John Dyer Books

If you are interesting in astronomy, or just bought your first telescope, buy this book (or its soft cover twin A Guide to Backyard Astronomy). Period. It is a perfect launching point to explore the stars. Some may complain that the maps are not complete, but the entire point of this book is to start you on the road to stargazing, and it has plenty for a budding astronomer to work with without being overwhelmed. Heck, I still use it and find it much more user friendly than many other books. Ignore the negativity and enjoy the book. For the price there should be no argument. I suggest looking up the reviews on its softcover identical twin, A Guide To Backyard Astronomy, for a more honest review.

Ten years ago, if you were someone who had never looked into a telescope, or couldn't find the North Star even with the Big Dipper emblazoned on the clear night sky right in front of you, one might question the wisdom of your decision to buy this type of book. After all, it includes instructions to navigate a telescope to a number of obscure Messier objects that you can't even see with the naked eye. The fact is, today anyone willing to invest a considerable chunk of spare change, say $1500 plus, can go out and buy a motorized telescope equipped with an internal computer that, along with a compass and a GPS system, automatically aligns the entire rig with the push of a button. From there, viewing these same Messier objects is as simple as programming your coffee maker. Needless to say, what was yesterday's advanced technology is today's ..umm, coffee maker.
This book is a pleasurably condensed beginning astronomy course, with each short section covering a broad range of subjects - from the birth and development of astrophysics and the state of exploration in the solar system (Voyager and Hubble) to some technical considerations, such as a brief synopsis of the electromagnetic spectrum and the physics of red-shift. From here it more than briefly covers the tools of the trade, from binoculars to telescopes (including "Go-To" technology) to astrophotography, and includes a very informative section on buying a telescope. Then follows an ample chapter on the Solar System covering the Sun, Moon, and the planets and their satellites. All this fairly light reading is wrapped up with a chapter covering all the other lights in the sky, including meteors, asteroids, double and variable stars, clusters, nebulas, novae, etc., and discussing with some detail their technical aspects. Somehow, each page, though jam-packed with information, still manages to include at least two relevant pictures or graphics. The deep space pictures are simply gorgeous.
The last 98 pages of the book are my favorite part - a `starhopping' guide highlighting some twenty selected sections of the sky (each generally covering the area of an average constellation). Each section has a comprehensive map and a number of photographs to aid the aspiring astronomer. With each destination is a recommendation of how to view it (i.e. naked eye, binoculars, or telescope) and includes considerations such as necessary field of view, recommended power, and required aperture. After all, you don't want to waste your time trying to discern the arms and dust lanes of M61 (a face-on but dim spiral galaxy in the constellation Virgo) armed only with a 6 inch reflector.
The inclusion of the word `Advanced' in the title of this book will likely scare off a number of potential buyers. The decision to use it certainly involved a calculated risk by the publishers. I consider myself a knowledgeable beginner at best, (I'm purchasing my first telescope as I write this review) and I found this book to be almost spot-on for my needs. In fact, it played no small part in inspiring my purchase, and this in the face of my dear wife's protests.
Bottom line: If you're an armchair wannabe astronomer who's susceptible to the occasional weakness for impulse buying, and your unsympathetic spouse has imposed a moratorium on larger purchases for the foreseeable future, don't buy this book. On the other hand, perhaps spending a punitive night or two "sleeping on the couch" might not seem so bad if you happen to wake up in the middle of a starry night.

Time was, the Nature Store was everywhere in Canada, and you could depend on them for just the right Xmas gift or whatever. That's gone now, but they left the excellent Nature Company Guides behind.

This is the book of those who have gone beyond "the stars are up there" stage but aren't at the Hawking level yet. I loved the crispy photos and the straight from the shoulder directions (not pretentious or dumb). I recommend it highly if you want something with a little more meat to it.

This book is very helpful, even if you are just an amiture astronomer like me. This book tells you how to navigate through the Heavens. It tells you what stars you can see, the dates that you can see them, even the times that you cansee them. This book tells you what to look for when buying a telescope, how to spot a trash scope, and what types are good to purchase for your needs. This book tells about anything that you need to know, from nebulas and double stars, to planets and black holes. Advanced Skywatching tells you almost anything you want to know. This is a book that no astronomer, begining, advanced, or professional, should be without.

Advanced Skywatching is a good book. But the book "Practical Skywatching" gives you two books for the price of one. It literally contains the best of the books "Skywatching" and "Advance Skywatching" in one reference

Mill's remarkable childhood education prepared him to be one of the leading intellectuals of his day (far surpassing his father, James Mill, who was no slouch, but not in his son's league) but while I admire his erudition and achievements, one has to wonder if the deep depression he fell into in his mid-20s had something to do with that.

Mill's contributions are better remembered than many of the other famous British intellectuals of the period--such as Herbert Spencer--whose particularly invidious version of the theory of Social Darwinism is best left languishing in obscurity. Who today remembers the prolific Spencer, whose collected works run to over 20 large volumes?

Mill is frank about his depression and how debilitating it was, and what a struggle it was to pull through it. But with the help of his best friend, he pulled out of it and went on to write many important works in philosophy, logic, political science, and economics.

Mill's I.Q. was certainly very high (estimated by psychologist Katherine Cox using a modified ratio I.Q. method to be at least 200), but very likely his father's misguided efforts to produce a prodigy and homegrown, British Wunderkind (to compete with the legendary "Infant of Lubeck," no doubt :-)) were the cause of his long, serious depression.

Mill's text on econonics, which was called Political Economy back in those days (also the title of his book, if I remember right), was the longest running and most successful college text of all time, being used for the next 50 years until the 1920s when the "New Economics" of the day, championed by the field of microeconomics and the theory of the firm, made a more modern, updated text necessary.

For me the most interesting part of the book was Mill's theory of history, with positive periods of creative cultural development being followed by periods of negation and dissolution. Mill summarizes it as follows (I think I'm remembering the quote more or less accurately): "During the positive periods mankind adopts with conviction some positive creed, claiming jurisdiction for all their actions proceeding from it, and possessing more or less of the truth and adaptation to the needs of humanity; when a period follows of negation and dissolution, during which mankind loses its old beliefs, of a general and authoritative character, except the belief that the old are false." Mills theory has parallels to the earlier Hegel's historical dialectic and later to Oswald Spengler's theory, and to later 20th century historian Arnold Toynbee's idea of "challenge and response."

For another more literary (and probably more interesting) take on depression by another British intellectual, you might try Richard Burton's The Anatomy of Melancholy (not to be confused with the African explorer by the same name). After all, anyone who says that "Giraffes live for love," not to mention palm trees, can't be all bad. :-)

This book is so wonderful on so many different levels that to give it a review at all would be a disservice. My recommendation is not on whether or not to read it but instead on how to read it. I suggest a quiet room, comfortable chair or couch, cup of coffee and a few hours of uninterrupted reading time. After completing the book, rest and repeat as desired.

Ever wonder for which bipolar monomaniac the Sorcerer's Apprentice worked? Now you know. Drier than Dryden, boot-licking admirer of the thief of his childhood, humorless bookworm of a dusty aristocrat, protonerd ex machina in extremis. When Continent-lazing navel-gazers concern themselves with improving society, oil your firearms. I'd rather a deep belly laugh than Mill's musings, any day.

I read this book for a graduate Mill seminar in Philosophy. Recommended reading for anyone interested in philosophy, political science, and history.

John Stuart Mill, 1806-73, worked for the East India Co. helped run Colonial India from England. Minister of Parliament 1865-68 he served one term.

I have to say that I found Mill's Autobiography left me wanting to read a good biography of him in order to learn more about his personal life and interaction with family and friends. He certainly did not reveal himself in the way Jean Jacques Rousseau did in his much-ballyhooed autobiography The Confessions. I do understand that his wife Harriett edited the autobiography to the extent that there is no mention of Mill's mother in it. Other than his education and his reference to taking walks with his father to talk about books he had read, he says little about their relationship. In addition, there is only a passing reference to having to serve as schoolmaster to his siblings while he was an adolescent and he does not mention them again. Mill spent most of his adulthood working for the East India Company; however, he says little about that experience in his autobiography. It seems he had few friends as an adult, if you go by his autobiography. There is a brief reference about his friendship with George Grote, the eminent historian of Greek history. Thus, the impression that I got of Mill the man was one of an emotionally cold person socially except to his wife Harriett, who I believe was the only person in his life he truly loved. Most of his autobiography is dedicated to his education; such as, books he had read or written and philosophers he was influenced by, and this is a part of his life that I found most interesting.

In Mill's autobiography, he tells readers how he benefited and suffered from having one of the most unique educational experiences known to humankind. His father was personally involved in both his education and that of his other siblings He was a brilliant student who read Greek by the age of three and Latin at eight years old. By the time he matured to adulthood, he was extremely well read. Thus, he received an academically rigorous education at home, and I find that his education really defined and shaped his character. Providing and improving education for all humans was a cornerstone of his philosophical belief in Utilitarianism. Education meant that people could develop their higher pleasures; a concept that Mill thought was of paramount importance to increase one's happiness. He invented this concept and differed with Jeremy Bentham, the progenitor of Utilitarianism, on this point. Bentham did not believe there was a qualitative property to happiness--Mill did. Thus, it is no mystery that in adulthood he developed very strong views on the advantages that universal education would have on improving people's characters. Mill believed universal education would lead to fostering social change for the betterment of all mankind. He stayed consistent on this belief throughout his life. He gave what I think was one of the great speeches on education and character formation in 1867 after accepting the position as Rector of the University of St. Andrews. In his Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St. Andrews, one of the points that he made in his speech was the responsibility that universities had in building their students' characters. He also wrote about the importance of character formation had on the ability for people to enjoy freedom in society in his book On Liberty. However, he personally found that his education had come at a great price to his emotional well-being.

During the winter of 1826 and into 1827 while in his early twenties, Mill recognized that he was suffering from a bout with depression. This is the only portion of his autobiography where Mill exposes his inner emotions to his readers. He believed his depression stemmed from an inadequacy in his education. He came to realize that although his father provided him a superior education on many intellectual levels, it was negligent in social contact with children of his own age, and did not prepare him emotionally for interaction with other members of society. His parents and visitors treated him as an adult from early childhood. Mill realized that his upbringing led up to his inability to feel a normal range of human emotions; thus, he felt detached from humanity. Mill found that reading poetry by Wordsworth in 1828 ultimately broke his depression. In poetry, Mill found that he could feel sorrow, and sympathize with others.

I found this part of his autobiography of importance for three reasons. First, it is the only painful human emotional event in his life that he divulges to his readers. Secondly, it is an indication of the importance that the concept of sympathy played in his life and formed his philosophical views as well. Mill understood the need for humans to be sympathetic to one another. Sympathy is required for social interaction and is a useful character trait that we use in order to keep us from harming each other. Thirdly, without his awakening of this emotion in his life, I seriously doubt that he would have found the capacity to love his wife Harriett in the manner that he did. One does get the sense from his description of her that she was his true soul mate and only real long lasting friend in his life.

Mill's friendship with Harriett while she was married to another man, caused them both to endure scandalous gossip, even though they both denied there relationship had any sexual component to it. When they eventually married each other about two years after she became a widow, Mill stayed true to his life long conviction in believing in equal rights for women. During Mill's time, married women's property automatically devolved to their husband and he correctly saw this as one more inequity against women placed on them by society. Therefore, on the day when he married Harriett Taylor in 1851, a financially secure widow, he wrote a formal renunciation to all of her property in protest against the current law. He was a life long feminist who wrote in his essay The Subjection of Women, about the scathing inequalities that women endured since the history of mankind had been chronicled. I have no doubt that his essay paved the way in changing marriage and divorce laws and fostered the improvement of relations between the sexes. He was also the first Member of Parliament to introduce a bill in the Commons to enfranchise women. He worked tirelessly at the end of his life, supporting women's rights with his pen and his purse. His stepdaughter Helen carried on his feminist work by becoming a leader in the suffragist movement in her own right.

In total, I would say that although the Autobiography provides scant information into Mill's daily life, when he does reveal himself, it appears he consistently lived up to his philosophical teachings and beliefs.

John Stuart Mill was raised by his father to be his intellectual heir, and a great genius. There is something moving about the care taken by the father to teach his wunderkind son all that he knew. The father was with Jeremy Bentham the guiding spirit of the philosophical movement Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism was a mechanical kind of philosophy which thought it possible to measure the goodness of action by measuring the amount of pleasure against the amount of pain. Mill followed the path his father set out from him, adopted his father's values and social conscience and was already by the tender age of twenty a distinguished intellectual figure. But then he asked himself the question if the realization of all his social schemes and all the grand social ideals would bring him happiness. And he understood that it would not. He understood in other words that all this focus on outward good and action, on mechanical measures for human life was missing some vital component in life and in himself. Mill went into a great depression. What brought him out was the reading of the poetry of Wordsworth and the understanding that there is a dimension of feeling, a dimension of the inner life which is somehow more important than all the social thought. This did not mean that Mill abandoned the path of social reform but rather that he changed its direction. Part of this change had to do with his meeting his relationship with Harriet Taylor, his embracing in a certain sense of liberal ideas on the role of women in society. Mill found himself and continued on his intellectual path, a path which would lead him to produce one of the masterpieces of modern political thought, "On Liberty ".

The foundation of consequentialist ethical theory, John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism is a must read for anybody who wants to understand ethical theory. While we may debate what makes action right or wrong, Mill's take is one that must be acknowledged.

One of the Classical School economists explains and defends a system of ethics that counted among its adherents Ludwig von Mises, one of the great Austrian School economists and philosophers.
Utilitarianism, in John Stuart Mill's day and our own, periodically comes under attack from the spokesmen of organized religion. But Mill holds that his philosophy is completely compatible with religious morals. Mill even writes that the founder of Christianity was a utilitarian. Makes sense when we realize that one of the main features of the early Christians was jettisoning Judaism commandments that seem to have no obvious utility (usefulness). That attitude lead them to eventually discard the entire Torah.
Mill imbibed Utilitarianism from his father -- British East India Co. executive and writer James Mill -- and their friend Jeremy Bentham. The two tablets of Utilitarianism are pleasure (acquisition of) and pain (avoidance of). Reduced to one it is the "greatest happiness principle." Mill argues persuasively that these things are more hard-wired into humans than almost everything else. The pursuit of virtue, which some in organized religion see as being at odds with Utilitarianism, is actually a form of the pursuit of happiness for the virtue-seeker, those around him/her, and/or future generations. This adds to the "public good," which is at the peak of Mill's values pyramid.
Utilitarian concepts are all over America's founding documents, especially the Constitution. Interestingly, and ironically, Mill's essay was published at the time of the Constitution's greatest crisis -- the Civil War (1863). Mill makes no mention of the crisis or America's earlier successful marriage of Utilitarianism and federalism/limited government.
Mill's "public good" and the U.S. Constitution's "general welfare" clauses helped open the gates to big government, Ayn Rand and other individual rights advocates point out. Sad but true. Although his ideas contain seeds for the modern welfare state, Mill meant his public good to be best achieved by free-acting individuals getting little or no prompting from government.
How does the individualized commandment of "love thy neighbor as thyself" get turned into the collectivist Social Security Administration? Perhaps the psychiatric profession can explain it. I can't.

Many of the posted reviews refer to a different version of the text (i.e. Crisp vice Sher)

Sher's version is an inexpensive and accessible (good font size and binding) edition of this classic. It contains the 3 essays (unabridged) use to construct Utilitarianism as well as a speech given by Mill while serving as a British MP in 1868 on capital punishment. Readers should note that aside from a short introduction by George Sher, this edition does not contain any additional analysis. Readers looking for a more detailed discussion will need to look elsewhere. Judging from some of the other reviews it sounds as if Crisp's version may be worthwhile.

I read this book for a graduate Mill seminar in Philosophy. Recommended reading for anyone interested in philosophy, political science, and history.

John Stuart Mill, 1806-73, worked for the East India Co. helped run Colonial India from England. Minister of Parliament 1865-68 he served one term.

Mill develops a theory of morality in Utilitarianism. He argues against the group of people who think that morality is intuitive. Intuitionists think that God put morality in us, thus, morality is a priori. Moral rules or principles were programmed in us, we can see these rules, they are binding, however they do acknowledge that on a case by case basis we still need to use them to reason out the ultimate answer for a particular case.

Mill also believes that there are a set of moral principles that we ought to be thinking about. Intuitionists today think that case by case we can reason out what is right or wrong. However, they would be suspicious that of believing there were general moral principles. Intuitionists say it is not up to us to investigate what is right or wrong. Mill would disagree. Mill doesn't like Intuitionists theory because they can't prove their view; and they can't explain why "lying is wrong" as an example. In addition, they do not provide a list of these innate morals we are suppose to have, and they do not have a hierarchy for them to resolve the conflict between two morals when they arise.

Background on essay, written in 1861 came out in 3 magazine articles, pretty scanty which sometimes drives one crazy trying to deduce what Mill is saying. A lot of interpretation is necessary.

Chapter 2: The second paragraph is official statement of the theory.

"The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness."

Happiness=pleasure and freedom from pain. This makes him a Hedonist philosophically.


Higher Pleasures Doctrine- Jeremy Bentham says how valuable pleasure was based on 2 dimensions that we evaluate our experience of pleasure by, intensity and duration. Bentham says this determines quantity in pleasure. Bentham said this determined how much a given experience adds to a person's happiness.

Mill adds a third value to evaluate pleasure by and that's its quality, how good it is. Many don't understand Mill's idea that pleasure has value and quality. Most people think that Mill is really talking about quantity, or they don't believe one can be a hedonist, that pleasure is the only thing that has value, and yet think that there is something more to judging how valuable an experience is than the intensity and the duration of the pleasure it contains. So, they say that one of two things must be going on here. Of course, some people are sure it is one thing, and some are sure it is another. Either what Mill is talking about when you get right down to it is quantity in pleasure and different experiences, or all the different things he says about quality can be somehow resolved into quantity. So that really what is going on is that when Mill talks about a pleasure being of a higher quality that just means that there is a lot more pleasure there that the quantity is much greater. Or, Mill is giving up on hedonism at this point and he is admitting that some things are valuable aside from pleasure. So, when he says an experience like reading a good book or something like that is more valuable than an experience of some kind of animalistic pleasure, that really what he is saying is this experience is more valuable for reasons that go beyond the amount of pleasure involved. In addition to how much pleasure is involved there is also that maybe the experience is more beautiful or more noble or something like that and this gives it additional value. So something other than the amount of pleasure involved gives it additional value. Mill can be a consistent hedonist and he can consistently say that pleasure is the only thing that can have value and yet it is still the case that some pleasures are just more valuable than other pleasures.

'Utilitarianism' by 19th Century English social philosopher, John Stuart Mill is the classic statement of a theory of ethics which is bases its argument primarily on the question of 'What is Good' instead of questions of obligation on which many other classic theories are based.

Today, Mill's theory and Utilitarianism in general fall under the shadow of an equally famous work by English philosopher, G. E. Moore, the great analytical work 'Principia Ethica'.

Utilitarianism is based on determining what is good by what provides the greatest pleasure for the greatest number of people. All by itself, this theory leaves itself open to all sorts of difficult questions about whether great good for a large number of people is worth the suffering of a single individual and all sorts of variations on this theme.

Moore's argument is simply that these problems simply point up the fact that what is moral cannot be reduced to statements of fact, such as the amount of pleasure received by a number of people.

Oddly enough, Moore did not kill Utilitarianism. That is why Mill's work is still studied today. Unlike scientific theories, philosophical theories, being different ways of looking at the world, never entirely loose their insights, even some of the most absurd sounding notions such as Bishop Berkeley's solipsism.

Like Kant's short 'Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals', the greatest virtue of this book is that it is a classic statement of an important position by it's most famous proponent in a relatively short work.

It is not easy reading, but it's length means one can read and analyze it within the course of a week, which is why professors still assign it.

A very important work.

This beautifully produced book is a superb addition to the library of any backyard astronomer or anyone from eight to eighty. It's a best buy for several reasons.
The first is its outstanding quality. The second is the BEWARE!.
This book is actually a softcover, otherwise identical reprint of "Advanced Skywatching", ISBN: 0783549415, published in 1997, also by Time-Life.
Perhaps Time-Life used this subterfuge to catch unwary on-line shoppers that already own "Advanced Skywatching" (as I do), since you can't view the contents on-line to discover you already own the same book under a different name.

The complaint on the star charts about this book (or its twin) not covering the entire sky is not critical.
There isn't room on anyone's bookshelf for all the possible fun sky-hops, of which this book and its twin present abundant excellent examples. There are more and different, also challenging and instructive ones in another fine volume, "Turn Left at Orion", and many others.

Not to worry if you get sucked in. This one makes a fine gift for your favorite grandchild as mine will.
Add this to your "must have" list if you don't already own its twin. If you do, buy it anyhow and give it to someone special.
The price is astonishingly low for the fine content.

After picking this book up at a Sam's club out of curiosity I found that I couldn't put it down and ended up putting it in the cart. My companion is a begining Astronomy buff and he couldn't get enough eighther. We were reading it to each other and trying to read it at the same time. We have learned alot from this book and have put it to good use with his new telescope. I highly remommed this book to the person who has always wanted to get started in astronomy!

David Dodd has assembled a wide variety of stories to inspire and encourage addicted people to get clean. I was impressed that Twelve Step groups were NOT the focus of every tale, and that the one constant was that each individual made a PERSONAL CHOICE to forego their addiction and live sober. For all the help some people get from 12-Step groups, there are many who don't "relate" to the religiousity. But this book shows that recovery is still possible and worthwhile. The fact that most of these tales are told by celebrities and artists we KNOW only increases their value. Plus, it's nice to know that my gut feeling about Steven Tyler is "on the money" - he truly IS a mensch!!

I was attracted to the many well-known names listed on the cover, but once I began reading the book, I was overwhelmed with its passion and solutions. David Dodd has done a remarkable job which is reflected in this collection of interviews. My favorite part, however, is the introduction to the book, where the author tells his personal story on how he became sober with the help of Steven Tyler. His vivid description of the events were astonishing to me, they were absolutely incredible. This is a wonderful book!

Early in the 20th century one John Livingston Lowes examined books Coleridge is known or likely to have read - either because it is explicitly referenced in Coleridge's notes or because it is very much like something Coleridge has referenced and was likely available to him at the time - and found passages similar to lines and phrases in "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" and in "Kubla Khan." Lowes then reproduced these passages, some at considerable length, and provided suitable contextual and connective tissue relating them to Coleridge's interests and habits and, of course, to his poems. He published the results of his labors in The Road to Xanadu. I agree with the modern judgment that Lowes' investigation into Coleridge's notebooks and library tells us relatively little about how Coleridge's poems work in our minds and hearts, nor is his loose associationist psychology very convincing.

Nonetheless, I find Lowes' work quite fascinating. What interests me is what interested Lowes, that fragments of ideas and wording somehow found their way from texts dating back to the 17th century and into Coleridge's poems. Those poems then served as a vehicle for further dissemination of some of those fragments. We can thus think of them as memes in Richard Dawkins' rather casual and controversial formulation.

As an investigation into Coleridge's creative process it is fascinating. But as a diet to feed the imagination (especially if you read the footnotes) it's incredible --
Soaring visions and haunted deeps, strange and ancient mysticisms, daemons invisible and inscrutable, hermetic secrets, alchemical transformations, incomprehensible beings who navigate the waves of ether between the stars, ghost ships and wandering Jews, tales of gothic horror and folk stories of "wise men" who know what charms will undo a malicious enchantment, an odd series of strange dreams and reveries that echo each other mysteriously across five centuries, travelers in peril from enticing voices and unearthly music at the edge of trackless deserts or from mysterious hypnotic lights in the dark (the original Jack o Lanterns), underground rivers and hidden seas, exotic kingdoms at the sources of the Nile or in the inaccessible heart of Asia, trackless jungles flowering with wild and dangerous profusion, the colors - intense or subtle - of icy northern seas, and Henry Hudson's crew describing in sober and convincing detail the beauty of a mermaid sighting.

The Subjection of Women is an often overlooked classic by one of history's greatest minds. Published at the end of Mill's life, The Subjection brings together all of Mill's most important views on liberty, utility, human nature, and society. It paints a far more accessable ethic than more famous works, such as On Liberty. Mill uses his philosophical views to reach conclusions that were long ahead of his time, and in many ways continue to outpace our understanding of gender and society. This work is arguably the best feminist writing ever, and the best commentary on morality and social evolution.

Today, Mill's work continues to provide us with a framework for understanding social movements such as the gay rights and animal rights movements. Mill shows us how just institutions are vital to the happiness of both society and the individual, as these institutions are central to the formation of our characters. He shows us how both the oppressor and the oppressed are harmed by unjust institutional arrangements, such as gender inequalities in the family. In sum, Mill's The Subjection of Women is perhaps the finest piece of social and political philosophy produced in the modern era, and should be read by all interested in social justice, feminism, or ethics.

Obviously, my problem is not with the text in this particular edition of J.S. Mill's classic. The problem is the edition itself. First, on Amazon "Search Inside" it made it seem like the edition came with commentaries - it does not. This is basically just a photocopy of some earlier edition of the book, put between the cheapest digital photocopies they could find. The only good thing about this edition is the huge margains around the text (for taking good notes), but those are obviously only there because it was easiest to photocopy the book on this paper. Yuck.

I read this book for a graduate Mill seminar in Philosophy. Recommended reading for anyone interested in philosophy, political science, feminism and history.

John Stuart Mill, 1806-73, worked for the East India Co. helped run Colonial India from England. Minister of Parliament 1865-68 he served one term.

In The Subjection of Women Mill first and foremost advocated the need for all humans to improve their characters. He was a firm believer, that all people regardless of their race or sex, had the capacity to learn and improve their characters. In light of this belief, Mill sets the tone for his argument in his opening paragraph of his essay wherein he wrote that the legal means by which the female sex was subordinated to the male sex hindered the character development of all members of society. He was the first male in Britain to champion the cause of women to the extent that he did, and he suffered plenty of criticism and insults for doing so. He was also the first Member of Parliament to introduce a bill in the Commons to enfranchise women. He worked tirelessly throughout his life supporting women's rights with both his pen and his purse.

I find that his essay really turned a spotlight on the many horrors that women endured throughout the history of mankind at the hands of their brutish husbands. No other person's writings illuminated the deprivations that women had endured the way Mill's essay did. No doubt, Victorian sensibilities were shocked when he wrote about the brutality that many women in marriage suffered at the whim of their tyrannical husbands--rape and beatings were at the top of his list.

One of the ideas that Mill gave his fervent support to, and that I greatly admire him for, is the concept that freedom of choice for people is a crucial ingredient in character formation and in improving society and civilization for everyone. This belief led him to argue that marriage as it existed in his time was nothing better than legal and state sponsored slavery. Women had few options in life. If they were married to a tyrant who beat them it was almost impossible to obtain a divorce. Divorce was rare in his day and actually had to be approved by an act of parliament. In addition, if a wife did obtain a divorce, not only would she most likely lose custody of her children, she would also be denied any visitation privileges as well. Mill correctly complained that outside of the home women were left with few options in life. Professional education and career paths were closed to them. Men were fearful of the competition in the workplace women would present if they were allowed employment in professions or trade guilds. Therefore, when it came to workplace opportunities, society left women with few options-- prostitution, or menial domestic work. Thus, Mill saw that the lesser of all evils that women could choose was marriage. Their life in the home was reduced to serving as scullery maids and raising children. Thus, he wrote women treated this way were turned into shrews, which not only made their lives miserable, but also the lives of those around them. For all these reasons Mill believed that the institution of marriage was an impediment; not just to women, but to the progress of civilization as well. Considering that marriage laws had the force of several millennia of religious and societal mores behind it, one can certainly understand why his description of its depravity on humankind won him few friends in "polite" Victorian society.

During his time, a married woman's property automatically devolved to her husband, and Mill correctly saw this as one more inequity against women placed on them by society. Therefore, when he married Harriett Taylor in 1851, a financially secure widow, he remained true to his convictions and wrote a formal renunciation to all of her property in protest against the current law. In addition, while a Member of Parliament he cosponsored the Married Women's Property bill in 1868 to try to change the law. Finally, he sternly rebuked this abomination in his essay by rightly concluding that marriage left the vast majority of women in the unenviable position of "the personal body-servant of a despot" (CW XXI: 285).

I read the subjection of women as a freshman in college. I believe that the subjection of women is one of the best arguments for equality of genders that has ever been written. beyond the usual cited feminist arguments that pervade pop culture, this book using reason argues that not only are women disadvantage by society unequal treatment, but MEN are too. Society is deprived of what they might have achieved, and we are all the lesser for it. Although written a hundred years ago, the ideas still have not been taken to heart by society. If more people read this book, the culture would be better off.

A founding document of modern feminism by the granddaddy of libertarian thought. If you have any interest in feminism and/or classical liberalism (a.k.a. libertarianism), you must read this short, brilliant book.

Since the early 1950's, John Berger has authored an almost dizzying number of works on art history, art criticism, fiction and politics, as well as a large body of writing that seems to defy categorization altogether. And that is why one can't help but feel a kind of admiration for Geoff Dyer's courage to take on, for his first full-length book, a difficult critical subject and author in Ways of Telling: The Work of John Berger.

Although Dyer clearly sees Berger and his work as massively influential yet nearly always overlooked by his peers and contemporaries, it is obvious that Ways of Telling is a great deal more than a mere reaffirmation of, or a critical love letter to, an illustrious writer and his sometimes ground-breaking work. In Ways of Telling, Dyer looks carefully at the broad spectrum of Berger's career, from articles on politics and aesthetics during the early 1950's published in Socialist newspapers and magazines, to novels written in the mid-1980's. Perhaps because Dyer intended (one could plausibly surmise) Ways of Telling to be not only an academic critique but a work written for a slightly wider readership, we are invited to take a closer look at several of Berger's more universally known works. These include G, an historical novel influenced by Socialist Realism and according to Dyer, possibly inspired by the Cubist movement as well. We look at A Painter of Our Time, Berger's breakthrough novel about the struggle between the moral imperative of being true to one's creative gifts versus fidelity to one's political beliefs. Scrutiny is also given to the near-canonical Ways of Seeing, both the BBC television series and the widely-read 1972 book of the same name. Dyer is quick to acknowledge that although the polemical, class-based attack on consumer-driven capitalism and "the authority of property" by way of a beautifully written critique of Western Art is often crudely drawn in Ways of Seeing. One might miss the point entirely if one chooses to ignore the manner in which Berger's sharp sense of aesthetics and his critical eye opened the floodgates to what is now the standard method for looking at art for an ever-widening audience.

No doubt it is a tall order for any reader, or writer to separate John Berger's Democratic-Socialist and Humanist value systems from much of his work, Dyer reminds the reader that any attempt to do so is pointless and probably an unnecessary exercise. To quote Dyer " He is a great writer, but the quality of his work is important, finally, not for what it reveals of him but for what it enables us to glimpse of ourselves, of what we might become-and of the culture that might afford him the recognition that it is due."

"The Cromwellian Settlement of Ireland" reminds us again of how the happenings in Ireland are inter-related to those in the rest of Europe and the rest of the world. A study of history teaches us the importance of Ireland, and those of us with Irish ancestry remember it with pride. Think of Thomas Cahill's book "How the Irish Saved Civilization" and how knowledge was preserved during the Dark Ages. It is a fascinating book, and it demonstrates how Ireland became a repository of knowledge from the ancient Christian world. If we "fast forward" some years, we see that for hundreds of years Ireland's greatest export was its people. At one time, I thought that the problems began with William of Orange and the fight against Stuart forces, and continued through the Potato Famine into modern times. "The Cromwellian Settlement of Ireland" has taught me that the issue was much more complex.

One of the biggest causes of the troubles in Ireland resulted from the success of the forces of Parliament under Cromwell in the English Civil War against King Charles I. This introduces the element of Protestant versus Catholic, a theme that has continued to this day. It also introduced the problem of how to pay the victorious Parliamentary troops. How were they paid? The same way William the Conqueror paid his supporters who invaded England in 1066. To the victor go the spoils. Those who supported King Charles I were typically Catholic, whether they were English or Irish. Those who lost lands even included those who held ancient titles of nobility. The easy step was to take the property of those who supported the losing cause. However, the Protestant forces went further, taking properties of people who were politically neutral, including the property of those who were often incapable of such political support, including widows, orphans, minor children, and the like. The leaders and intellectuals of Ireland went to Connaught and to the four corners of the civilized world. The working classes stayed because then new landowners needed them. I feel that the Cromwellian settlement of Ireland was the foundation of the atmosphere of violence and hatred felt today in Ulster.

I valued this book for the information it contained. Many readers may find that it is a boring book. For those Irish of English ancestry, this book may have some genealogical value. For those Irish who want a better understanding of our history, this can provide real insight into the problems of the twentieth and twenty first centuries in Ulster.

I agree with the first reviewer. Mill's work is spectacular, but this printing is an INSULT to a great thinker and human being. The text is barely legible, and in the copy I received a number of pages had the text cropped off on the left side. Unbelievable that anyone thinks they can sell this for 40 dollars! It's really a disgrace. I would have written to the publisher, but I didn't see an address. Pitiful, just pitiful.

Then you'd get some idea how badly your eyes would hurt trying to read this reprint. The quality is horrible, just horrible. It reminds me of the first faxes I saw (back in the 80s, right?). That being said, everyone should have a copy of this book, and (ever the optimist) the poor quality of print forces you to read slowly which is something the material in this book cries for on its own. Do not rely on the received view of Mill, especially the view propogated by Frege, Ayer, Russell, et al. that Mill held the bizarre view that at some point 2+2 might not =4. Read what he actually says for yourself! In the end, I'm grateful to have my own personal copy of this unsung classic of philosophy; so grateful, in fact, that I don't have too much heartburn over having paid a pretty penny for a crappy reprint. Still, the print of this edition (the only other edition I've seen is one from around 1900), is so poor, I have to give this edition (the yellow cover w/ full title) only 2 stars. So, I'd probably try the other edition first, but if this was the only one I could get, I'd still get it just for the value of having Mill's own words at my beck and call.