|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0192854089
| 9780192854087
| 0192854089
| 3.67
| 986
| 1982
| 2000
|
really liked it
| On Approaching Aristotle I enjoyed this VSI. What was most valuable was that it gave me a good frame of reference to tackle Aristotle � by letting On Approaching Aristotle I enjoyed this VSI. What was most valuable was that it gave me a good frame of reference to tackle Aristotle � by letting me prepare for Aristotle in relation to Plato. Of course, Jonathan Barnes mostly assumes that the the reader has already taken the trouble to read Plato. That is the trouble with inviting such a distinguished scholar to write a basic introduction. This was just what I needed as I prepare to take my first tentative steps towards a fuller reading of Aristotle (having a dabbled a bit with Rhetoric before). Putting Aristotle’s works in perspective by relating them to their points of departure from Plato, makes a whole corpus suddenly much more familiar and in tune with things I have been reading and thinking about for months on end now. The VSI only hints at this and does not do this exhaustively, but that is enough and the reader can do the heavy slugging on their own. The Popularity Contest Besides directing the studies in the Academy, Plato himself gave lectures and his hearers took notes. It is important to notice that these lectures were not published, and that they stand in contrast to the dialogues, which were published works meant for "popular" reading. If we realize this fact, then some of the sharp differences that we naturally tend to discern between Plato and Aristotle disappear, at least in part: We possess Plato's popular works, his dialogues, but not his lectures. The situation is the exact opposite in regard to Aristotle, for while the works of Aristotle that are in our hands represent his lectures, his popular works or dialogues have not come down to us—only fragments remain. We do not possess a record of the lectures that he delivered in the Academy (though we have more or less cryptic references in Aristotle), and this would be all the more to be regretted if those are right who would see in the dialogues popular work designed for the educated laymen, to be distinguished from the lectures delivered to professional students of philosophy. We cannot, therefore, by a comparison of Plato's dialogues with Aristotle's lectures, draw conclusions, without further evidence, as to a strong opposition between the two philosophers in point of literary ability, for instance, or emotional, aesthetic and "mystical" outlook. We are told that Aristotle used to relate how those who came to hear Plato's lecture on the Good, were often astonished to hear of nothing but arithmetic and astronomy, and of the limit and the One. So we can assume that if we had only his lecture notes, even the supremely inventive Plato might be able to bore us! An Unfair Contrast Thus we have a queer situation here. What has come down to us from Plato were exactly the material he had designed to be read by the public, while most of the surviving writings of Aristotle were perhaps never intended to be read; for it seems likely that the treatises which we possess were almost wholly put together later from Aristotle’s lecture notes. The notes were made for his own use and not for public dissemination. They were no doubt tinkered with over a period of years. Moreover, although some of the treatises owe their structure to Aristotle himself, others were plainly put together by later editors � the Nicomachean Ethics is evidently not a unitary work, the Metaphysics is plainly a set of essays rather than a continuous treatise. In the light of this, it will hardly be a surprise to find that the style of Aristotle’s works is often rugged. Plato’s dialogues are finished literary artefacts, the subtleties of their thought matched by the tricks of their language. Aristotle’s writings for the most part are terse. His arguments are concise. There are abrupt transitions, inelegant repetitions, obscure allusions. Paragraphs of continuous exposition are set among staccato jottings. The language is spare and sinewy. If the treatises are unpolished, that is in part because Aristotle had felt no need and no urge to take down the beeswax. But only in part; for Aristotle had reflected on the appropriate style for scientific writing and he favoured simplicity. Aristotle could write finely � his style was praised by ancient critics who read works of his which we cannot � and some parts of the surviving items are done with power and even with panache. But he probably did not feel the need for it in his lectures, where the premium was on packing maximum information into limited time available, much like today. The Best Approach to Aristotle All this is not to suggest that reading the treatises is a dull slog. Aristotle has a vigour which is the more attractive the better it is known; and the treatises, which have none of the camouflage of Plato’s dialogues, reveal their author’s thoughts � or at least appear to do so � in a direct and stark fashion. Above all, Aristotle is tough. A good way of reading him is this: Take up a treatise, think of it as a set of lecture notes, and imagine that you now have to lecture from them. You must expand and illustrate the argument, and you must make the transitions clear; you will probably decide to relegate certain paragraphs to footnotes, or reserve them for another time and another lecture; and if you have any talent at all as a lecturer, you will find that the jokes add themselves. Let it be admitted that Aristotle can be not only tough but also vexing. Whatever does he mean here? How on earth is this conclusion supposed to follow from those premises? Why this sudden barrage of technical terms? One ancient critic claimed that ‘he surrounds the difficulty of his subject with the obscurity of his language, and thus avoids refutation � producing darkness, like a squid, in order to make himself hard to capture�. Every reader will, from time to time, think of Aristotle as a squid. But the moments of vexation are outnumbered by the moments of elation. Aristotle’s treatises offer a peculiar challenge to their readers; and once you have taken up the challenge, you would not have the treatises in any other form. It is easy to imagine that you can overhear Aristotle talking to himself. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
May 2014
|
May 04, 2014
|
May 04, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
B005ELU01Y
| 3.83
| 1,402
| 2009
| Sep 03, 2009
|
liked it
| The book is like a slightly expanded and selective index of common economic ideas. Useful for a quick glance. This index-of-an-index is for reference: The book is like a slightly expanded and selective index of common economic ideas. Useful for a quick glance. This index-of-an-index is for reference: 01. The invisible hand the condensed idea: Self-interest is good for society 02. Supply and demand the condensed idea: Something is perfectly priced when supply equals demand 03. The Malthusian trap Useful Quote: ‘Malthus has been buried many times, and with him. But as Garrett Hardin remarked, anyone who has to be reburied so often cannot be entirely dead.� the condensed idea: Beware relentless rises in population 04, Opportunity cost Useful Quote: ‘The cost of something is what you give up to get it.� the condensed idea: Time is money 05. Incentives Useful Quote: ‘Call it what you will, incentives are what get people to work harder.� the condensed idea: People respond to incentives 06. Division of labour the condensed idea: Concentrate on your specialities 07. Useful Quotes: ‘Name me one proposition in all of the social sciences which is both true and nontrivial.� the condensed idea: Specialization + free trade = win-win 08. Capitalism Useful Quote: ‘The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.� the condensed idea: The least worst way to run an economy 09. Keynesianism the condensed idea: Governments should spend to prevent deep recessions 10. Monetarism the condensed idea: Control the growth of money 11. Communism the condensed idea: An egalitarian, entirely state-run society 12. Individualism Useful Quote: ‘Once it has been perceived that the division of labour is the essence of society, nothing remains of the antithesis between individual and society. The contradiction between individual principle and social principle disappears.� the condensed idea: Individual human choices are paramount 13. Supply-side economics the condensed idea: Higher taxes mean lower growth 14. The marginal revolution the condensed idea: Rational people think at the margin 15. Money the condensed idea: Money is a token of trust 16. Micro and macro the condensed idea: Micro for businesses, macro for countries 17. Gross domestic product the condensed idea: The key yardstick of a country’s economic performance 18. Central banks and interest rates Useful Quote: ‘In central banking as in diplomacy, style, conservative tailoring, and an easy association with the affluent, count greatly and results far much less.� the condensed idea: Central banks steer economies away from booms and busts 19. Inflation Useful Quotes: ‘Inflation is the one form of taxation that can be imposed without legislation.� the condensed idea: Keep prices rising slowly 20. Debt and deflation the condensed idea: Falling prices can cripple an economy 21. Taxes the condensed idea: As inevitable as death 22. Unemployment the condensed idea: Zero unemployment is impossible 23. Currencies and exchange rates the condensed idea: The barometer of a country’s standing 24. Balance of payments the condensed idea: The ledger of a country’s international economic relations 25. Trust and the law the condensed idea: The irreplaceable foundations of society 26. Energy and oil the condensed idea: Deal with oil shortages through innovation 27. Bond markets the condensed idea: Bonds are the basis of government financing 28. Banks Useful Quote: ‘What is robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?� the condensed idea: Banks connect borrowers with lenders 29. Stocks and shares the condensed idea: Stock markets sit at the heart of capitalism 30. Risky business the condensed idea: Pass risk to those more willing to take it 31. Boom and bust the condensed idea: Boom and bust are inevitable 32. Pensions and the welfare state the condensed idea: Beware promising money you can’t give 33. Money markets the condensed idea: Money markets make the financial world go round 34. Blowing bubbles the condensed idea: Humans are addicted to bubbles 35. Credit crunches Useful Quote: ‘The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent.� the condensed idea: Economies seize up as credit dries up 36. Creative destruction the condensed idea: Companies must adapt or die 37. Home-owning and house prices the condensed idea: House prices go down as well as up 38. Government deficits the condensed idea: Governments are addicted to debt 39. Inequality the condensed idea: The wealth gap will destabilize nations 40. Globalization the condensed idea: Globalization is the adrenaline of capitalism 41. Multilateralism the condensed idea: Nations can achieve more by working together 42. Protectionism Useful Quote: ‘When goods cannot cross borders, armies will.� the condensed idea: The biggest threat to world peace and prosperity 43. Technological revolutions the condensed idea: Technology is economic fuel 44. Development economics the condensed idea: Aim to pull the bottom billion out of poverty 45. Environmental economics the condensed idea: Act now to avoid terrible environmental costs 46. Behavioural economics the condensed idea: People are predictably irrational 47. Game theory Useful Quote: ‘Do not do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Their tastes may be different.� the condensed idea: People behave differently in games 48. Criminomics Useful Quote: ‘Since the science of economics is primarily a set of tools, as opposed to a subject matter, then no subject, however offbeat, need be beyond its reach.� the condensed idea: Economics can apply to everything 49. Happynomics the condensed idea: Economics is not all about money 50. 21st-century economics the condensed idea: Intervene when people are not rational ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Apr 20, 2014
|
May 03, 2014
|
May 03, 2014
|
Kindle Edition
| |||||||||||||||||
0140444505
| 9780140444506
| 0140444505
| 4.12
| 6,310
| -369
| Aug 04, 1987
|
it was amazing
| Epistemological Idiots Here Plato engages with the concept of ‘knowledge� and ‘understanding� as in many other dialogues, but Theaetetus is often h Epistemological Idiots Here Plato engages with the concept of ‘knowledge� and ‘understanding� as in many other dialogues, but Theaetetus is often hailed as ‘Plato’s most sustained study of epistemology,� and is a deep investigation into the question �What is knowledge?� As such, it is the founding document of what has come to be known as ‘epistemology�, as one of the most important branches of philosophy and went on to influence Aristotle, the and the modern geography of the field. In comparison with most Platonic Dialogues, Theaetetus is a complex and difficult work of abstract philosophical theory and attempting to summarize would only serve to make it even more so. The difficult topic of epistemology and its many twists and turns are best left to Socrates� expert hands. Here I will only try to outline my understanding of how this dialogue fits into Plato’s overall objectives. Socrates� abiding passion was the question of practical conduct, and to be able to have any workable theory on conduct and the ‘good life�, it is not acceptable that truth is relative � if there is no stable norm, no abiding object of knowledge, Socrates (and thus Plato’s) basic objective collapses. This is why it was essential to be convinced that ethical conduct must be founded on knowledge, and that that knowledge must be knowledge of eternal values which are not subject to the shifting and changing impressions of sense or of subjective opinion, but are the same for all men and for all peoples and all ages, eternal. This conviction that there can be knowledge in the sense of objective and universally valid knowledge is what animates the spirit of Theaetetus � to demonstrate this fact theoretically, and to probe deeply into the problems of knowledge, asking what knowledge is and of what. Keeping with this objective, in the Theaetetus Plato's first object is the refutation of false theories. Accordingly he sets himself the task of challenging the theory of Protagoras that knowledge is perception, that what appears to an individual to be true is true for that individual. His method is to elicit dialectically a clear statement of the implied by the the epistemology of Protagoras, to exhibit its consequences and to show that the conception of "knowledge" thus attained does not fulfill the requirements of true knowledge at all, since knowledge must be, Plato assumes, (i) infallible, and (ii) of what is. Sense-perception is knowledge fails spectacularly (and quite satisfactorily for Plato) in this examination as it is neither the one nor the other. Sense-perception is not, therefore, worthy of the name of knowledge. It should be noted how much Plato is influenced by the conviction that sense-objects are not proper objects of knowledge and cannot be so, since knowledge is of what is, of the stable and abiding, whereas objects of sense cannot really be said to be but only to become. This first of ճٱٳܲ� (Theaetetus was a famous mathematician, Plato’s associate for many years in the Academy) three successive definitions of knowledge � that knowledge is simply ‘perception� � is not finally ‘brought to birth� until Socrates has linked it to Protagoras� famous �man is the measure� doctrine of relativistic truth, and also to the theory that �all is motion and change� that Socrates finds most Greek thinkers of the past had accepted, and until he has fitted it out with an elaborate and ingenious theory of perception and how it works. He then examines separately the truth of these linked doctrines and, in finally rejecting ճٱٳܲ� idea as unsound, he advances his own positive analysis of perception and its role in knowledge: Thus Socrates proceeds to the next two definitions of knowledge � that ‘Knowledge is simply "True Judgment”� and that ‘Knowledge is True Judgment plus an "Account" of it.� After systematic exploration of these ideas (with a few amusing digressions) and rejecting them as unsound Socrates paves the way toward an acceptable theory of Forms, to be explored further in dialogues such as Parmenides and ճܲ . Epistemological Idiots? Not Quite. Once we reject the three proposals and reach the aporetic conclusion of the dialogue, our first impulse might be, as with all epistemological explorations, to conclude that Socrates has proved that it is impossible to define ‘what is knowledge� and hence, by extension, the impossibility of knowledge itself. I almost laughed with triumph at this nihilistic ending until I was put in my place by reading commentaries on the subject. For a quick flavor: SOCRATES: And so, Theaetetus, if ever in the future you should attempt to conceive or should succeed in conceiving other theories, they will be better ones as the result of this inquiry. And if you remain barren, your companions will find you gentler and less tiresome; you will be modest and not think you know what you don’t know. This is all my art can achieve � nothing more. Instead, a more nuanced reading of ճٱٳܲ� conclusion by situating it among the Platonic corpus will tell us that the conclusion to be drawn is not that no knowledge is attainable through definition, but rather that the individual, sensible object is indefinable and is not really the proper object of knowledge at all. The object of true knowledge must be stable and abiding, fixed, capable of being grasped in clear and scientific definition, which is of the universal, as Socrates saw. In the Theaetetus he shows that neither sense-perception nor true belief are possessed of both these requirements; neither, then, can be equated with true knowledge. This is the real conclusion of the dialogue, namely, that true knowledge of sensible objects is unattainable, and, by implication, that true knowledge must be knowledge of the universal and abiding, which must be, as we have said, (i) infallible, (ii) of what is. The key to understanding Theaetetus is to accept that Plato has assumed from the outset that knowledge is attainable, and that knowledge must be (i) infallible and (ii) of the real. True knowledge must possess both these characteristics, and any state of mind that cannot vindicate its claim to both these characteristics cannot be true knowledge. It follows, then, that it is the universal and not the particular that fulfills the requirements for being an object of knowledge. Knowledge of the highest universal (beauty, goodness, justice, courage, etc.) will be the highest kind of knowledge, while "knowledge" of the particular will be the lowest kind of "knowledge." This connects us directly to the famous line analogy of The Republic and paves the way for . Theaetetus is a valuable but difficult dialogue to be familiar with since Plato explores epistemology without letting on his intentions and this might prove difficult to readers who treat this dialogue as standing by itself. Instead it needs to be treated as part of a continuum, that started with Parmenides and is carried forward in The Sophist and The Statesman (the next two parts of the ‘trilogy�) and on to The Republic, destined to trouble Plato for the rest of his career, never being resolved satisfactorily enough. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
May 2014
|
May 02, 2014
|
May 02, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0143036831
| 9780143036838
| 0143036831
| 3.80
| 940
| Mar 28, 2006
| Mar 28, 2006
|
liked it
| For Whom the Snob Trolls Grammar snobs who like to bully people have done an incredible job of alienating the rest of us from even wanting to know For Whom the Snob Trolls Grammar snobs who like to bully people have done an incredible job of alienating the rest of us from even wanting to know stuff like how to use the word “whom.� But there’s a good reason to learn. So good that it’s worth overcoming the visceral aversion to the word that these grammar snobs have instilled in us. And here is that reason: About half the people you hear spewing the word “whom� in everyday conversation don’t really know how. It’s now almost normal to just glaze over when you hear about who/whom or I/me or that/which or terms like “subject pronouns� and “object pronouns.� But there is no need to do that � if you stop and take notice, you’ll see that they’re completely self-explanatory. Punctuation, another bugbear, too is pretty darn simple. In fact most of grammar is extremely simple stuff, with just a few confusing gray areas. These gray areas, of course, are where we make our mistakes and, therefore, where snobs & perfectionists find fodder to intimidate the bejesus out of us. Casagrande asks the reader to not let this get to them. That’s what the grammar snobs want. And if we retreat now, the meanies win. Grammar Emperors Wear No Clothes Casagrande insists that the rules are at best self-evident and at worst ridiculous. So it’s a good thing we didn’t invest too much time reading the works of grammar snobs, punctuation pundits and word pervs. And just to prove her point, she ingress out famous gamer snobs and pulls them down. SHe doesn’t hesitate to discredit the worthies as well � too coming in for special hammering. So if you ever find yourself being roughed up by people who actually expect you to say ridiculously stuffy-sounding things like, “I did it wrongly,� or “I followed the directions rightly,� just know that, eventually, all grammar bullies get their comeuppance. Even better, with a little confidence you can be the one who puts them in their place. Channel The Hatred! Okay, maybe spite isn’t the best reason to learn grammar and usage. But it’s certainly good motivation. What’s more, the meanies� just by being themselves—have provided us with excellent fodder for having a good time while we learn. And that is the crux of the book, learn good grammar while being really mean and bashing up your bullies. Stripped of all the foul mouthing, the book is a simple call to learn grammar and not to be intimidated and offended by snobs into ignoring it. Sure, good way to dress it, but does it work? To an extent, yes. Among all the supposed fun are some well articulated and simple rules that might help make grammar easier for the long-bullied. Casagrande takes a few common worry spots such as whom-usage, me/I, etc. and reassures the reader that they are, in fact, more often right than they think. [image] And, hey, if making a few jokes at rules and getting righteously angry is what it takes to remember, go right ahead, eh? Are You a Snob? Am I one? Yes, of course � anyone who cares for the language is. It is the sense of humor that counts, the idea is to not be snobs that troll. Also, endeavor to not be too harsh as snobs, because most rules have loopholes, if you are good enough a grammarian. If it is the language you care about and not your own ego, then trolling or bullying the occasional honest mistake is not the answer. It will only serve to alienate people from good english. This is Our Language Too This funny and useful book tells the lay reader that when the experts can’t even get their stories straight and when professional writers make egregious flubs, it’s actually good news for the rest of us. It means that the seemingly huge gulf between the duds and those in the know isn’t so huge after all. It means that nine out of ten times when we’re worried we don’t know the right way to speak or write the experts don’t know either. It means that our instincts are good and that common sense applies. It means that the super-arcane, super-difficult aspects of the language aren’t things we’re expected to know anyway. It means, in short, that this is our language too and we shouldn’t be afraid to point out occasionally when the emperors struts out with no clothes on. [image] So, “Whom’s afraid of the big bad grammar snob?� or “Who’s afraid of the big bad grammar snob?� Not you, that’s for sure. ONE LINE SUMMARY: GRAMMAR EMPERORS WEAR NO CLOTHES. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 21, 2014
|
Apr 28, 2014
|
Apr 28, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0025003704
| 9780025003705
| 0025003704
| 3.79
| 123
| Mar 20, 1987
| Mar 01, 1987
|
really liked it
| The Testaments of Democracy Adler presents an engaging discussion of what he classes as the three defining documents of the USA — the The Testaments of Democracy Adler presents an engaging discussion of what he classes as the three defining documents of the USA — the , the (plus amendments, especially the First Ten amendments - known as the ), and the , and their inter-relations, especially between the Declaration and the Constitution. He calls them the American Testaments, since when interpreted together and in relation to one another, they are like the sacred scriptures of the nation. Adler claims that through detailed examination and critical exegesis, much can be gained from them. - From the Declaration � DERIVE the nation's basic articles of political faith. - From the Preamble & Amendments � UNDERSTAND the elaboration of these articles of political faith in terms of governmental aims, structures and policies. - From the Gettysburg Address — give to ourselves a full and rich CONFIRMATION of our faith in these articles. And also in the people who declared, formed the ‘more perfect union� and perpetuated it. Best Quote: We are not only the heirs of those people, we ARE those people. The Parts of the Whole The first part of the book is devoted to declarations about the importance of learning these three documents - both for understanding the nation and to charting the future course of democracy. From then on, the book focuses on a minute examination of the three documents. Before the exegesis commences, Adler indulges in a discussion about two words: Ideas & Ideals. These two words look alike and sound alike but have different meanings, and form the very core of this book. To summarize, we can distinguish the two thus: - IDEAS � are to be understood, intellectually and can be theoretical or practical. - IDEALS � are objectives/goals to be striven for, and realized/realizable through action. Once an Ideal is realized, it is no longer an ideal. Only realizable goals are ideals, if not they are utopian fantasies. Genuine ideals belong to the realm of the possible. We need only think of an ideal society to understand that most underlying ideas of any constitution remain unrealized. We have only remotely approximated most ideals, including the practicable ones. Which is why we need to understand the ideas and their most ideal natures and objectives, to understand how they have served us and how they can serve us further. Some of the ideas addressed are - equality, inalienable rights, pursuit of happiness, civil rights and human rights, consent of the governed, the dissent of the governed, people (form of by etc) and thus Democracy itself. Of these ideas, Equality, happiness, etc. generates ideals that are clearly not yet achieved. Democracy too is an idea that is also an ideal - i.e. not fully realized yet. After delineating ideas and ideals, Adler proceeds to set out the ideas and then examine if they have been realized and the ideals we need to aspire to realize more fully The second part of the book is concerned with isolating and explaining the ideas identifiable in the Declaration of Independence & Lincoln’s famous speech. They are only considered as ideas in this section and their more important role as pursuable ideals are discussed only later. The third part isolates the additional ideas found in the Preamble and then foes on to also consider them as ideals, still on the road to fulfillment. The Fourth section of the book is devoted to the most important idea of the modern world - the idea of democracy. This is considered in great detail and more importantly, in both political and economic aspects. Adler says that this idea has only recently been recognized as an ideal. Which is why it requires the fullest possible realization of Political and Economic Justice, Liberty and Equality. We are made to consider also the obstacles to be overcome if a true democracy is to ever be born for the FIRST time in the history of the world. This was my favorite section of the book � most interesting being the discussion on the economic imperative of true democracy, without which it will always remain an ideal, an idea-in the making. Democracy is not a Political idea, it cannot be attained through political means alone. The goals have to include both political and economic ideals. The Individual Obligation to Philosophy Adler wrote this book as an homage to the second centennial celebration of the Declaration of Independence. Mere flag waving, convocations or oratory will not suffice to celebrate such an event and its two centuries of development. What would instead be a better homage to the idea of democracy is to focus on individual celebrations � by accepting the obligation to understand the ‘testament of the nation.� I would go further and say that this spirit should be maintained at every election year, and even more, at every democratically vital moment a nation passes through. I read this to gain that spirit as India prepped for the world’s largest democratic spectacle. In spite of studying the constitution many times, I have always felt that it had to be more than mere study that is expected. Adler has made me realize that it is direct engagement with the core ideas and ideals that is required along with constant reinterpretation of the arguments. That is the only way to make sure that we stay true to the ideals and keep re-charting the course we have taken. To set out to understand the Ideas & Ideals enshrined in any constitution is nothing less than a philosophical undertaking, and that is what Adler demands of us. It is true that Adler talks primarily of the American Constitution, but readers from any country can come away from this reading with a better appreciation of how to engage with their own Testaments. We are not merely the heirs of the people who gave them to us, we ARE those people and it is our duty, both to confirm them and to fulfill them. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Apr 10, 2014
|
Apr 25, 2014
|
Apr 25, 2014
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||
0071472339
| 9780071472333
| 0071472339
| 4.04
| 175
| Dec 14, 2006
| Jan 04, 2007
|
really liked it
| The Engines of Democracy Edersheim starts the book on a brooding note, by talking of how managements can no longer steer companies assuredly anymor The Engines of Democracy Edersheim starts the book on a brooding note, by talking of how managements can no longer steer companies assuredly anymore. She says that something is wrong with all businesses in this century � they are overwhelmed, by the amount of information and change that keeps coming their way and the strain placed on them by the call for continuos innovation. Why? Because successful people wants to hold on to yesterday � to things, ideas and habits that made them successful � they don’t know how to free themselves and embrace the new fluxing reality of the day. This is where she believes Drucker has a great and immediate role to play. His greatest asset is his “ability to liberate people� according to Edershiem. This ability involves the creation of tools of thinking and acting that allows ones strategic ability to adapt as fast as the environment � primarily by giving the CEOs or the managers the faith to trust their own judgement and thinking once again, instead of just clinging to whatever has chanced to work before. Hitler and The Dangers of Management Failure While this might seem like something that should concern only the business world, in Edersheim’s hands, Drucker assumes much greater importance � he becomes the modern messiah who has to guide a faltering world. This is because in Drucker’s conception, the vibrancy of business and their direction is a guiding force for the direction of society itself. The book thus represents Drucker’s driving passion for making organizations and management work well in the present to create a better tomorrow. The importance and need for great management derives directly from its importance as the vibrant driving force of society. [image] Europe’s economic free-fall in 1930s and the organizational failures were, to Drucker, directly connected to poor business and government management. The lack of a viable economic engine in Europe is what bright Hitler to power. Without economic opportunity, he wrote back in 1933, “the European masses realized for the first time that existence in the society is governed not by what is rational and sensible, but by the blind irrational and demon forces.� He says that lack of an economic engine isolates people and they become destructive. The Fragility and interdependence of our economic system and the enormous cost of failure along with the studies on the rise of Fascism and Communism further confirms Drucker’s view of the critical need for vibrant businesses in any economy to be able to function. The Marauder’s Map of Questions In interpreting Drucker, Edersheim has focused on today � the crazy times. The focus is on using the past learnings to drive future change, and to initiate them today. But more than the intent of the book, it is the method that should interest keen readers: Drucker was famous for his Socratic style of questioning - forcing people to step back and think and arrive at answers - it was part of the ‘liberating� that he was acclaimed for. This freedom to question and to accept new answers were part of that ‘liberation�. [image] Edersheim has used Drucker’s most insightful questions (that a company/management should ask itself) to structure every chapter in the book along with some insightful case studies as illustrations.The case studies are woven around them as model ways of posing these questions and the answers that were arrived at thus. As we read, we are also encouraged to think through how and where we could pose these questions ourselves and how we might answer them. It is a very consultative book in that sense The Structure The book can best be described as a prep course for a long journey. The minimum essentials are to have a good map handy, to have the best vehicle outfitted and a good driver at the helm. The books is structured around these key requirements. The first chapter lays out the map, �looking outside� before using the famous Drucker concept of �looking in from outside� � laying out the importance changes that makes this century so crazy and dangerous for business. The windshield of the car is the imaginatively titled �Marauder’s Map� � what you see this changing environment through - the map is always in flux, changing along with the people, events and ideas; and what we need to understand is that it has to be accepted on those terms. Chapter 2 is about the guy at the steering wheel - The Customer. The one who should be setting the direction and driving every change, every turn that the organization should take and also changing the map in the process. Chapter 3-5 are the fundamentals needed on the journey � the four wheels: innovation, collaboration, people and knowledge. Chapter 6 is about the the Decision mechanisms, Discipline and Values that connect all the fundamental things (well, wheels) together and gives shape to the vehicle that is the organiation - the chassis. The last chapter is about the CEO � forced to think outside the box always, he stands outside the metaphor too! The Engines of Democracy According to Drucker, the world wars were a point of management transition - of transition from a mercantile economy to an industry economy � and resultant tensions between policy and reality. Drucker believes that we are now in another critical moment of transition � from the Industrial economy to the knowledge-based economy � and we should expect radical changes in society and business and we haven’t by any means seen them all yet. The Lego World, or Competion-less Capitalism Drucker calls the modern world a Lego World � a world where corporations do not compete anymore, but are interchangeable (and sometimes unique) lego blocks that fit together in unique ways to provide specific value oppositions to the customers. Drucker throws a direct challenge to the �World Is Flat� viewpoint. He says that it is so only from an industrial viewpoint. But it is not flat from the viewpoint of organizations. There is plenty of rom for uniqueness � it is all about the coming together of the right Lego pieces. [image] In Ducker’s view, the current Economic Engine is facing its great threat in more than a 100 years � can modern corporations learn to be be strategic collaborators rather than than unilateral superstars?? The book repeatedly emphasizes Drucker’s conviction that Businesses are the critical engine of a thriving society � of a society that values individuals and rewards achievement, and Management is the key factor to keeping it running. Business isn’t just business. It is the economic engine of democracy! And liberated managers who can ask the right questions are needed to rise to this occasion and meet the grave challenges that are being posed of us. The book is about learning to ask those few key questions. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Apr 18, 2014
|
Apr 20, 2014
|
Apr 20, 2014
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||
0140136290
| 9780140136296
| 0140136290
| 3.84
| 17,438
| 1954
| Jan 01, 2009
|
really liked it
| Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics: The Pirates of the Powerpoint Darrell Huff uses a simple, but effective literary device to impress his readers abo Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics: The Pirates of the Powerpoint Darrell Huff uses a simple, but effective literary device to impress his readers about how much statistics affect their daily lives and their understanding of the world. He does this by pretending that the book is a sort of primer in ways to use statistics to deceive, like a manual for swindlers, or better, for pirates. He then pretends to justify the crookedness of the book in the manner of the retired burglar whose published reminiscences amounted to a graduate course in how to pick a lock and muffle a footfall: The crooks already know these tricks; honest men must learn them in self-defense. This keeps the book interesting and entertaining, though for anyone even partly trained in statistics, it has very little educational value. Of course, the title of this book and Huff’s little charade would seem to imply that all such operations are the product of intent to deceive. The intelligent reader would be skeptical � it is the unfortunate truth that it not chicanery much of the time, but incompetence. On the other hand, Huff is pretty clear that the ‘errors� if that is what they are always seem to come down on the side of the interested party. As long as the errors remain one-sided, he says, it is not easy to attribute them to bungling or accident. No More Mr. Nice Guy After being fellow pirates for much of the book, in the concluding chapter Huff finally lets go if his pet charade and faces up to the more serious purpose of the book: explaining how to look a phony statistic in the eye and face it down; and no less important, how to recognize sound and usable data in that wilderness of fraud to which the previous chapters have been largely devoted. He lays down some thumb rules, which in the end comes come down to asking intelligent questions of the stats, especially of the conclusions. Asking such questions require the readers to be aware of the tendency of stats to mislead and to not be dazzled by the numbers. Huff’s book is primarily an attempt to pull down the high estimation automatically awarded to anybody willing to quote numbers. It is a fun evening read for the expert, who may then roll his eyes and say that there is nothing of real value in the book. But as its popularity attests to, it seems to be an important book for the lay reader, just by serving a reminder that the pirates are still out there � wielding their charts. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Apr 03, 2014
|
Apr 30, 2014
|
Apr 06, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
1841125628
| 9781841125626
| 1841125628
| 4.33
| 3
| Nov 14, 2003
| Nov 14, 2003
|
liked it
|
This book is a series of interviews with top management ‘gurus.� It is full of business ideas from these � some of world’s leading business thinkers.
This book is a series of interviews with top management ‘gurus.� It is full of business ideas from these � some of world’s leading business thinkers. It will not turn a bad business into a good business. Nor will it turn a bad businessman into an entrepreneurial genius. However, what this collection of interviews offers is a smorgasbord of business ideas: Pick and choose. Some you will find risible. Others will strike a chord. Others still you may remember and act on. In the final analysis, ideas are nothing without application. The Table of Contents is quite valuable and can serve as quick reference. I am basing my quick summary on it. Please feel free to ‘pick & choose.� Section 1: Leading the Way 1. Warren Bennis: Geeks, geezers and beyond Warren Bennis analyses Geeks and Geezers � which compares leaders under the age of 35 (‘geeks�) with those over 70 (‘geezers�). His basic argument is that tough situations make for tough leaders. Best question: You argue that crucibles are important in people’s development. But can you create your own crucible? 2. Rosabeth Moss Kanter: Teaching cowboys Confucius Kanter uses The Change Toolkit � to create Web-based versions to empower people to make change more effective. To give these skills to everyone so that change management � essential to leadership � becomes more widely understood and practiced. This is a way to empower people � by giving them the tools. Best Question: Is the western heroic view of leadership still appropriate? Answer: If we think of the western notion of leadership as cowboy leader- ship, the tough heroic stuff, it is no longer very appropriate. My view of leadership is probably more Confucian than cowboy. The best leaders have somewhat universal characteristics. Leaders are more effective when they are able to create coalitions, develop and use a support system, encourage, listen and develop other people. Those sorts of attributes tend to transcend cultures. 3. Manfred Kets de Vries: The dark side of leadership PSYCHOANALYSIS Meets Management Strategy: He talked about why companies crave heroic leaders � and what happens when executive egos get out of control. de Vries is a sort of pathologist of organizations. People would ask me to look at organizations that they thought were going in the wrong direction � for looking at the darker side of organizations, and particularly the darker side of leadership. How do leaders derail, what goes wrong? How can you recognize the signals when things go wrong and what can you can do about it? You can argue that 20 percent of the general population is relatively healthy; 20 percent is relatively sick; and the other 60 percent some- where in the middle. That applies to most people I meet. If you are a CEO you usually have a ‘magnificent obsession� and that comes with a price. You are obsessed by certain things having to do with business. You may not have the greatest talent for other parts of your life that may result in negative side effects such as a high incidence of divorce. The real disease of many executives, CEOs in particular, is narcissism. 4. John Kotter: In the field There’s no one who has spent more time talking to managers. That is about the claim to fame. 5. Daniel Goleman: Maxed emotions Spread the gospel of emotional intelligence to a largely grateful business world � It is based on the notion that the ability of managers to understand and manage their own emotions and relation- ships is the key to better business performance. Section 2: Selling the Future 6. Peter Schwartz: Thinking the unthinkable An internationally renowned futurist, Peter Schwartz is a leading advocate of scenario planning � a technique that helps organizations ‘think the unthinkable� by creating alternative stories, or scenarios, about how the future might pan out. Claim to fame: He assembled a team of futurists to envision the world in 2058 for Steven Spielberg’s latest film Minority Report. 7. Watts Wacker: Fringe benefits How do you practically look to the future when things are changing so rapidly? The way to do so it is to look at what is called the fringe. Basically, the fringe is three deviations away from the mean. If we want to see the parts of the future that are seeable we need to look at the fringe because the fringe migrates to the middle. Trends that are peripheral today become mainstream tomorrow. Keep a sharp eye! 8. John Patrick: The attitude thing Very general. Best let the Guru talk: What is the right attitude? It is an attitude that includes the ability to think globally but act locally, think big but start simple, think outside-in instead of inside-out, be able to accept ‘just enough is good enough�, engage in trial by fire, transform to a model of sense and respond instead of the traditional model of plan, build, deliver. This attitude comes from the grassroots thinking that was part of the evolution of the Internet. It’s hard to describe. Young people tend to have it but it’s not really an age thing. The masses of people in the middle layers of large organizations often don’t have it. The bureaucracies of large organizations have shielded them from the new way of thinking and, in some cases, Darwinian instincts have caused them to bring up their own shields. 9. Charles Handy: Reflections of a reluctant capitalist No other management theorist’s world view encompasses the irresistible rise of the flea, the crumbling of the elephants and a written constitution for business. In addition, the world according to Charles Handy calls on the business world to rethink the money-obsessed mindset of executives and to look for a reason for business beyond simply increasing shareholder value. 10. Philip Kotler: Marketing in the digital age Kotler wrote Marketing Management, still the definitive work on marketing and the text-book on every marketing student’s shelves. Subsequently, Kotler has applied marketing theory to a huge variety of new areas � nonprofit organizations (museums, per- forming arts, hospitals, colleges, etc.), social causes, places (cities, regions, and nations), and celebrities. Along the way he has coined phrases such as ‘mega marketing�, ‘demarketing�, ‘social marketing�, ‘place marketing�, and ‘segmentation, targeting, and positioning�. It is no surprise to talk about e-marketing then, right? Best question: What is the best marketing job in the world? Answer: The most satisfying marketing job is not to sell more Coca-Cola or Crest toothpaste but to bring more education and health to people and make a real difference in the quality of their lives. Section 3: People Power 11. Derrick Bell: The ardent protestor Derrick Bell is one of America’s most forthright and best-known commentators on race and ethics. He protests for their rights and makes it a part of business strategy. Commendable. 12. Jonas Ridderstråle: Emotional capital Core Competencies to PASSION! Companies talk a lot about core competencies but they are meaningless without core compassion, actually caring about what you do, why you do it and who you do it with. Organizations can start by hiring people with a passion for their business. In reality, companies actually steer clear of passionate people. They would rather hire dull, reliable people than passionate enthusiasts with an appetite for change. They fill their ranks with people who want the future to be the same rather than people who want to invent the future. One thing we can be sure of is that the future will not bring more of the same. 13. Leif Edvinsson: The context’s the thing The context around the workers matters most: The big issue now is the context around the knowledge worker. The context surrounding knowledge workers has become tougher. Research suggests that 20 per cent of our health is related to the architecture which surrounds us � work space design, sound levels, smells, types of seating and so on. Context matters. So the challenge of intellectual capital is also very personal and health-oriented. One important dimension of this is to replace offices with other meeting places or knowledge arenas, such as knowledge cafés. We have to have space to clear our heads to seize our own opportunities. In years gone by, people took the waters in search of physical restoration. Now, we need mental spas, places where we can renew ourselves and our minds. After all, we have the potential for hundreds of billions of thoughts per day. The opportunity cost of not seizing these opportunities is enormous. This is brain economics; the care for the talent potential. I think it was Peter Drucker who lamented the inefficiency of the knowledge worker. He was right. You, as brainpower, can work positively and usefully for 4�8 hours per day. Thereafter, your effect is likely to be a negative one. 14. Tony Buzan: Brain power Buzan is best known as the creator of Mind Mapping®, a ‘thinking tool� once described, colourfully and not altogether helpfully, as the ‘Swiss army knife of the brain�. A mind map is a kind of mental shorthand. Arguments and ideas radiate in tentacles from a centre point. His central argument is that the magical powers of the human brain remain largely untapped. Our greatest asset is allowed to wallow in ill-organized, poorly-directed lethargy. Unused muscles rapidly lose their tone. 15. Marshall Goldsmith: Coaching for results Marshall Goldsmith is one of the world’s best-known � and best-paid � executive coaches. What else? Yeah, he gets results. Don’t ask me how. Didn’t you see the word ‘coach�? 16. Kjell Nordström: Tribal gathering How should companies differentiate themselves? The starting point must be a neat niche, a funky few, a global tribe. You need to understand your particular tribe better than anyone else. You must know what makes them tick, what scares them, what gets them out of bed in the morning, what turns them on. The tribe is the basic unit of business. If you don’t know who your tribe is or anything about them, you are not going to stand out from the crowd. So what’s the message? If you focus your energy on creating and then exploiting an extremely narrow niche you can make a lot of money. The tribe may consist of one-legged homosexual dentists. It may be lawyers who race pigeons. But if you manage to capture these customers globally, you can make a lot of money. There are riches in niches. 17. Tom Stewart: Intellectual capitalist Intellectual capital can be crudely described as the collective brainpower of an organization. The switch from physical assets to intellectual assets � brawn to brain � as the source of wealth creation has been underway in the developed economies for some time. As an advertisement for Deutsche Bank put it: ‘Ideas are capital. The rest is just money�. Section 4: Strategic Wisdom 18. Gary Hamel: The radical fringe He calls for radical innovation in business, telling companies that they must continually reinvent themselves, not just at times of crisis. His landmark book, co- authored with C K Prahalad, Competing for the Future, was BusinessWeek’s book of the year in 1995. Its 2000 sequel, Leading the Revolution, was also a bestseller. We have to systematically train people in new ways of think- ing. We have to create new metrics. Most of the metrics companies use � ROI, EVA, and so on � push us into thinking simply about incremental improvements. We still have a very deep belief in management processes, which are the antithesis of innovation. 19. Costas Markides: Escaping the jungle Imagine you find yourself in the middle of a dark and hostile jungle. If you want to get out of the jungle, do you need a strategy? Think about it. In the dense foliage, you cannot see beyond a few feet. You want to get out of this jungle but you don’t know how and you don’t know which way to turn. There is total uncertainty. How then can you get out alive? Well, the last thing you want to do is to stay still, paralysed by uncertainty. You need to analyse your position based on the available information and then decide on a direction. That’s the first principle of strategy � the need to make difficult choices based on what information you have at the time. You take stock, gather information based on that and then start walking. The worst thing is to stay still. That’s the second principle of strategy � the need to stop analysing and start doing, even if you are not entirely sure that what you are doing is going to turn out to be the right thing. So, what needs to change? We need to train people how to think, not what to think. 20. James Champy: What re-engineering did next Champy and Hammer established re-engineering as the big business idea of the early 1990s, creating a whole new consulting industry. His recent book, X-Engineering the Corporation, argues that managers must now look beyond re-engineering and cross (as in X) boundaries they’ve never crossed before. The walls between a company, its customers and its suppliers � and even between competitors � are falling, he argues. The advent of the Internet makes it possible to redesign processes across organizational borders. James Champy talks about what the re-engineering revolution achieved, how it was hijacked by corporate downsizers, and why X-engineering is the next big thing. 21. W Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne: Strategic moves “Smart Strategic Moves� are needed. Yes! You guessed it � I didn’t get how this is anything different. 22. Henry Mintzberg: Searching for balance Henry Mintzberg talks about why MBAs and shareholder value are killing business, and the need to bring balance to the capitalist system. Solzhenitsyn said that a society that has no rules like the communist society is abhorrent, but a society that only stays within the letter of the law � he had the United States in mind � is not much better. Best Question: What’s wrong with MBAs? Answer: Basically, my objection is that MBA programmes claim to be creat- ing managers and they are not. The MBA is really about business, which would be fine except that people leave these programmes thinking they’ve been trained to do management. I think every MBA should have a skull and crossbones stamped on their forehead and underneath should be written, ‘Warning; not prepared to manage�. And the issue is not just that they are not trained to manage, but that they are given a totally wrong impression of what managing is; namely decision-making by analysis. The impression they get from what they’ve studied is that people skills don’t really matter. So they come out with this distorted view. I’ve seen it over and over again where people have MBAs and go into managerial positions and don’t know what they are doing. So basically, they write reports and plans and do all sorts of information processing things and pretend that it’s management. It’s killing organizations, and I think it’s getting worse over time. One more: Is Michael Porter’s Five Forces framework still relevant today? Porter’s Five Forces is a wonderful way to analyse industries but it has nothing to do with making strategies because there’s no creativity in it. It’s just an input for a process, not the process itself. 23. Sumantra Ghoshal: The rise of the volunteer investor Errr� leadership as voluntary investment of human capital? Well, that’s it folks. Have fun wrecking your business. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Apr 2014
|
Apr 02, 2014
|
Apr 02, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0415779006
| 9780415779005
| 0415779006
| 3.08
| 25
| Jun 06, 2006
| Nov 18, 2009
|
really liked it
| I love reading introductory books. It helps to pick one up on a regular basis. Thankfully the market is overflowing with them. I have found that somet I love reading introductory books. It helps to pick one up on a regular basis. Thankfully the market is overflowing with them. I have found that sometimes it is more invigorating to read one than to read specialist books with lots of ideas and suggestions. The intro frees up space for you to think and work with the basic tools. That is useful if you are in marketing, especially when the daily rigors allow little room for theoretical reasoning. This is a decent introduction and covers a lot of ground without being obscure or loading up with technical terms. Not too many references either. On the other hand, it doesn’t give much in terms of detail. The author keeps it light and focuses on explaining terms and the logical connections between them, all the while keeping the structure of an organization in view, thus making sure that the reader understand the concepts in context. Recommended for a quick glance before diving into text books. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Mar 11, 2014
|
Mar 13, 2014
|
Mar 13, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0914955195
| 9780914955191
| 0914955195
| 4.45
| 167
| Jan 01, 1971
| Jan 01, 1995
|
it was amazing
| The Open Secret At first glance, the title of the book might give the impression that it is an esoteric defense of some Vedic ‘secret�. It is true that The Open Secret At first glance, the title of the book might give the impression that it is an esoteric defense of some Vedic ‘secret�. It is true that some spiritual teachers like to emphasize the esotericity of works to claim the easy defense - “you are not spiritual enough to understand such works� - to western scholars. Contrary to this, Aurobindo approaches the text like any genuinely curious scholar and puts together a coherent interpretation of the hymns, seen more from the Upanishadic tradition than from the materialistic/ritualistic tradition that is adopted by historic commentaries. His object is not to veil, but to uncover; not to assert that the meaning is secreted away in an inaccessible spiritual realm, but to show that the meaning is easy enough to access consistently. Useful to understand one potent way of looking at the Rig Vedic hymns - what Aurobindo calls the ‘psychological� way - suffusing the hymns with psychological symbols. In addition, Aurobindo’s interpretation is also based on a fascinating philological exploration of the hymns. Even more importantly, this reading helps to understand the multiple meanings of the many commonly used sanskrit words and comes in very handy to understand the meanings of the hymns independently even if the reader doesn’t want to travel the road prepared by Aurobindo. While it should not be taken uncritically, Aurobindo’s criticism of early brahmin and western scholarship is also vital to a good understanding - especially so since scholarship available to the modern reader is heavily biased towards those interpretations. As Aurobindo is not hesitant to say, this is only an exploration of possibilities, an attempt at uncovering the spiritual ‘Secret of the Veda� from the elaborate ritualist vein under which it is enclosed - he constantly invites us to adopt a particular symbol and see ‘how far it takes us� - only if he feels it consistently applicable throughout the hymns does he adopt it. This is quite reasonable and I found it acceptable to quite a degree. The biggest contribution Aurobindo makes is to establish an alternate framework for the Rig Vedic symbols and to ground them in credible first-hand research and scholarly commentary. The beginning reader would be served well to consult Aurobindo while reading the original hymns. However, the reader should also be aware that in translation Aurobindo departs greatly from what might seem at first glance to be the ‘evident� meaning of the hymns - but this is only because he has chosen to elaborate the symbolic meaning that he believes he has uncovered. This is useful but should not be read in isolation. The best way would be to treat Aurobindo as one more commentary along with Sayana, Dayananda and the modern scholars, read all of them and then form our own interpretations of the original sanskrit hymns. This book only gave me company through the early Fire Hymns, after which I have been left to my own devices by Aurobindo. Even though I skipped ahead with him and read the ‘selected� hymns, I am not sure I will come back to his translations when I read them again in the course of my own progress. I think that is okay, for even as we part company, his method stays with me. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 10, 2014
|
Feb 24, 2014
|
Feb 23, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0684838230
| 9780684838236
| 0684838230
| 3.87
| 1,633
| 1978
| Jun 01, 1997
|
liked it
| Aristotle IS Everybody We often come across teachers or books getting us to understand a philosopher. It is only common sense, they say. See, this is t Aristotle IS Everybody We often come across teachers or books getting us to understand a philosopher. It is only common sense, they say. See, this is their thought: in a nutshell. See how easy it is? You already knew all this. You just have to remember that this guy talked of it first. You read those and come away with a feeling that you now understand the philosopher. Worse, you might come away feeling that the great guy was so wrong! Surely you are quite smart if you know more than Aristotle! Well, not quite, right? As Newton said, we see farther by standing on the shoulders of many many giants and only because we stand on their shoulders. We cannot stand there and then tell them haughtily that we can see farther - they constructed the whole edifice of thought we stand on. Ok, I am mixing metaphors here. Let us drop the shoulder metaphor and take an edifice metaphor. So, these thinker over the years have built a complex edifice on which we can stand and look at the wonder of the universe, exult in many logical puzzles and best of all, enjoy many material pleasures derived from the techniques developed while building the edifice. But it is not those manifestations of knowledge that matters. We are not smarter than the ancients because we can use a laptop and ‘google� up anything we want. That is no way to judge the achievements - after all, we don’t even have to climb the edifice. We are plopped right on top - what then, if any, was our achievement? We can't just run around the top of the edifice, fiddling with our shiny toys. We have to be either looking outwards or inwards - in fact both. (Nothing smart about playing with a 'smart' phone.) It is the edifice alone that matters. (Well, just for emphasis. Don't call me out on this) We have to direct all our energies to examining it, the intricacies of its structure. We have to climb down and examine its foundations. We will never grasp it fully, but we have to be Janus like - we have to stand on top and look farther but all the while we have to probe (and prop up) the edifice ever deeper. It is as much the responsibility of the ones born onto the shoulders of the giants or to the tops of this edifice to look farther as to probe the structure itself. Coming back to this book, Adler is one of those teachers who wants to show us how easy Aristotle is. The danger is that we might walk away believing that it is true, thinking that Aristotle only talked about these really obvious things. Instead of feeling smug about knowing what Aristotle thought about , we would do better to understand how he thought of such things that went on to become obvious - the highest distinction that ideas can hope for. Time to look at the foundations. ++++ One interesting thought was Aristotle’s concept of Justice. Aristotle considers the Pursuit of Happiness or the Good Life as the ultimate goal of a human life. For this we need wisdom to identify, courage to persevere and one more ingredient - since we are political animals, we need justice to ensure that impediments don;t pop up through others. Hence Justice becomes a very selfish motive, unless we also want Justice so that others can pursue the Good Life. Of course, for a person pursuing the Good Life, the best outcome is that everyone around him/her is also pursuing the Good Life. Aristotle goes on to say that it is the very duty of the state to aid in this Pursuit. What a noble conception of the need for a State. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 21, 2014
|
Feb 23, 2014
|
Feb 23, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0192840509
| 9780192840509
| 0192840509
| 4.05
| 128,102
| -560
| Apr 10, 2003
|
it was amazing
| AESOP'S ECHOES It is amazing how so many popular references and common senses are found here. Aesop finds his echoes throughout the high flying phi AESOP'S ECHOES It is amazing how so many popular references and common senses are found here. Aesop finds his echoes throughout the high flying philosophers and through the earthy grandmothers, not only engrafted into the literature of the civilized world, but familiar as household words in daily conversation of peoples, across borders. It is all pervading. And to top it off, such great pleasure too. Wisdom, and simplicity, and entertainment - through unforgettable stories - what more could be asked? Aesop: The Origins The most famous of Greek poets, Aesop was born about the year 620 B.C., by birth a slave. He was owned by two masters in succession, and won his freedom from the latter, as a reward for his learning and wit. [image] As a freedman in the ancient republics of Greece, Aesop now had the privilege and the permission to take an active interest in public affairs; and Aesop, raised himself to a position of high renown - a political ambassador of sorts. In his desire alike to instruct and to be instructed, he travelled through many countries. And in his discharge of his commissions, is said to have, by the narration of some of his wise fables, reconciled the inhabitants of those cities to the administration of their times. [image] Here we can detect and understand some of the common themes that run through these fables - those of keeping to one’s appointed place/station, the utility of inherent strengths which might not be easily visible and of the perils of overreaching. These, and other, but still few, simple strands of wisdom is reinforced again and again in different situations - which is the essence of the craft of a fabulist. Aesop: The Fabulous Fabulist The Fable, like any Tale, will contain a short but real narrative; it will seek, like any , to convey a hidden meaning, but by the skillful introduction of fictitious characters; and it will always keep in view, as its high prerogative, and inseparable attribute, the great purpose of instruction, and will necessarily seek to inculcate some moral maxim, social duty, or political truth. And yet, even when trying to realize profound human truths through itself, it so conceals its design under the disguise of fictitious characters, by clothing with speech the animals of the field, the birds of the air, the trees of the wood, or the beasts of the forest, that the reader shall receive advice without perceiving the presence of the adviser. [image] Thus the superiority of the counsellor, which often renders counsel unpalatable, is kept out of view, and the lesson comes with the greater acceptance when the reader is led, unconsciously to himself, to have his sympathies enlisted in behalf of what is pure, honorable, and praiseworthy, and to have his indignation excited against what is low, ignoble, and unworthy. [image] This format also required the fabulist to keep a unity of character throughout - The introduction of the animals as characters should be marked with an unexceptionable care and attention to their natural attributes, and to the qualities attributed to them by universal popular consent. The Fox should be always cunning, the Hare timid, the Lion bold, the Wolf cruel, the Bull strong, the Horse proud, and the Ass patient, even as they are made to depict the motives and passions of men. [image] Aesop’s fables achieve this unity and consistency so throughly that now they have passed into popular consciousness. Indeed, we can even assert that these animals, as we know them today, were created in these Fables! Aesop: The Companion Aesop's Fables are valuable companions. These stories pack much distilled wisdom in them and can be employed with great effect. It is said that a few good stories are better moral equipment than the best tracts of philosophers. Even Socrates is mentioned by Plato as having employed his time while in prison, awaiting the return of the sacred ship from Delphos which was to be the signal of his death, in turning some of these fables into verse from what he had committed to memory over his long lifetime. Socrates, like Aesop, understood that we are all moralists, seeking the human judgements that inform ours, and other’s actions. But morality forced down by edict can be very forbidding. This forbidding notion of morality was what inspired the philosopher Bertrand Russell to remark that the Ten Commandments ought to come with the sort of rubric which is sometimes to be found on examination papers of ten questions: ‘Only six need be attempted�. It is noteworthy that Socrates tried to emulate in his own teaching method the technique of the great fabulist - of letting the listener arrive at his own conclusions, or at any rate, avoiding the biggest pitfall any teacher can fall into - of being perceived as a moral superior. In how Socrates shaped up as a teacher, we can very well see why the most earthy and yet the loftiest of philosophers considered Aesop’s fables to be masterpieces, a constant source of companionship and teaching - and also a manual on teaching well. We would be well served to do the same. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Dec 10, 2013
|
Feb 22, 2014
|
Feb 22, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
1610915410
| 9781610915410
| 1610915410
| 3.83
| 30
| Apr 15, 2014
| Apr 29, 2014
|
it was amazing
| We are in a race between tipping points in nature and our political systems. MOVING THE IMMOVABLE OBJECT The Sta We are in a race between tipping points in nature and our political systems. MOVING THE IMMOVABLE OBJECT The State of The World Report 2014 focuses on Governance - “the most powerful obstacle to creating a sustainable future.� It is clear that things cannot continue as it is the. The modern vision of hell is ‘Business As Usual�. That is why the core of the Environmental Movement is Change - but change has three aspects to it: 1. Change has to be initiated 2. Change has to be controlled and directed 3. Transformational change, always brings side effects - they have to be mitigated or hedged against. Dealing with these three aspects requires good leadership, motivated citizenry and capable institutions - Good Governance, in short. We need to recognize this and break out of our apathy or even revulsion towards governments. True, governments have not ben responsive, true they have not lived up to their empty promises, and true they have deliberately sabotaged environmental movements - but the answer is not rejection, but reform. Long before the climate crisis was “the greatest market failure the world has ever seen,� it was a massive political and governmental failure. [image] This Report is a call for action for this reform. It asks us to get around the idea that “government is the problem,� propagated by the odd alliance of ideologists, media tycoons, corporations, and conservative economists such as and , which has only lead to the sad present condition where the public capacity to solve public problems has diminished sharply, and the power of the private sector, banks, financial institutions, and corporations has risen. Meanwhile, elsewhere, the number of failed states with tissue-thin governments is growing under the weight of population growth, corruption, crime, changing climate, and food shortages. This is why we need to re-look the role of governance - The Report asks us to start to make concerted efforts to create the kind of local, national and international governance structures that will take us through the ‘Perfect Storm� we are sailing into. The Irresistible Force of Environmental Concern and Activism has to Move the Immovable Object that is the current atrophied Governance structures. The Coming Tide The massive ecological changes that are predicted, and already underway, is going to change the landscape of human existence and civilization. We are living a pipe-dream if we expect magical technological bullets to stop this. The effects of our rapaciousness are already upon us and the effects will last for centuries, perhaps millennia, and no society, economy, and political system will escape the consequences. That is where we are headed. Many challenges loom ahead: Soon, millions of people will have to be relocated from sea coasts and from increasingly arid and hazardous regions of Earth. Agriculture everywhere must be made more resilient and freed of its dependence on fossil fuels. Emergency response capacities everywhere must be expanded. The list of necessary actions and precautionary measures is very long. We are like a ship sailing into a storm and needing to trim sails, batten hatches, and jettison excess cargo. Without proper governance structures, can we realistically expect to confront and survive changes on this scale? What we do know is that citizens, networks, corporations, regional affiliations, nongovernmental organizations, and central governments will all have to play their parts. The twenty-first century and beyond is all-handson-deck time for humankind. We have no time for further procrastination, evasion, and policy mistakes. We must now mobilize society for a rapid transition to a low-carbon future. The longer we wait to deal with the climate crisis and all that it portends, the larger the eventual government intrusion in the economy and society will necessarily be, and the more problematic its eventual outcome. Prioritizing Responses; Avoiding Disaster A second and related priority will be to reform the global economy to internalize its full costs and fairly distribute benefits, costs, and risks within and between generations. By most reckonings, majority of the costs of economic growth has been, and will be, offloaded on the poor and disadvantaged. [image] In the face of governmental inertia and corporate capture of many decision-making processes, strong and persistent bottom-up political pressure is needed more than ever, and it should be a directed and strategic pressure, aimed at well thought out reform towards much-needed new economic, political and social governance structures. Whether we can avoid capsizing the frail craft of civilization or not will depend greatly on our ability and that of our descendants to create and sustain effective, agile, and adaptive forms of governance that persist for very long time spans. ++++++++++ ADDENDUM: A SUMMARY OF CHAPTERS All in all, this year’s Report is a very good compilation of the leading thoughts on an important issue, as usual presented in a focused and concise, yet hard-hitting format. While it is easy to say “Good Governance� is the answer, the more difficult question concerns what is needed to drive the governance process for sustainability forward. The chapters in this book examine not only the obstacles to this process, but also the multiple ideas and possibilities for needed change at different scales - from the level of individual ethics to the minutiae of international policy making. Here is a quick summary of core ideas from some of the chapters, since the ideas themselves are worth thinking upon and acting upon: Chapter 1: Failing Governance, Unsustainable Planet Introduces the main themes and sets the stage. Cold, hard data reinforce the sense that humanity is at an unprecedented crossroads that requires a sharp departure from politics and business as usual. Chapter 2: Understanding Governance Sets out the core principle so ‘good� governance, especially for our changing times. Taking inspiration from ’s (2009 Nobel Prize in economics) work, Conor Seyle and Matthew King, while admitting there is no ‘one-size-fit’s all solution�, makes a case for stronger and more involved bottom-up local governance to flourish. Elinor Ostrom, drew on her experience in small-scale societies around the world to identify eight principles for the successful management of common-property resources: (1) a strong group identity, (2) fairness in distributing costs and benefits, (3) consensus decision making, (4) effective monitoring of effort and rewards, (5) graduated sanctions, (6) rapid and fair conflict resolution, (7) sufficient autonomy when the group is part of a larger system, and (8) appropriate coordination between groups. Ostrom and her colleagues identified these principles, which, when are in place, local communities do a remarkable job of protecting their resource bases even under intense outside pressure. Chapter 3: Governance, Sustainability, and Evolution In this chapter, Governance is explored from the perspective of evolution, which makes a lot of sense when governance is so divorced form nature - it helps to put it back in perspective. Governance systems are the formal and informal ways that humans manage relationships with each other and with the natural world. John Gowdy, in this chapter, argues that there is in fact an evolutionary basis for the worst forms of governance mistakes and suggests that failing to devise institutions that can mitigate our worst genetic tendencies will take us down nature’s pathway to sustainability, with whatever costs and disruption to human civilization it sees fit to inflict. Chapter 4: Ecoliteracy: Knowledge Is Not Enough Monty Hempel asserts that teaching ecoliteracy, while necessary, is not enough to get people to respect the mimics of the planet and operate harmoniously with the natural world; it will need to be combined with ethics training, developing emotional connections to the natural world and appeals to action. Much attention in environmental education and risk communication has been devoted to the “knowledge deficit� theory of social change, when the real issue appears to be a behavior deficit. Chapter 5: Digitization and Sustainability Richard Worthington debunks the idea of “technology is legislation, � and cautions that we cannot rely on the digitization of everything to solve the problems we face - digitization has not increased the number of politically engaged citizens. What we need is concerted action in other, especially political, spheres. Digitization and media access widens the information and engagement gap. At one end of the spectrum are a relatively few highly informed and active citizens, whose information sources are more biased toward their views than was the case before the advent of digital systems. At the other end are the vast majority of citizens, who have relatively little information or interest in politics, and whose views are subject to the messages emanating from an increasingly concentrated mass media. Chapter 6: Living in the Anthropocene: Business as Usual, or Compassionate Retreat? Peter Brown and Jeremy Schmidt urge us change the basic approach towards the future, way from a blind hope in technology that reaches extremism like geoengineering and to instead to opt for an ”ethics first� approach, that would seek reduce human impacts on planetary systems. [image] Our task within the Anthropocene is to re-learn what it means to be a citizen; not just of our earthly community, but of the universe. And it raises sharp questions about whether geoengineering is the latest version of the Faustian bargain struck by a wealthy minority who have brought life’s commonwealth to an unwanted and undeserved, yet fateful, choice. Chapter 8: Listening to the Voices of Young and Future Generations Antoine Ebel and Tatiana Rinke urge us to expand the circle of stakeholders to include the voiceless youth and the generations to come, especially in business calculation and the now infamous short-termism of the ‘discount rate� - we can not longer afford to ‘discount� the future! Chapter 10: Looking Backward (Not Forward) to Environmental Justice - MUST READ In what is the best written and most eloquent chapter in this Report, Aaron Sachs warns us that we cannot afford to lose sight of the injustices of today’s world when we worry about the apocalypse that is coming. Sachs invites us to instead view the Environmental Movement through a historical perspective and demonstrates why all successful social movements throughout history, have incorporated a strong sense of ethics - The Environmental movement cannot expect to gloss over the injustices of today if it hopes to succeed. And this should start with what is increasingly derided by a disillusioned community - of taking personal steps and sacrifices towards an ‘impact-free� life. Yes, all that tripe about switching off the bulbs and recycling is indispensable to a truly ethical approach. We can be impatient for revolution but we cannot abscond our own responsibility to “Do No Harm�. [image] This chapter made me proud again of my own small efforts such as cycling to office everyday. It is easy to question what these sorts of acts can really accomplish - it reinforces the ethical basis of the revolution, that is what it accomplishes. It gives legitimacy to the rhetoric. Even the best-intentioned young environmentalists, who often emphasize governance and “efficacy,� tend to scoff at my insistence that they read Thoreau: given the enormity of our problems, what does it matter if one more hermit goes off the grid? But the point of working one’s way through Walden and Thoreau’s other writings is not so much to dwell on his specific actions in the woods as to analyze his way of thinking and his resistance to certain elements of the status quo, to engage with his New England spirit of self-reliance and civil disobedience. Chapter 14: How Local Governments Have Become a Factor in Global Sustainability Extending the the focus on Local Governance, Monika Zimmermann discusses that the current locus of activity on climate change and biodiversity preservation lies mainly within organizations of local and regional, not national, governments. Over the last 20 years or so, pioneering local governments have stepped forward on the global stage to assert their relevance to sustainability initiatives, exemplify commitments, provide and share resources, establish concrete metrics, track progress toward goals, and help spur national and international processes to do the same. Chapter 19: The Rise of Triple-Bottom-Line Businesses As Muhammad Yunus argues in his discussion on 'Social Businesses' as a way to end poverty, Colleen Cordes examines the parallel “benefit� corporations and their impact on changing the face of business and eventually of investment activity, I.e., finance. This still-new phenomenon of remarkable companies that orient themselves toward a broader array of stakeholders, including their employees and the local communities within which they operate, volunteering to be held publicly or even legally accountable to a triple bottom line: prioritizing people and the planet, while also promoting profits. Chapter 21: Take the Wheel and Steer! Trade Unions for a Just Transition Along with Sean Sweeney in Chapter 20, who argues in favor of greater “energy democracy� that gives workers, communities, and the public at large a more meaningful voice in decision making, Judith Gouverneur and Nina Netzer argue here for a fundamental reorganization of all unionization. They argue that it is also the responsibly of the Trade Unions to protect their members through the coming changes to ensure a ‘just transition.� Conclusion: A Call to Engagement Ultimately, then, it is not ‘Government is the problem�, that we arrive at but concentration of power that is thwarting efforts to achieve sustainability. The theme that runs through much of this year’’s report is one of deconcentrating - devolving - wealth and power. The concluding chapter, is a ‘call to engagement� by listing out again the variety of political and economic means available to achieve that end. Sustainability is a socioecological problem. It is a problem for each and every one of us to tackle personally, socially and politically - we need to tackle it on every field simultaneously. People everywhere must strive to don the mantle of citizenship and commit to persistent engagement in the governing of their workplaces, communities, and nations. Only a steady popular commitment to engaged governance can prevent the future we seem to be headed towards. The quest for environmental sustainability, social equity, and a deep, deliberative culture of citizen engagement are closely intertwined goals. If there is a common theme standing behind the policy ideas and reforms explored in this book, however, it is the necessity of citizen empowerment and citizen responsibility. Call it the first law of political physics: a body at rest will remain at rest until a force is applied to it. When promising governance alternatives are known and seem worth trying out but are not yet happening, then a force needs to be applied to encourage exploratory movement in a new direction. And when governments themselves are unable to muster that force and other actors (such as corporations) are pushing in the wrong direction, an opposing vector can come only from the people. This book was provided by as an ARC through NetGalley in exchange for an honest review. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 15, 2014
|
Feb 21, 2014
|
Feb 21, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0099910101
| 9780099910107
| 0099910101
| 3.82
| 340,510
| Sep 1929
| 2004
|
really liked it
| War is Boring Hemingway’s narrator writes not as a soldier but as a journalist-soldier, channeling Hemingway himself, recording with precision and War is Boring Hemingway’s narrator writes not as a soldier but as a journalist-soldier, channeling Hemingway himself, recording with precision and apparent objectivity the things that happen around him and to him - practical and prosaic and always pragmatic about everything. People die and bombs explode in the same paragraph as the one where breakfast was considered with equal interest, and he takes it all in his stride. As best as I can tell, the action of A Farewell to Arms takes place from 1916 and before the end of the war. Place references and political references come and go without troubling the narrator too much - he is not to be bothered with such details. His context is not simply this war, but all wars and the notions of honor, heroism and patriotism - all of which he looks at with pristine incomprehension. War always generates backlash, even from the Mahabharata and the Iliad to the many anti-war epics over the ages - the honor and glory that war is supposed to provide is questioned in its aftermath. The bloodlust and the fever-pitch cries of honor precedes war and then they calm down into searching questions about what those terms mean or into scathing parodies. I am not entirely sure whether Farewell to Arms is a sober questioning of these virtues or a shambolic parody of them. It is never quite clear whether Hemingway is making fun of war or just expressing profound ennui. Especially when he combines Love with War, and both seem to get the same treatment, it becomes even harder to deduce whether Hemingway is ridiculing war and its virtues or life and its delusions in general and including love also into it. After all, the famous ending doesn’t leave us with much to pick up the pieces after. [image] The narrator tells the often ugly truth about war, without even trying to be anti-war in any way. By depicting daily life, he achieves it without an effort. It is the prosaicness of action, the utter lack of drama that becomes the most significant force in the narration - even his injury is incurred not in valorous combat but while he is eating spaghetti. All this combines to show up war as a hideous game, but one entirely not worth the bother. There are so many subtle ways in which he trivializes war, always retaining the impression that it is not a conscious effort, as if he was not even telling us anything about the war, letting it remain in the background as a boring humm. “The war seemed as far away as the football games of some one else's college.� We are not even allowed particularly intelligent characters to liven up the drudgery of our reading, the novel is full of the Ordinary, the exceptional striking in its absence - and the readers are left disoriented, repeatedly trying to remind themselves that they are in the midst of the greatest and most destructive war humanity had yet known. In the end, war is exposed as not only meaningless but boring. Usually war writers exploit the Pathos of war, Hemingway walks right inside, shows us around and escorts us out after having shown us the utter blandness of the ‘heroic� exercise. [image] Even the “Love Story� is constructed out of the boring bits and of repeated bland conversations that seem almost never-ending and droll. Here Hemingway is probably playing us again: instead of the usual technique of showing the pleasant bucolic scenery of distant daily-life and contrasting that against gory war scenes and thus asking the reader to thirst for the war to end, Hemingway places both the personal and the public sphere next to each other, exposes both and yet somehow derides war through this. I am not yet sure how he does that, but my feelings wherever I encountered this tells me that he does it well. Hemingway’s notorious fault is the monotony of repetition, and he has always been considered a better short story writer than novelist - the short form plays into his prowess for portraying ironies in short staccato beats. In A Farewell to Arms, he brings both his strengths and weakness as a storyteller and makes them both work for him masterfully. He converts the act of boring the reader into an art form and into an exercise in supreme irony. Very effective. Almost as effective as comedy, if you ask me. While it is hard to interpret A Farewell to Arms as hopeful, to me it was so, though in a subtle way. It leaves us the hope that if only more soldiers could be like the Tenente and just walk away from all the boredom, even though only boredom awaits in normal life, things could be better. To me the most striking impression of all, in a work filled with unforgettable impressions, was the sheer acceptance exhibited by the narrator: The hustle of the war, his own life, and the entire world even seems to move past the stoic Tenente who is left a mere spectator, but who never seems to question the events that unfold. This captures the spirit of the war and also of the times. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 11, 2014
|
Feb 16, 2014
|
Feb 11, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0199555656
| 9780199555659
| 0199555656
| 3.92
| 3,587
| -390
| Sep 14, 2009
|
it was amazing
| “It makes no difference to me, provided you give the answers, whether it is your own opinion or not. I am primarily interested in testing the argum “It makes no difference to me, provided you give the answers, whether it is your own opinion or not. I am primarily interested in testing the argument, although it may happen both that the questioner, myself, and my respondent wind up being tested.� THE TAO OF TEACHING The Protagoras is at its core a simple dialogue that questions the role of teachers in society - Is teaching possible? What is to be taught? How do we choose? Can only experts be teachers? Is expertise possible? How are we to judge? As a setup for a Critique on teaching, what better way than to confront the best teacher of the day? And to show him up! I wonder how many teachers and professors of our day would be able to stand up and defend their own capacity to teach, or their own claim to expertise. When I categorize the Protagoras as primarily a critique on teaching, I might get an objection that this dialogue is applicable to only the non-expert fields of education such as the humanities or literature, or more specifically to the really debatable fields such as political theory. My counter would be that unlike what Plato firmly believed in (naively?) back then - that some fields can have experts, we now know that no field can, not really. Hence, to me this dialogue can now be characterized as universally applicable to all types of education, educational institutions and educators. In any case, the question - if the teacher REALLY understands what he purports to teach - must be some nightmare to confront! One has to credit Protagoras for being able to stand up to that scrutiny. This dialogue is a must-read for everyone in the teaching profession. Moral of the story? As long as they are like Socrates and only trying to learn, in company, then it is hunky-dory. Never call yourself teachers. (only communal learners?) Accept teaching to be a joint exploration. That is the best claim that can be made without being shot down for hubris! The Socratic Loop Thus, the Protagoras is concerned with the nature and acquisition of human excellence and the credentials of those who purport to teach it. So we move from who can teach � to what is the end of teaching � to what it is they are teaching � soon reaching the familiar Socratic territory of arete � ‘what is excellence� & ‘what is the Good Life�. Once Socrates establishes that the answer to both these questions is in the ‘art of measurement� i.e. knowledge, then we can again loop back to the beginning and question for ourselves the credential of a teacher who cannot even explain what it is he is teaching, and what its purported end is, and how whatever is being taught ties up with this end � - in the real dialogue, discussion breaks down before a full conclusion and is left for another day - the dialogue is over but we have no choice except continue the debate! The Perils Of Education A sophist is an educator. Socrates was not happy about the fact that Protagoras taught arete, or virtue, to young men of rich or noble families, and taught it in a worldly way, as the means to “get on in life.� He also charged high fees and became rich. Protagoras offers to teach young men ‘sound deliberation� and the ‘art of citizenship’—in other words, as Socrates puts it, human ‘virtue�, what makes someone an outstandingly good person. But can this really be taught? Socrates doubts that virtue can be taught at all, and all the more that Protagoras can teach it. Inevitably Protagoras and Socrates came to verbal blows. But Protagoras posed him an unusual problem, for unlike most of the clever men Socrates met and debated with, Protagoras was highly rational, moderate and quite a match for Socrates! Protagoras is committed to holding that it can be, especially by him, and he expounds an extremely attractive Promethean myth (of the cover of this edition - the word "Prometheus" originally means "Forethought" by the way!) about the original establishment of human societies to show how there is room for him to do it. [image] Ultimately Protagoras� answer, as of all self-proclaimed experts (and all experts are self-proclaimed!) devolves to authority - which amounts to “I can teach because I am qualified. My qualification attests to my knowledge. And my knowledge gave me the qualification. (Logical loop, anyone?). This qualification is conferred on me by others like myself - who in turn got it form others." So rests the whole edifice of authority. From the whole spicy argument between Socrates and Protagoras, neither seem to be entirely convinced... One thing, however, is established for certain - which is precisely what Socrates set out to discover in accompanying his friend Hippocrates to confront Protagoras: even if virtue can be taught, no one should entrust himself to Protagoras to learn it, since he does not even have a coherent view of what it is. Student: What will I get out of Education? “Well, Protagoras,� I said, “as to why we have come, I’ll begin as I did before. Hippocrates here has gotten to the point where he wants to be your student, and, quite naturally, he would like to know what he will get out of it if he does study with you. That’s really all we have to say.� Hippocrates here represents those students who have no idea what he/she wants in life, or wants to be taught - and tags along purely out of heard reputation of the teacher-sophist. Socrates does manage to convince Hippocrates (and all future students?) of the folly of this unconsidered approach to education. Which, to me, is one good conclusion to arise from the dialogue. The Poetry Review Exercise As an addendum to the discussion of how teaching is unreliable, Socrates calls literature and poetry to the stands. The point is to demonstrate the unreliability of written texts and the folly of attempting to ‘decipher� them or ‘analyze� them - since the author is not around to explain. [image] Socrates demonstrates this by taking a well-known poem by Simonides (dealing with the thesis - �It is hard to be good�) and then putting his own theories into Simonides� mouth with such breathtaking ease! “So the tenor of this part of the poem is that it is impossible to be a good man and continue to be good, but possible for one and the same person to become good and also bad, and those are best for the longest time whom the gods love.� While an interlude, this thrilling ‘review� of Simonides� poem, its structure, word order, hypothesis, reason for composition, etc, is an amazing example of how adept Plato/Socrates was at literary criticism and structural theory. Socrates does this by taking Simonides' poem and re-rendering it in prose form. Socrates advises his audience: just imagine that Simonides is making a speech, instead of writing poetry. Then let us approach it! “And that, Prodicus and Protagoras,� I concluded, “is what I think was going through Simonides� mind when he composed this ode.� THE HOME RUN! Protagoras is, for the most part, a pretty slow dialogue and after a while, I gave way to thinking that surely the point was already made and these digressions were more for the participants� sake and less for me, the reader’s sake. I even developed a theory on why some of these dialogues must have been fun back then but not to me: part of the Dramatic potential of the dialogues is lost to us because a big part of it must have been to see real life figures of the Polis being put on the stand by Socrates and made to look perfectly foolish! As the argument veered towards expertise and its definitions, I was worried that this would be a corollary dialogue in which one aspect, expertise, would be better explored but nothing really new set forth. I must confess that for a while there, I was thinking that this would be the first Platonic Dialogue to which I would award less than the full Five Stars. And then, Socrates blew me out of the park with the delightful discussion that marked the closing of the dialogue. I was reinforced in my conviction that every dialogue of Plato is an absolute gem! The Home Run had been hit and the Five Stars were on the board! Courage? No Such Word in My Dictionary! “But all people, both the courageous and the cowardly, go toward that about which they are confident; both the cowardly and the courageous go toward the same things.� The argument does get a little convoluted here, but the essential aspect of it is this: Courage is ‘knowing what to fear� and going AWAY from what is to be truly feared, since no wise man will go towards something that is genuinely ‘bad�. It depends on what your confidence tells you is ‘good� or ‘bad� in any given choice. The wise will know what is truly good for them and will go towards it - this movement is wisdom, not courage. Socrates effectively argues that true Courage is just a reflection of wisdom! While Cowardice is a reflection of Ignorance. “So then, wisdom about what is and is not to be feared is the opposite of this ignorance?� This amounts to completely inverting the meaning of Courage. Let me try to explain: Any movement (used here for the act of exercising a choice) is based on Confidence - which does not depend on real knowledge but only on the perception of knowledge. This is just another version of ‘Opinion� that Socrates derides much elsewhere. 1. If going towards the ‘Good�, it is because of this same confidence, but one backed by true knowledge. It should not take any Courage since we are only moving towards what is Good for us. (Even if the path is difficult, sine Good here only signifies the total Good, after any Bad involved in that choice is also weighed in the balance and found less than the Good that will result - the example given is of a painful surgery( 2. If going towards the ‘Bad� (long term vs short term, once weighed with �art of measurement�), then that is what takes Courage, surely? (redefined as Stupidity, then?) - Explanation: this movement too is backed by confidence/opinion, but of the mistaken variety, backed only by ignorance of what is really Good. We move towards the Bad, thinking it is the Good. So courage, if defined conventionally as moving towards something that is Bad for us, is required only where ignorance prevails. And then, of course, it is not courage but only seems so! This quote has just become my favorite inspirational quote of all time (yeah, it is about a more than adventure sports!) [image] This is where it can get a bit funny: As we said, this is only seemingly 'courage', not in reality! 1. Consider a ‘Coward� looking at such a ‘Courageous Man�. What does he see? - From the viewpoint of the ignorant, such people who go towards the Good seem courageous (or foolish) since they cannot see from their vantage point what the wise see! 2. Now, Consider someone going towards a goal that he considers is Courageous. Why would he consider himself courageous? - Even if someone is going towards the Good and thinks one is acting courageously - it would only mean that one lacks confidence in that Good and is hence acting out of ignorance. So ‘courage� as a concept does not even exist on this Earth - it is all about confidence - whether it is mistaken or actual. If you are going to Bad, you are in ignorance, if to Good, you are Knowledgeable and wise. There is no question of Courage here. It has been inverted, it has been subsumed under the dictionary entry for Wisdom. It has been removed from the dictionary! The Fine Art of Measurement (of the Good) This entire argument depends on one hinge. That we can actually know what is the Good and the Bad. That is, that we can achieve knowledge that gives us confidence of what is really in our own best interests. This is what Socrates calls the �Art of Measurement� - the knowledge of how to “measure� the personal Good that would result from any choice, finely weighing in the balance all results, short term and long term, to our soul and to our bodies, to our societies, families, etc. [image] This is where the argument takes special importance. Socrates, by proving that Courage is just an aspect of Wisdom, soon goes on to argue that, similarly, all virtue is one - namely a single knowledge. The conclusion is that our ‘salvation in life� depends upon this ‘Art of Measurement� that will overcome the power of appearance and get us to act rightly always. At the end of the complex argument, Socrates is thus revealed as deeply committed, more deeply indeed than Protagoras, to Protagoras� initial claim that virtue is a rationally based expertise at deliberation and decision. But how, then, can he have been right to doubt whether virtue is teachable? Aren’t all rationally based expertises acquired by teaching? Socrates believes that this “Art of Measurement� exists and it can be developed with consistent Philosophical enquiry. We can either roll our eyes or make the best of a bad deal. Do we really have another option? “Then if the pleasant is the good, no one who knows or believes there is something else better than what he is doing, something possible, will go on doing what he had been doing when he could be doing what is better. To give in to oneself is nothing other than ignorance, and to control oneself is nothing other than wisdom.�...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 09, 2014
|
Feb 10, 2014
|
Feb 09, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0764586173
| 9780764586170
| 0764586173
| 3.00
| 6
| Apr 15, 2000
| Jan 01, 2000
|
liked it
| This Notes companion was in fact pretty good. Even though I had supplemented my reading with the exhaustive commentaries of the Norton editions and oc This Notes companion was in fact pretty good. Even though I had supplemented my reading with the exhaustive commentaries of the Norton editions and occasionally of the NCS edition, I had glanced at these notes wherever the commentaries, which is line-by-line, was not allowing me a full sense of a sonnet's meaning. The 'quick summaries' provided by these Notes can come in handy. Eventually I got into the habit of reading these notes after each sonnet and while it is true that they hardly said anything more than what the critical commentaries said, they did summarize it to an extent. Primarily, they were helpful since it is useful to get a quick summary of a sonnet's critical reception before reading the line-by-line commentary. There are some out dated notions present too, that the reader should be in the look-out for. It would not be advisable to use only this companion while reading the sonnets. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 20, 2014
|
Feb 08, 2014
|
Feb 07, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0192805576
| 9780192805577
| 0192805576
| 3.71
| 1,747
| 2005
| 2005
|
really liked it
| The Epistemology of Suspicion Always resisting categories, obfuscating himself - decoding the writings of Foucault is obviously a tough challenge. The Epistemology of Suspicion Always resisting categories, obfuscating himself - decoding the writings of Foucault is obviously a tough challenge. This VSI makes an admirable attempt and in the end at least provides us with a glimpse at the intricacy and elegance of the many arguments and the fine ways in which they tie in with each other. Such wide subjects as modern medicine, the prison system, schooling, madness and asylums, attitudes towards sex, and many others, all coming together into a single system of thought should be sufficient to get anyone excited enough to embark on such a difficult undertaking. In addition, Gutting also very nicely situates Foucault’s thoughts and makes them accessible and generates enough curiosity in the reader. It showcases the immense breadth and range of Foucault, the power of his ideas and also, for fun, where he could be challenged - which adds excitement to the anticipation of reading! [image] I generally don’t try to talk about the actual ideas in reviews of VSIs since I am not qualified to detect any biases in the author's interpretation and hence do not want to be a purveyor of ignorance. But I cannot resist commenting on the two most interesting aspects of Foucault’s philosophy: 1. His meditation on Power & Knowledge: On its origins and structures, and orgies. 2. His exercises in Language: His writings (when exploring the thoughts of other authors) are exercises in wringing the very language, the authors and the readers - designed to unleash from language new transgressive truths that will take him and his readers beyond the realm of their knowledge and capacity of expression. Making space for language itself to speak, freed from the original author’s intentions. Of these, I focus here only on the dynamics of Power in society: Foucault dissects the very basis of power in society - by making explicit the political significance of the societal norms defining the modern individual’s identity. I get the impression, in fact, that all of Foucault’s philosophy is based on this platform of thought, is centered on Power - which is derived from and influences directly Knowledge. Foucault is about the interplay of these two entities - Power & Knowledge - and how they test each other. And at the localized, microscopic level of individuals, not just at the large and abstract lever of nations and sociology. Foucault occasionally noted how the objects of such power structures could themselves internalize the norms whereby they were controlled and so become monitors of their own behavior. This phenomenon becomes central in some contexts, when individuals are supposed to discern their own fundamental identity from crucial social norms, and on the basis of this self-knowledge, transform their lives. As a result, we are controlled not only as objects of Power, by experts that have expert Knowledge of us - we are also controlled as self-scrutinizing and self-forming subjects of our own Knowledge. And even when we try to break free of these structures, the social pressures, basic education, intruded education (advertisements, etc.), social gossip, the magazines, self-help books, and manuals that guide us to an ‘empowered� life seem to induce in us as much insecurity and fear about our social relevance and ability to contribute as sermons and tracts did in our grandparents. So all of Foucault’s wide-ranging studies are really part of an effort to understand the process whereby individuals become subjects, emerging from his analysis of modern power relations, which he saw penetrating even the interiority of our personal identity; and the need for developing a deep Suspicion towards all structures - both of Power and of Knowledge. I realize that I am getting muddled up a bit here. The best summation of Foucault is probably his own final overall characterization of his work, in the Preface to �The Use of Pleasure�: Foucault maintains that, from the beginning, he has, on the broadest level, been developing a ‘history of truth�. He conceives this history as having three main aspects: an analysis of ‘games of truth� (that is, various systems of discourse developed to produce truth), both in their own right and in relation to one another; an analysis of the relation of these games of truth to power relations; and an analysis of the relation of games of truth to the self. In sum, as I hope I have shown, it certainly works as a good sounding stone to test if you are ready for these ideas or not. If you can make sense of them, then it might well be time to jump right in. One thing I was not able to establish from this excellent VSI was the order in which I should approach Foucault - is there a good starting point that gives a better understanding of the rest? I am inclined to start either with The History of Madness or with The Archeology of Knowledge. I would be grateful if experienced Foucault readers could help me out on this. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 05, 2014
|
Feb 07, 2014
|
Feb 07, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0670023035
| 9780670023035
| 0670023035
| 3.72
| 1,464
| 2011
| Oct 13, 2011
|
did not like it
| Holy Contortions, Batman! Paul Johnson has made up his mind. Need I say more? In his earlier writings Plato presented Socrates as a living, breathing Holy Contortions, Batman! Paul Johnson has made up his mind. Need I say more? In his earlier writings Plato presented Socrates as a living, breathing, thinking person, a real man. But as Plato’s ideas took shape, demanding propagation, poor Socrates, whose actual death Plato had so lamented, was killed a second time, so that he became a mere wooden man, a ventriloquist’s doll, to voice not his own philosophy but Plato’s. Being an intellectual, Plato thought that to spread his ideas was far more important than to preserve Socrates as a historic, integrated human being. Using Socrates as an articulate doll was, he saw, the easiest way to bring about this philosophical dispersal. So the act of transforming a living, historical thinker into a mindless, speaking doll—the murder and quasi-diabolical possession of a famous brain—became in Plato’s eyes a positive virtue. That is the only charitable way of describing one of the most unscrupulous acts in intellectual history. Thus Plato, with no doubt the best intentions, created, like Frankenstein, an artificial monster-philosopher. It is particularly damaging to our understanding of Socrates in that the line of demarcation in Plato’s writings between the real Socrates and the monster is unclear. It has been argued about for centuries, without any universally accepted result, and anyone who writes on the subject must make up their own mind, as I have done in this account. That ought to do, really. The rest of this review is really not required. However, let me say more in any case. Such astonishingly superficial an understanding is demonstrated by PJ that it would be entertaining at the least to examine his method. A Pigeonhole For Socrates Socrates as a nationalist, a monotheist and a patriot - is the new pigeonhole invented by PJ for the more gullible readers to follow. He was that and nothing else, mind you. Don’t even think about it. No! Comparisons with the Jewish civilization and then with the Romans and finally with the British (with Churchill, no less!) abound - “man of our times�, after all. The essential aim of these are to draw strict parallels b/w the ancient Greeks to the Hebrew civilization and thus to the modern Christian empires. Socrates did not believe in the traditional pantheon of Greek religion, with gods specializing in particular services and leading tumultuous lives that were more mythology or fiction than serious religion. When Socrates was at his most devout, he always refers to “god� or “the god,� not “the gods.� He was a monotheist. The first book is a dialogue, Euthyphro, set before the trial, in which Socrates, suddenly becoming aware that he is shortly to be tried for impiety, realizes that he is not quite sure what impiety is, or piety for that matter, and seeks definitions. As usual, he is frustrated by his own methods of examination, and all he shows is the muddle and confusion that arise when humans, anxious to appease or gratify the gods by offering sacrifices, are unable to explain the practical value of these pious actions or why the gods should want them. Socrates was by instinct and reason a monotheist and could perfectly well have argued that a human soul does indeed please an omnipotent god by offering him a pure and virtuous life on earth, and that this is the only form of sacrifice (which involves dispensing with carnal pleasures and all forms of self-indulgence) that matters. But to argue on this line would merely give hostages to his legal opponents, so he does not take it. Plato, The Sideshow (PlatSoc!) Religious patriotism - is the perfect virtue mined from Socrates while relegating Plato to the background - an impossible feat, achieved with ease, by making up of mind, which we already referred to. so, he is not Socrates but a hybrid creature I call Platsoc. Even though PJ’s thesis is built on the assumption that early plato was a true follower while late Plato was not, he could hardly write half a book without referring to the magnificent late dialogues. So what does he do? Luckily, PJ finds it easy to bend over backwards if necessary to get just what he wants from any given work. Talk about being picky: In the first book of the Republic, Socrates, who is still himself at this point� And it is not just Plato. PJ has no qualms on how he twists the sources available to him: Example: He likes so he decides conclusively that Aristo and S must have become friends after he wrote the clouds - based on? Them sharing a party in ‘Symposium� which was in fact a veiled attack on poor Aristo. Aristophanes attacked them in Clouds before he got to know Socrates, and when he thought he was one of them, a mistake made by some others. And just as Aristophanes is exonerated, so is Socrates completely freed of any negativity. PJ meticulously strips away everything he doesn’t like about the Historical Socrates. PJ’s got moves, I am telling ya: His failure to examine slavery is the greatest lacuna in his otherwise comprehensive view of justice, indeed in his entire philosophy. Given his influence after his death, a sharp and reasoned condemnation of slavery would have had incalculable consequences, and perhaps have led to the abolition of this scourge of humanity many centuries ago. Of course it is possible that Socrates habitually questioned the justice of slavery in his conversations. I think it possible, indeed quite likely. If so, the implied rejection of slavery, like the explicit rejection of retaliation, would have played a part in the hostility to Socrates among some Athenians that led to his prosecution, conviction, and death. Socrates: The Christian Precursor So by the end, we have a Socrates who has been twisted beyond recognition by PJ. PJ wanted to establish Socrates as a Path-paver to Christianity and hence picks and highlights only those aspects of the Platonic oeuvre that conforms to this view and relegates the rest as purely platonic distortions of an early christian insight into Philosophy. All the while introducing his own distortions and interpolations and assumptions in addition to the picky choosing among the Dialogues by making claims that are nothing more than assertions that amount to “This is S & This is P, ‘cuz I say so!� & Socrates� Greatest Dream? - A Democratic Theocracy! That is the stunning conclusion that the reader is slapped with in the end where we have a Socrates who is militaristic and endorsing three main virtues to the exclusion of all else: , Moral Absolutism & Anti-Retaliation. The wise and humble Socrates who made it his life’s quest to keep searching for questions and never impose answers on anybody has all but disappeared in PJ’s hands. The success with which Socrates did this, worked out over numerous generations, gave clarity and power to the Greek world’s reception of Christianity and so made it more fruitful. That in itself was an enormous achievement, beside which the work of Plato and Aristotle, important though they were in the establishment of Christendom and so of the Western world that succeeded it, were peripheral contributions. PJ just wants to use the convenient bits of the Platonic philosophy that conforms to his own idea and discard the rest. That is how the ‘mind was made up�, in case you were wondering. [image] One is reminded of grand summary of Socrates� work: “He was the first to call philosophy down from the sky and establish her in the towns, and bring her into homes, and force her to investigate the life of men and women, ethical conduct, good and evil.� And PJ wants to make that grand Philosophy into populist religious propaganda. How Noble. Post Script I must admit that I read this with the fore-knowledge that I am reading it to bury it. I read PJ mainly to know how NOT to read Plato and to learn of the many distortions that may easily creep into commentaries. PJ is the expert and it is always good to learn security from the worst of the crooks. One thing is for sure when reading PJ, regardless of which of his works you may pick, you should keep looking for which axe he is grinding. PPS: You MUST not miss message #1 by Ian below! v v ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 2014
|
Feb 03, 2014
|
Feb 03, 2014
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||
0711218463
| 9780711218468
| B0092G8QBI
| 3.83
| 1,970
| 1995
| Apr 08, 2005
|
liked it
| I had picked this one up as a quick refresher (after making the mistake of not reading Iliad along with the original Odyssey reading). It serves that I had picked this one up as a quick refresher (after making the mistake of not reading Iliad along with the original Odyssey reading). It serves that purpose. Some of the translations are even remarkably well rendered. However, it was not too useful as an easy companion to Ulysses since Sutcliff rearranged the structure of the epic completely to make it a linear narrative, which is a huge disservice, both to the epic and to the reader. All in all, it is a sort of Cliff’s notes with stunning illustrations. [image] [image] [image] [image] [image] As you can see, this is a good one for the shelves. It would be a good buy just to have that cover - so that you can tease guests if they would like to see a pic of Odysseus and then pull this one out and show the Tattered Traveller! [image] ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 28, 2014
|
Jan 31, 2014
|
Jan 30, 2014
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0192854550
| 9780192854551
| 0192854550
| 3.69
| 1,462
| 1989
| Jun 28, 2001
|
really liked it
| The Literary Scientist I have been toying with the idea of a proper, first-hand reading of Freud. I read this primarily to find out if I should read Fr The Literary Scientist I have been toying with the idea of a proper, first-hand reading of Freud. I read this primarily to find out if I should read Freud in depth and to test the waters, so to speak. It has convinced me I should. So full marks to this VSI, which being a VSI, is 4 stars. Again, being a good VSI, it is good strictly as an introduction but extremely bad if one is looking for a shortcut towards understanding Freud’s theories. Storr approaches this as an intellectual history. After taking us through what is known of Freud’s personal life, Storr switches attention to the major works and takes the reader through a quick survey of the publications and case studies. This is the most interesting and largest section of the book. However, Storr’s principal focus is on the practical aspects of Freud’s theoretical construction and development. Hence, he opts to conclude with a glance at the actual practice of modern psychoanalysis - because Freud’s methods have proven to be more important than his theories, which have not stood up to critical scrutiny. On the other hand, Freud’s method, of acceptance of patients and continuing care, though underestimated by Freud himself, is now his most important legacy to his chosen field. (Transference being the mainstay of modern practice) Even if well known, one of the stand out features was how Storr showcases Freud’s importance to the fields of literature and arts. Freud was a literary genius who dabbled in science and aptly is venerated for his literary legacy than for his scientific legacy. Freud is indeed one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century, along with Darwin and Marx and merits study. In addition, Freud was also a brilliant writer whose writings retain their charm and brilliance, even today, even in translation. Storr manages to convey this. He also strikes the fine balance between caution and admiration needed in approaching Freud. As I said, full marks. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 22, 2014
|
Jan 24, 2014
|
Jan 23, 2014
|
Paperback
|