher, I can only praise Carman's effort at making Heidegger speak to a contemporary audience about issues of universal philosophical concern. ... Read more

Product Description
In this classic work, Adorno revolutionized music theory through an analysis of two composers he saw as polar opposites, Arnold Schoenberg and Igor Stravinsky. "Philosophy of Modern Music" presents a profound study of key musical works of the twentieth century. But it is more than this because, as always with Adorno, a wide range of social and cultural questions are brought to bear on the analysis. In many ways, "Philosophy of Modern Music" is a product of Adorno's exile in the United States, where he wrote the book while National Socialism fell apart in his European homeland. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

poor translation
Adorno's Philosophy of New Music gets five stars. This translation gets two stars. It's notoriously unreliable and full of errors. Instead, buy Robert Hullot-Kentor's translation titled, "Philosophy of New Music" (he explains why this is the correct translation of the title rather than *Modern* music.) That edition is far superior with an amazing introduction provided by the always perceptive Hullot-Kentor. Read Adorno as he was meant to be read. Don't buy this translation.

Still a nourishing display of conceptual power.
Although out-of-print this is an event in the history of music comparable to primary musical works.It had to be Theodor Adorno a consummate intellect that created a new mode of contemplating contemporary art, music simplybeing the realm he knew more intimately,literature a close second. Hisprolific student from the late Fifties, Jurgen Habermas once said ofAdorno, that he created theory spontaneously, simply within the course of adiscussion, adept at synthesizing his thoughts as he spoke. But Adorno'simportance for contemporary expression was assured,in that Adorno broughtthe complexity of philosophic,social and political thought to music.Something hardly done prior, and is only now within the past ten yearsbeginning to be realized. See numerous studies on Adorno and his approachto speaking about music. To read the"Philosophy of ModernMusic" is to understand Adorno's departures for his thought is themost exposed. Written in short cursive, aphorisitic-like paragraphs, almostapproaching a sketch of a thought is to reveal a complexity, but one whichengages his subject. The two polar opposites here are composers, ArnoldSchoenberg(representing the progressive elements in music), and IgorStravinsky(representing the backward-looking retrogressive elements).Adorno had considered the private artist working in seclusion as thehighest form of rebellion, of subversion, for Adorno had contempt for themarketplace and how that magnetized and transformed art. Something of themarket, in the late Forties was prevalent in jazz and film. Had Adornolived into the age of computers and simulation,he would have seen to fullextent how his thought has been realized in ever purified forms. Adornothought Schoenberg's discovery of the 12-Tone dodecaphonic compositionalmethod as a sign of progress. 12-Tone in a profound way was a synthesis, aconduit of the theoretical advancements of the history of music.It was botha beginning and an endpoint. But Schoenberg's method, althought quite newand unfinished allowed for all the parameters of music to be defined anddeveloped, "Total Organization of the Elements of Music" is oneparagraph here or section, "Differetiation and Coarseness" yetanother referring to thinking about sound, as a sculptor would of his/hermaterials, shapting them, giving them form and direction. Stravinskycontrarywise indulged in looking backward, at the folksongs of his nativeRussia for music materials to be manipulated and the projection of soundwithout its deep attenuation. A view that is subjective now inretrospect,for Stravinsky was a grand orchestrator and a craftsman. But inStravinsky, in particular his early period of the marvelously powerfulballet music, sound is pulverized,and is forced into suppressedforms,usually ashifting alternating suite of pieces,refocusing our shortattention spans as required and, all in the projection of an image, ascreeen for which the ballet takes place. But Adorno had takened issue withStravinsky's subject matter as well as his technical means, a puppet in"Petrouska" one given over to a master without hope norrecourse.Likewise the "Rite of Spring" a virgin is simplysacrificed without recourse and we have the human image portraying theinevitability of natural forces, something Europe was about to experiencefirst hand with the rise of fascism. These sections here are"Depersonalization" and "Fetishism of Means", explainsStravinsky's creativity stepping backwards within himself. In "Modesof Listening" Adorno refers to the "Shock" value thatpummels the listener and the degradation of hearing into a music you merelysubmit to, whereas in Schoenberg there is more a sense of give and take,ofthe music allowing contemplative time. Again to my mind this is allrelative, for these festures I find in both composers oeuvre. Still I finda conceptual power in Adorno,one that still nourishes today in the mileauof after-postmodernity. ... Read more

Product Description
This is an EXACT reproduction of a book published before 1923. This IS NOT an OCR'd book with strange characters, introduced typographical errors, and jumbled words.This book may have occasional imperfections such as missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. that were either part of the original artifact, or were introduced by the scanning process. We believe this work is culturally important, and despite the imperfections, have elected to bring it back into print as part of our continuing commitment to the preservation of printed works worldwide. We appreciate your understanding of the imperfections in the preservation process, and hope you enjoy this valuable book. ... Read more

Product Description
Contributors include: Margaret D Wilson, Roger Woolhouse, G H R Parkinson, Don Garrett, Edwin Curley, Robert C Sleigh Jr, Martha Brandt Bolton, Nicholas Jolley, Annette Baier, and Patricia Kitcher. ... Read more

Product Description

The seminal work by one of the most important thinkers of the twentieth century, Physics and Philosophy is Werner Heisenberg's concise and accessible narrative of the revolution in modern physics, in which he played a towering role. The outgrowth of a celebrated lecture series, this book remains as relevant, provocative, and fascinating as when it was first published in 1958. A brilliant scientist whose ideas altered our perception of the universe, Heisenberg is considered the father of quantum physics; he is most famous for the Uncertainty Principle, which states that quantum particles do not occupy a fixed, measurable position. His contributions remain a cornerstone of contemporary physics theory and application.

Customer Reviews (21)

Just historical
I see people usually like this book. It is remarkable how much history of philosophy Heisenberg knows, however I don't really find a thesis here. Not like the principle of complementarity of Bohr. He makes parallels and shows how August Conte was wrong in the way that he didn't proclaim that science evolved of changes in language.
I does not go far from the standards from today.

Classical Dynamics and Quantum Theory
Werner Heisenberg's classic text on physics and philosophy is a must read for all those in quantum theory today who feel as one of the founders of the Standard Model of Particle Physics; in"Dreams of a Final Theory," Dr. Stephen Weinberg, in some ways very hostile, if that is not too strong a word, towards philosophy (because Dr. Weinberg asserts that philosophy has only obtruded or obscured the quest for the final laws of nature: in surveying the philosophy of science literature today, one gets the bewildering feeling that the only thing that matters is taking an obscure subject matter and turning it into an incomprehensible one.) concedes that "we need to better understand quantum mechanics."
If this is true, and if philosophers of science can assist in the scientific quest (a premise Dr. Weinberg disagrees with, I think) by purifying the reasoning or methodology of the scientific quest, then philosophy of science can be a gaurdian of what W. V. O Quine considered the "queen" of the sciences--i.e., physics. Certain philosophers of physics assure me that this task will be necessary until a final theory is in hand, if ever, after long millenia, it can be in hand. The work of William Lane Craig and Quinton Smith is an excellant example of what philosophy can do for science, the work of Albert William Levi "Philosophy and the Modern World" is a masterful study by a non-scientist of the work of, for example, Albert Einstein and Max Planck and of Alfred North Whitehead. Modern philosophy itself--in its Logical Positivist manifestation--is technological;consider alone the level of attention paid to relativity theory and quantum mechanics by the Vienna Circle.
Heisenberg is very careful in this work to offer an argument for the consistency of modern quantum mechanics with certain elements of Aristotle's concept of potency or potentiiality: He sees the nature of the quantum to lay in a certain manyness-in-oneness, or what is today called the superposition of the quantum wave function; since potency resides in this state, the orthodox Copenhagen School allows only statistical descriptions of the probable, emergent phenomena: these statistics are inherently part of any quantum field, or better expressed, any part of a quantum field when it is subject to the Heisenberg Cut, which is a mesurement of part of the quantum field which causes the collapse of the wavefunction and its superposition; what evolves once the Heisenberg Cut is made does so by a presumable determinism which is indemonstrable within quantum mechanics; and here, I think, is where Heisenberg's text re-pays careful study (I have twice read the book), for he admits a determinism at the scale of, say, planetary bodies or telluric bodies, but he also indicates that classical determinism emerges from the quantum state's potentiality. This whole problem in Modern physics revolves about various questions about the "measurement problem" in quantum physics, and I have already alluded to that; but Heisenberg taught us that just as Newtonian mechanics was eventually shown to be a subset of Einsteinian dynamics, when special relativity was considered, so does classical deterministic evolution of micro-matter occur as a subset of states of the quantum, but these states are the precisely measurable states. They are the product of freely chosen laws to this extent: they were brought into being by measurement, which founds the ensemble (Q. Smith), a micro-world as subset of the total world structure. To recur to Dirac's way of dividing the wave-function, it has two cognate parts, Large Psi, which refers to the entire quantum wave-function, and small psi, which refers to the division of the wavefunction into a proper subset: Here is where the crossroads of a great philosophic/scientific problem is broached, for if Classical determinism prevails at the level of human life or planets, and measurement from the superposition creates such determinism, then what measures into being the measurer? Dreams of a Final Theory: The Scientist's Search for the Ultimate Laws of NatureTheism, Atheism, and Big Bang Cosmology (Clarendon Paperbacks)The Principles of Quantum Mechanics (International Series of Monographs on Physics)Before the Big Bang: The Origins of the Universe

Quantum theory, crossing borders in the higlight of physics
The German physician and philosopher Heisenberg counts together with the German Erwin Schrödinger as founder of the Quantum mechanics. In the year 1927 he formulated the uncertainty relation, German: "Unschärferelation" (also called indeterminacy principle) according to which place and impulse of a subatomic particle cannot be destined at the same time. For his quantum physical research he received in 1932 the Nobel prize of physics.

After the second World War Heisenberg became director of the Max-Planck-Institute. His "Einheitliche Theorie der Elementarteilchen" (unitary theory of elementary particles) from the year 1958 was called "world formula" (although that is just what it is not!) and strengthened Heisenbergs position as one of the most important representative of quantum physics.

In countless lectures and essays he disputed the philosophical implications of quantum physics, among others in "Quantentheorie und Philosophie", "Physik und Philosophie" and "Der Teil und das Ganze".
According to Heisenberg the whole thing is more than the summary of the parts. In this idealism is recognizable as to such a degree that it must be concluded to have created not the theory but vice versa the reality itself. And this would mean, that in the end all things that came into being must be traced back to an immaterial flow of information. But information is a spiritual phenomeneon. The magazine "Der SPIEGEL" called this "God in the quantum chaos", for according to Heisenberg:

"The quantum theory leaves no room for a totally objective description of nature... In the experiments of atomic procedures we have to do with material things and facts, with phenomenons so much real as any phenomenon in daily life. But the atoms or the elementary particles are not equally real. They form much more a world of tendencies and possibilities than a world of things and facts."
Quite a heap of idealism, it seems, but a compelling conclusion from the datum of physics? Does a spiritual principle stick behind the whole cake? The universe as quantum world! A world which is incessantly in movement because she is designed like that. Only by movement is the personality-structure of all proprieties held. Still-stand is death, or better: non-existence. Is there still-stand at all? Nowhere is it visible, nowhere it has space.

Einstein struggled long against the quantum theory. He tried to adopt it to the theoretical fundament of the classic physics and confessed to himself that he failed. There is no solid - you could also say no material - ground on which the order of the world is built! Many years Einstein spent to give the world the knowledge, that there is no chance to pass by the quantum theory, an almost metaphysical theory, when describing reality.
In reference to Einstein`s theory of relativity Heisenberg had called the fact that all physical systems possess either the propriety of a wave or of a particle and that only one of the two is measurable, "indeterminacy principle" or "uncertainty relation". Material, according to Einstein nothing but of time and energy, was robbed of it`s last consistency. Und such thing should have stood in the beginning of the universe?
Impossible since the quantum mechanics stand before. Material needs an idea to start movement. A frontier crossing to the spiritual realm is inevitable!
Interestingly Heisenberg perceived the contradiction of the quantum theory to modern biology. "...most biologists are prepared to confess, that the existence of atoms and molecules can only be understood with the help of the quantum theory, but besides that they have the wish to regard the working material of the chemists and biologists, namely atoms and molecules, as stuff of classic physics, thus dealing with them as with stones or grain of sand."
Creation is, by all appearance, provided that we are ready to believe the quantum physics an artfully, a subtle construction, a "Within" which does not only make an "Outside" thinkable but even demands for it. Any attempt of a world formula" in the sense of Einstein must therefore fail, because it wants to explain the Within without the Outside!
Some may flinch from the title of the book or the name of the author to read the book. The fears are not grounded. Basic knowledge of atomic physics is sufficient to understand what the author is talking about. He uses a clear and simple diction. If one understands his theories is another matter. But this might be indebted to the ideology one tends to hold.

Existence and physical reality according to physicist Werner Heisenberg
At the turn of 20th century when quantum physics was born; the founding fathers of this scientific revolution were thinking deeply about the philosophical consequences of the new physics in terms of existence and physical reality (ontology). The reality perceived through the laws of classical physics provided strong challenges to quantum reality and human knowledge of quantum physical concepts (epistemology). In addition, the theory of relativity, which also came into existence at about the same time, altered the concept of space and time (consequently their relationship to matter, and the concept of gravity) radically from the existing knowledge of Newtonian physics. In this book, physicist Heisenberg gives a brilliant account of physical reality after reviewing the works ofnotable philosophers like; Kant, Descartes, Locke, Berkeley, and Hume. You get to read the physical and philosophical analysis of one of the founding fathers of quantum physics using both classical and quantum physics. His philosophical ideas are summarized below:

Physical theories had to be proposed speculatively and pursued deductively with respect to their many consequences that can be put to theoretical and experimental verifications. It turns out that the theory makes more physical and philosophical assumptions than the facts alone imply. The assumptions could be ontological or epistemological in nature. For example, the concept of space and time (and its relation to matter) is independent of the observer, which would be ontological in nature since the subject matter of scientific knowledge is independent of the perceiver (consequences of relativity). The nature of quantum physics introduces indeterminacy to nature of things which would be epistemological since the experiment performer (and knowledge-seeker) influences the subject matter (the outcome his experiments) by his physical observation. The state of a quantum object is undetermined until an observation is recorded. Hence, the author's argument is that the potentiality is a part of physical reality. Einstein's contention was that the potentiality, probability or chance is due to epistemological limitations of our knowledge in knowing the entire picture, the Omni-complete, and hence misapplied to the object itself. The Omni-complete object is omniferous, omnifarious, omniparous, omnipotent and omniscient and therefore the concept of chance or probability is inappropriate in the description of a real object. Both Einstein and Heisenberg admitted that the experimental data does not lead to concepts of physics, and hence the object of scientific knowledge remains unknown, but it is known through the theoretical constructs or axiomatic postulation verified indirectly by experiments and its deduced consequences. To find the object of scientific knowledge one must go to the theoretical assumptions of a physical law; the concept of probability and chance figures into the definition of the state of a physical system (due to statistical nature of things, and also use of statistical analysis in understanding the results of an experiment) in both classical and quantum physics. In quantum physics it also figures in the subject matter, but not in classical physics. This is the major difference between two disciplines that separated Einstein from Copenhagen school of thought. Author Heisenberg suggests that the concept of potentiality very much a part of subjective reality contrary to classical reality.

The probability function represents a mixture of two things, partly a fact and partly our knowledge of a fact. An atom consists of a nucleus and electrons (wave) moving around the nucleus; from the classical standpoint it is difficult to conceive how an electron orbit around the nucleus without changing its energy. Then again the electron is a wave until detected; therefore the energy is constant as long as it stays in the same orbit. The second point is that the act of determining the position becomes a measurement problem since light quanta is absorbed during its detection and the electron is displaced (change its position) to a higher electronic state. Thus the spacetime descrip¬tion of the atomic events is complementary to their deterministic description. The probability function obeys equations of motion as in Newtonian mechanics; its change in the course of time is completely determined by the quantum mechanical equation, but it does not allow a descrip¬tion in space and time. The observation, on the other hand, enforces the description in space and time but breaks the determined continuity of the probability function by changing our knowledge of the system. The mechanism and the results of an observation of atomic events can be described in classical concepts, but the deductions from observations results in probability functions which combines the statements about possibilities with statements about our knowledge of facts. Therefore we can not completely objectify the results of an observation. What happens between an observation and the next depends on the way we observe or on the fact we observe. This becomes subjectivism. Since the probability function combines objective and subjective elements. It contains statements about possibilities or better tendencies ("potentia" in Aristotelian philosophy), and these statements are completely objective, they do not depend on any observer, but it contains statements about our knowledge of the system, which of course are subjective in so far as they may be different for different observers. In ideal cases the subjective element in the probability function may be practically negligible as com¬pared with the objective one.

1. Heisenberg and the Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics: The Physicist as Philosopher
2. The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory
3. Encounters with Einstein
4. Philosophical Problems of Quantum Physics
5. What Is Life?: with "Mind and Matter" and "Autobiographical Sketches"
6. Schrödinger: Life and Thought
7. Niels Bohr's Times,: In Physics, Philosophy, and Polity
8. Niels Bohr's Philosophy of Physics
9. Ideas And Opinions
10. From a Life of Physics

His master's voice
Quantum science is without any doubt the greatest breakthrough of science in the 20th century.If you want to know what quantum physics is all about, read this fluently written introduction to quantum physics by one of the founders of the theory himself, Nobel Prize winner Dr. Werner Heisenberg.It is very uncommon that a great scientist is capable to transmit his profound knowledge in such an easy to read book, without a single formula. (For the ones interested in the mathematics behind this theory, he has also written another book : "The physical principles of the quantum theory").In the world of today, Aristotle's deeper understanding that philosophy is the mother of science has been forgotten, something that Heisenberg not only recalls, but actively uses as a guiding principle throughout this book.

Quantum physics is important, since it produced a revolution within the materialistic perspective of classical physics.At elementary level, there is no longer a sharp distinction between matter and energy.Heisenberg says : "The elementary particles are certainly not eternal and indestructible units of matter, they can actually be transformed into each other. As a matter of fact, if two such particles, moving through space with a very high kinetic energy, collide, then many new elementary particles may be created from the available energy and the old particles may have disappeared in the collision. Such events have been frequently observed and offer the best proof that all particles are made of the same substance : energy."

This way he also solves the duality between particles and fields.If energy is the primary substance of the universe, then it will only depend on the experiment how we will observe this energy."What we observe is not nature in itself but nature exposed to our method of questioning."
... Read more

Product Description
An extensive examination of the history of gnosticism and how its philosophy has influenced the Western esoteric tradition

• Explains how the Gnostic understanding of self-realization is embodied in the esoteric traditions of the Rosicrucians and Freemasons

• Explores how gnosticism continues to influence contemporary spirituality

• Shows gnosticism to be a philosophical key that helps spiritual seekers "remember" their higher selves

Gnosticism was a contemporary of early Christianity, and its demise can be traced to Christianity's efforts to silence its teachings. The Gnostic message, however, was not destroyed but simply went underground. Starting with the first emergence of Gnosticism, the author shows how its influence extended from the teachings of neo-Platonists and the magical traditions of the Middle Ages to the beliefs and ideas of the Sufis, Jacob Böhme, Carl Jung, Rudolf Steiner, and the Rosicrucians and Freemasons. In the language of spiritual freemasonry, gnosis is the rejected stone necessary for the completion of the Temple, a Temple of a new cosmic understanding that today's heirs to Gnosticism continue to strive to create.

The Gnostics believed that the universe embodies a ceaseless contest between opposing principles. Terrestrial life exhibits the struggle between good and evil, life and death, beauty and ugliness, and enlightenment and ignorance: gnosis and agnosis. The very nature of physical space and time are obstacles to humanity's ability to remember its divine origins and recover its original unity with God. Thus the preeminent gnostic secret is that we are God in potential and the purpose of bona fide gnostic teaching is to return us to our godlike nature.

Tobias Churton is a filmmaker and the founding editor of the magazine Freemasonry Today. He studied theology at Oxford University and created the award-winning documentary series and accompanying book The Gnostics, as well as several other films on Christian doctrine, mysticism, and magical folklore. He lives in England. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (6)

For some things you have to *Be It* to *Know It*
There is an insurmountable difference betwixt being on the inside of something, and being on the outside of something. Those who are on "the inside" *know* - and those who remain outside, on the porch,.. delude themselves with falseness, and in their benightened state mistake data for knowledge.

Appreciating that experientially, it becomes vigorously obvious that quintessence trumps academia in every regard. The sciences of apara vedya cannot comprehend the knowledge of Para Vedya. The non-Gnostic spirited are doomed to gaze drunkenly through a scanner darkly indeed, recognizing only those who their heavily filtered psychic browsers will let load into their hylicean awareness. And if the codec isn't there, their minds do not, can not and will never percieve - let alone comprehend - the Gnotheans among them, nor notice the fruits of their efforts in any media.

Those mind/souls in whom the Ancient Memetic Friend dwells are marked to one another, towering salient above the innumerable generations of sheeple (the bio-cultural fusion of the forms of humans with the mentalities of sheep). Friedrich Nietzsche once noted that the difference between a genius and a normal human is greater than the difference between a man and an ape. The same is true of the Gnostic and the unsouled. In fact, the difference between a souled person and a non-souled person is greater and more alien than is or can be between any other things in this world. To have a soul is to be in this world, but not be of it - and that is the greatest, and indeed the ultimate, difference that can exist.

Read this book - but not with your physical eyes. Listen to its message, but not with your rational ears. Feel the pattern embedded within it. If you can feel that pattern, if you can connect with the current which this book is a vector of,.. Then you are reading it from the inside. Its messages will thus be of increased profundity to you.

Much clairity can be brought to bear upon this book/topic by also reading:

The Secret Teachings of All Ages, by Manly P. Hall
Food of The Gods, by Terrence McKenna
Hero With a Thousand Faces, by Joseph Campbell
The Gnostic Religion, by Hans Jonas

Gnothi seauton!

This book is just not accurate
I have to agree with Stephen Haines. This guy drags in everything but the kitchen sink. He makes Boehme a Gnostic, the troubadors, the Knights Templar, William Blake, the Masons, Jung, and finally, any physicist worth his salt.

I mean, some of these folks might not have been orthodox in their Christian practice, but being heterodox does not make one a Gnostic.

How did he forget Meister Eckhart, and Sabbatai Tzvi? If he has Boehme as a Gnostic, then these also are Gnostic.

He never distinguishes between Gnosticism as a group of sects, and gnostic practice, which pervades Kabbalah, Sufism,etc.

This is just not a good book.

Do what thou wilt!It is the Law!
Although this book purports to be a history of a philosophy, Churton stretches definition of "gnosis" almost to the breaking point.In the minds of most today, "Gnosticism" refers to one of the many branches of Christianity.Following the work of Hans Jonas, Churton argues that the "gnostics" have roots far back in time, long before Jesus.The origins lie in Persia, and may reach into ancient India and the Upanishads.The author grants himself a certain breadth of view earlier scholars either didn't use or didn't possess.The result is a sweeping vista of various movements, most of which have but the most tenuous ties to one another.Woven into this rather tattered tapestry is the running theme of the Rosicrucians and the Freemasons.

The dictionary cites "gnosis" as "an intuitive knowledge of spiritual truths".That rather vague meaning is applied here with a vengence.Churton views the Zarathustrans as the earliest gnostics.Their division of the world into two realms, the material and the spiritual, laid the foundation for many elements of Western European philosophy and religion.Good and bad, light and dark, body and spirit were the basic formulas by which the cosmos was viewed by successive gnostic movements.The appearance of Christianity was a major challenge to the gnostic dualist idea, since the Christ figure merged the demarcated elements.Gnostics, who had at least as many views of Jesus as did the orthodox Christians, ultimately rejected the corporeal aspect of Jesus.For that view, and the religious rituals Gnostic Christians adopted, a campaign of vilification and condemnation as heretics resulted.In fact, much of what was known of them for many centuries was through the voices of their enemies.

Churton, however, is able to trace the rise of many sub-themes of the gnostic idea throughhistory.Besides the resistance to bishops and other forms of church hierarchy, the gnostics had a loftier view of deities.To them, the Judeo-Christian "creator" was a "demiurge" - a deceiver and trickster.A higher deity, a goddess figure, was the True God.Even that appellation was an insufficient description and this cosmic ghost become known as The One or The All.Knowledge of The One granted the possessor with immense spiritual powers.Thus, "Do As Thou Wilt" was acceptable in the framework of one who had achieved spiritual preeminence.

Following expressions of the gnostic ideal through the Knights Templars, the Romantic movement in art and philosophy, and other offshoots promoted by those feeling constrained by orthodox Christianity, Churton arrives at the key figure in this study.Aleister Crowley, one of the most bizarre figures in Western mysticism, is granted an entire chapter.Vilified and scorned by orthodox society, Crowley followed a lifestyle an Oscar Wilde would hestitate to adopt.Crowley incorporated nearly every mystical idiom available, finally setting convential norms aside with his proclamation of "sexual magick" in his"Book of the Law".In this, and other works, Crowley claimed not only to have achieved the highest spiritual realms, but was the personification of The One in the guise of Aiwass.Churton could not have imagined a more appropriate choice to end his book, but he goes a step further.As a conclusion fitting for the end of the 20th Century, he elevates Jimi Hendrix and John Lennon as the most recent expressions of the "spiritual all".

"The All" and its "Law" is the unifying theme of the book.The All, a deity, supra-deity or megadeity, replaced earlier forms of gnosticism.The expression leaves doubt, however, as to whether the dualist nature of original Gnosticism hasn't thereby been abandoned.Mysticism, of course, is boundless, permitting any form of definition and removing any restraint to practice."Do As Thou Wilt" is perfectly permissible so long as you can claim spiritual approval for your acts.The concept should appeal to "all" humanity, but so far hasn't even displaced the various forms of monotheism.At the opening of the 21st Century, Churton's analysis seems disjointed.He cites many figures, such as Benjamin Franklin, as "gnostics", but the effect is Churton wedging anybody he can define as "unorthodox" into the Gnostic pantheon.With all his attempt at "unity" he omits the two men who truly unified life, Gregor Mendel and Charles Darwin.As an advocate of "spiritualism", Churton deftly sidesteps science, applying the usual disparagement of "materialism" as a dismissal.The book might have been a success in the opening years of the Enlightenment.Today, it's only a glaring anachronism. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

The Real McCoy
Long dissatisfied with the modern Western worldview, Westerners are increasingly turning to the Eastern spiritual traditions. This is not a bad thing, and I am not for a moment suggesting that there is no value in such philosophies. However, unbeknown to many, there is a rich alternate spiritual path right here in the West, and, nobody ever entirely able to shake off their centuries of cultural heritage, Westerners could find deeper resonance in these philosophies.

The reason Gnostic ideas are often overlooked is that due to a history of authoritarian domination by the "official" Church, many gnostic movements had no choice but to go underground. Hence "esoteric" knowledge, rather than "exoteric". But the "Da Vinci Code" phenomenon has put gnosis centre stage, and currently there is an eager revival underway. Problem is, the field is saturated with quackery, and sifting through the wheat is no easy task.

Churton, founding editor of "Freemasonry Today", is an authority on the subject and comprehensively chronicles Gnostic History to its earliest origins. What is more, he does this in a highly readable format, his journalistic experience shining through in each chapter. If your curiosity of Western esoterica has been piqued of late, and you're looking to get the low-down on what it is actually all about, there is probably no better place to start.

Gnosis and Jnana are of the same Root
_It is fitting that the author reminds us that both gnosis and jnana both come from the same root, i.e. knowledge. Specifically, in this application, it means knowledge leading to union with the divine.

_I read the author's previous book on this subject through at least three times over the years. I found his idea of the gnosis extending through history to the modern day as both valid and inspiring. No matter how overpowering was the dogma and worldly power of the age, a true spiritual path survived in the background down through the ages. A Golden Thread linked these ages. That is also true in this book, for as the author points out, you can start reading at any of the fourteen chapters and still find the Center, for the chapters mirror each other. This is because where ever this thread intersects with an age, that is where the Center is- stringing seemingly disparate and profane history together on a necklace of higher wisdom. All through history has the gnosis flowed, through the Vedists, Kabbalists, Magi,Neoplatonists, Hermeticists, Troubadours, Knights Templar, Cathars, through individual mystics, to modern day neo-gnostics.

_This is no soulless, academic, encyclopedic compilation of gnostic terminology, the inherent meaning of the subject shines through. The meaning of true Gnosis as union with god, or rather, the Divine spark and origin in all of us is repeatedly expounded. Moreover, it is shown that this is why mankind is different from other beings. We come here from beyond to grow through suffering and hard moral choices- and to ultimately awake to our Divine origins. The ultimate reason and purpose of this is that unconscious God may ultimately come to know Himself as conscious God. That was set in place from the beginning.

_One other small comment of my own on the gnostic concept of the lesser, deranged "creator god." I am not at all sure that at least some of the gnostic writers weren't referring to the Romans here. It is well known that the imperial Romans engineered cults for the purpose of social and political control. The divinization and cults of the emperors are prime examples. They claimed to be gods, demanded worship, and set up false religions to achieve this- sounds like the evil, deranged, lesser god to me, or at least his microcosmic reflection....

Oh yes, thanks to this book I now view the character and works of Aleister Crowley with considerably more sympathy and respect.

_This is a thick book, but it is uniformly a joy to read. If one were to have but one book in their library on this most profoundly significant of subjects this would be a fine choice.
... Read more

Product Description
The Contradictions of Modern Moral Philosophy is a highly original and radical critique of contemporary moral theory. Johnston skillfully demonstrates how much of recent moral philosophy runs aground on the issue of whether we can make correct moral judgements. ... Read more

Product Description
Kessinger Publishing is the place to find hundreds of thousands of rare and hard-to-find books with something of interest for everyone! ... Read more