AMeador1

Not a foundational course and bias mixed in

Revisado: 05-20-21

As Eric Burger says, philosophical bias has clearly made its way into this course as well. Blatantly, no, seams to be some effort to avoid it, but when you have knowledge of the topic from a different perspective - it is clear. That makes it, in my mind, hard to take much of the content at face value as alternative views are not really discussed at least not as fully as to show the merit. I had hoped this would have been more technical as well. It is more of a light overview of the approach to constitutional law from inception to current - but not getting into the weeds per se.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

Great intro to classics and method for analysis

Revisado: 11-11-20

The objective analysis with this group of plays is a great approach to using practical application to apply this analytical methodology to other plays, films, etc. I am better for having read it - and will be better yet for reading it and studying it a time or two more.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

Must read for parents to be or already started!

Revisado: 10-12-20

In my mind this is not a philosophy - but a system - and there is a critical difference. The philosophy that directs my system of values is one that is pro individual, pro freedom, pro rational thinking, pro self-esteem, etc... but without accepting coercion or violence against others. As such, this system is very in line with that philosophy - but, as it is not based on this philosophy, there were a couple of points where I felt like this system became contradictory. But, even so, it is a minor set of issues that surely does not invalidate the system. In comparison to many approaches, this one is very close to those philosophical goals (which are very summarized). The one example that stuck out to me - is when she goes over how to handle a baby with a toy, when another baby comes and tries (and eventually does) take the toy away from the baby that had it in the first place. Her summary approach is to take the path of least resistance. In her scenario, she more or less suggests narrating to the babies what they are doing. She does suggest stopping the first baby from hitting the second baby, but does not suggest stopping the second baby from trying to take the toy from the first. At one point she asks the second baby if it would like to play with another similar toy on the shelf to the one they are fighting over - but the baby ends up trying harder and succeeds in taking the toy. At which point she simply narrates to the first baby what happened. And then it ends nicely when the second baby gives the toy back and now all is happy again. I do not think it philosophical to effectively teach the first baby that it is not allowed to defend itself against aggression. Not only that, but that the authorities will not defend your rights to you property - and will simply allow then to take it. This also teaches the second baby that there are no consequences, or that it is ok, to take from others. This does not seem like path of least resistance to the first baby! Granted, at such a young age, they may not get it. But by repeated the proper approach - they will learn in time - and being rationally consistent matters. Again, though - this is one of very few contradictions or flaws I see in this system. Having a proper philosophical understanding is important and can allow analysis of a system like this for truly philosophical errors so I recommend an Objectivist philosophical study as well. That and this system pair nicely. I suggest reading the books: A Theory of Objectivist Parenting by Roslyn Ross and Teaching Johnny to Think by Leonard Peikoff - for more to think about and to gain more depth in a real philosophy that can be the basis behind these ideas. I do consider this a great source, please do not let these criticisms overwhelm. This is the basis of the 4 start rating - as I don't think there is a full philosophical study behind this system - allowing for these minor flaws to creep in - but it is still so good that 4 starts is justified - and if I could - 4.5 stars!

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

An education in philosophy across time - great!

Revisado: 10-08-20

The narrator reminds me of Leonard Peikoff himself in terms of his voice and style - which I thought added to the value of the book. I will honestly have to read this in paper form - especially for the purpose of referencing the chart and DIM classifications to take away a deeper and better understanding of this text. They book was written with usage of this table/chart in mind as an aid, so missing this with the audible book does make a difference. That being said, I didn't feel at a complete loss either. Hearing the history from the pre-Socrates and Aristotelian time frames, through the times of the Roman Empire, Dark Ages, Renaissance, Enlightenment, to current - covering trends of the DIM categories over literature, science, politics, etc... was a great travel through time from a philosophical perspective. I will not be bothered in spending the time needed to re-read this, to take many notes, and probably to re-listen/re-read many times. This is a study of intense interest to me and this is a valuable study, analysis, and methodology to glimpse where we are headed in the future.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 2 personas

Valuable for historical context-but not much else

Revisado: 09-04-20

There is a lot here in terms of Rand's life in terms of her relations with people - like von Mises, her "collective", her relations with those in the upper echelons of the Libertarian movement, politicians, friends, and family. But her analysis of the relations and how they impacted Rand have to be weighed against this author's clear misunderstandings of the deeper constructs of Objectivism. I think it is much like someone with a bit of Algebra skills trying to take on the PhD thesis of a masterful mathematician. Without a highly skilled level of mathematical skill - it is hardly believable that they could understand the concepts involved - especially to the level of throwing mud on the ideas of the mathematician s complex thesis. This is the case here. The little jabs, digs, and commentary when she obviously doesn't understand Rand's philosophy in more than a superficial study is annoying. I like the context of what were some of Rand's relations, sources, etc... as it gives me more to research further myself. I would like to see what Rand saw in developing her ideas. It helps to further strengthen one's own knowledge - first handedly instead of simply taking someone's word on something - including Rand's. But, for people that may see this without a strong knowledge of Rand's works and Objectivism - it can easily lead to those with the actually childish observation, that Objectivism and Rand were juvenile. I suppose for a person with a juvenile understanding of the Objectivist system of philosophy - that may appear to be the case. More knowledge is valuable - so it is worth something. But not as a source of knowledge of what was in Rand's mind or into the philosophic system of Objectivism.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 2 personas

Excellent book on morality & reality of finance!

Revisado: 08-27-20

The historical to modern explanations about finance was great! It makes it so plainly clear that government meddling in free markets is the actual evil vs the indoctrination that so much of society has fallen victim to - that finance is the evil. This is a must read - for those who already know this, but more so for those whom do not.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Excellent - applied philosophy based on reason!

Revisado: 08-18-20

My wife and I have argued some of these same points for decades. CO2 is good for plants - it is their "air". Extra warmth and more CO2 will incrrase plant growth which will buffer and bring down CO2 levels over time - not that we believed that increases in CO2 were going to cause thr impacts the environmentalists claim. The earth is a living system and living systems can adjust and adapt to changes - much live properly established fish tanks - but on a grand scale.

Anyone who looks to do proper analysis can see the one sided, vague, and improper analysis and models produced for/by climate scientists with an agenda. The problem is the group of people in this area of ideas that treat the environment/earth like their religion/god and act/think irrationally about it - ignoring proper scientific methods, reality, rationality, etc.

People need to take a step back and evaluate their life philosophy and what they hold as their primary value and rethink their premises when they hear the arguments in this book.. Alex is right - people just need to listen and think about it deeply.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Great book! Buy the Audible version!

Revisado: 08-14-20

Well, I wrote a nice, detailed review - and it got lost!!! So, in short, this is a great book that would be a value to anyone who gets it. So get it!

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Great story showing the reality of collectivist...

Revisado: 07-15-20

societies in action. This pseudo autobiography turned novel from someone who lived with communism in Russia gives a picture of what it is to truly live in a system where the individual is secondary to society and how the nature of people in positions of government power can then abuse the individuals with impunity.

It is a gloomy novel based on a gloomy reality. It is worth the time to read.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Great book as usual!

Revisado: 05-06-20

Great integration of the romantic form of artistic endeavors tied to Objectivist metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, etc. Will read and listen to it many times I'm sure.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña