Q and A Books

It's always on and poppin. I could not wait until the2nd part came out. i Love this part.

This book was wonderful but you have to get part II, then wait for Part 3 which I haven't heard anything about. This book isn't predictable at all.

It has been over six months since I have read anything. I saw this book at Wal-Mart and it got my attention. I love the way the author paid attention to details and how he took his time to make Dee Dee the Baddiest "Itch." I recommend to this book to anyone that is looking for a fast pace, straight out gansta type of reading, "This Is The One." I bought the book last night and I finished it today. I just couldn't put it down. This novel was what I needed. To each of you enjoy reading and take care.....Peace.

Alastair J. Hatter's It's On and Poppin' treats readers to a fresh scene of the grimy streets of Memphis. A story about twin brothers and a younger sister from a a good Christian home may not be what the streets is craving, but throw in the fact that this family is running the drug game in Memphis and you might have yourself a great page turner. Jay and Bee are making waves in the drug game when their younger sister Dee Dee decides to leave the stifling roof of her mother's home to live with her brothers. When things start to go wrong and her brothers end up locked down, Dee Dee is determined to keep the family enterprise afloat by showing her worth. Mr. Hatter can be commended for his great character development, but there are a few editorial issues that should be addressed. All in all It's On and Poppin' leaves readers craving a sequel with a final funeral scene that is anything but expected.

1. What did you like best about this book?
I liked that Alastair gave readers a new setting of Memphis.

2. What did you dislike about this book?
I didn't like the few typos that I found throughout the book.

3. How can the author improve this book?
I think this book is good the way it is creatively. All that needs to be done technically, is maybe a final proofread to clear up any inconsistencies.

"It's On and Poppin" is definitely that and a realistic hood legend!!! Alastair penned this novel around siblings, Bee, Jay, and baby sis, Dee Dee. Bee and Jay are young guys in the game on the come up with alot of muscle, loyalty and street smarts. They're living comfortably but in search of their big break while standing watch over their sister trying to protect her from thugs in the street that live a life similar to theirs. Bee and Jay end up in jail leaving sheltered Dee Dee at the realm of their budding empire, and she's left to fend for all and has to discern who's truly gangsta and who's snake. Can Dee Dee stand for her family or will they all fall?

"It's On and Poppin" is full of gritty, enthralling drama that will have you turning pages and becoming more intrigued with the supporting characters as much as the central characters. Mr. Hatter captures your attention with love, murder, scheming, back-biting, drug game tales, cheating, grief, and heartbreak in the lives of true playas.

If you think King of Spades is good you need to get the sequel Queen of Spades. I read it and I must say you will not be disappointed. In Queen of Spades Baby Girl and the girl are back at it again vowing to get payback and takeover the record label but someone will not sit back or rather lie down and let them do it. You will have to pick up your copy to see what I am talking about. I guarenteed you will not be disappointed. See if Baby Girl get rich or die trying.

i PERSONALLY LOVED THiS BOOK & i AM WAiTiNG FOR QUEEN OF HEARTS TO COME OUT. iT WAS JUST FiNALLY A LiL DiFFERENT FROM ALL THE TYPiCAL URBAN NOVELS OUT THERE. SHE DEF CAME WiTH A TWiST TO iT.

My title sums up this page turner. I finished this book in less than a week. As two reviewers mentioned earlier you have to pay close attention to the characters b/c Ms. Gayle gives alot of details.

Hint: This book has a sequal.

I can't wait to read it.

KING OF SPADES by Kiniesha Gayle is a story of sex, drugs and murder. Andre Chin is a well-known drug lord who is living life to the fullest. He has a fancy house, plenty of nice clothes and more money than he knows what to do with. The drug game has been good to him. His girlfriend Porsha, an attorney, is assisting Chin in making all of his business endeavors legal. Although he is still in the drug game, he also is the owner of a restaurant and a record company. In the midst of his conversion, someone is robbing him of his drugs, which is causing him to lose money. Chin and his partner, Tony Moreno, are determined to find out who is behind the robberies if it's the last thing they do. Chin has done a lot of dirt in the past, and has a list of several people who could be out to get him. Will the sins of his past hinder his future from prospering?

Natalie Smith, affectionately known as Baby Girl, is determined to find her parents' killer. Having lived a hard knock life after the death of her parents, Baby Girl will not have peace until their murder is resolved. She was there when they were murdered and remembers vivid details of the killer. Since the police haven't solved the case, she decides to take matters in her own hands. She gets caught up in the life she swore she would steer clear from, and, in the process comes into contact with Chin. As charming as Chin is, Baby Girl almost loses sight of her goal, but it doesn't take her long to get back on track. And once she does, an opportunity arises that allows her to seek control over Chin's expanding business and get the revenge the she has sought for a long time. Will she succeed in avenging her parents' deaths?

KING OF SPADES is a suspenseful tale of a man's attempt to turn from his wicked ways and a young girl's struggle to seek justice. The characters were well-developed, gritty and real. The adversity that they overcame to come out on top was inspiring, as was their desire to achieve their goals by any means necessary. If you are in the market for a tale full of unsuspecting twists and turns, don't hesitate to pick this book up.

Reviewed by Eraina B. Tinnin
of The RAWSISTAZ™ Reviewers

Kinieshia Gayle brings you the drug game like never before not only does she go to the limit letting you know how the game is played but she goes as far as to even show you how a woman can be a man's downfall.

Andre Chin was sitting on top of the world or so he thought his women Porsche Hilton was a prestigious lawyer trying to make his game flow legit. When Chin allowed his manhood to get the best of him and started swaying and playing the game. He finds himself in a whole lot of trouble with a triangle of females all around him: Baby Girl, Chyna, & Porsche. Porsche Hilton fell in love with a thug by the name of André Chin he treated her like a queen while she did her best to make his illegal business are made into a legit situation but when she finds out that both Baby Girl and Chyna Porsche allows her jealous raise to get the best of her almost causing her very own life. Chyna was down for whatever but when her man gets locked up she finds herself in Chin's arms and allowing her to do all those things Pitbull did for her before being on locked down but when Chin makes her make a decision she swears on vengeances for what's hers. Natalie "Baby Girl" Smith was on the mission of finding her parent's killers and she would go through hell to make them pay even if it meant taking her own life to the edge to get payback. She is determine to get vengeances with the surroundings of her best friends or her so called friends Dimples & Sandy. She gets herself involved in the street game but her mission was to come out on top.

After taking deadly beatings, Porsche, Dimples, & Baby Girl put into action the perfect plan to take over the empire that Chin has built leaving a Queen and a King but all fear would come from the sister with a vengeance but would her King question her. Kiniesha Gayle writes the near perfect tale. The story kept me wanting to know more I would have given the book a five accept for the minor editing problem through out the book but Ms. Gayle is said to have a sequel to King of Spades that I defiantly can't wait to read.

Wow they defiantly answered a lot of q questions in this book especially liked the reasoning behind q going after picard so much.

This was an interesting, creative story, with a very imaginative and unique view of Q. The characterization of Q was layered and complex, and the plot was suspenseful and fun. This is one of the best Trek novels to come along in quite some time.

This book was well written and a welcome change from the Borg themed Next generation books that have been written lately. I found it very fun to read and couldn't put it down until I was finished.

Some fans are dissing the TNG episode references. But I've long felt that the movies do a disservice to their source material by neglecting their source material. The most successful Star Trek films (Khan and First Contact) were directly spun off from episodes, and this book does a great job shedding light on the Q continuum and the further exploits of the Enterprise E and her valiant crew. Witness parallel universes colliding, and everyone's favorite cosmic prankster's various past shenanigans are put in new perspective (some we didn't even know he had a hand in). If you thought Admiral Lameway had tamed the quirky ominiscient, au contraire mon capitane; he is back! All hail the continuing voyages of the Starship Enterprise.

Been a while since I read Star Trek novels, but my friend got me a couple as a present and I've read both of them ("Resistance" and now "Q&A") in the span of two weeks. Maybe minor SPOILERS.

After going through Q&A, it seems to have the same problem as Resistance. The premise of "Q" being involved in a book is usually pretty exciting. I was curious what the authors could pull out this time. However, the story sort of dragged along with millions of cutovers to other people with Q popping up intermittenly. There are some funny moments (as usual) with Q's interaction with the crew.

However, the setup (while a little dragged) was ok, the climax and ending were (to me at least) a big "HUH" moment. Maybe I was just reading the book to late to grasp all the details, but I felt letdown at the end.

All in all, the book is not terrible and if you're a fan of Q, it's worth a look. But maybe you need to keep your expectations low.

I did not receive my item. I ended up having to buy the book from the college bookstore three days after classes started. She does not return e-mails or contact attempts.

Great book to have around when you're unsure about something. Will definitely be a book you will not want to sell back to the bookstore.

This book is recommended for anyone that wants to maintain a good level of grammar in their writing. This is especially useful for multi-lingual users. It is insightful and also reminds one of the basic grammar rules that are easily forgotten through the years.

Really good!
delivery was okay
and the book was in good condition.
satistfied with the order ~
but the only sad part was that I bought a wrong book
however, when i looked through it,
it seemed like a good book to study !

We are using this as a textbook in our home schooling. It is very easy to understand and use. My child is learning a lot and it was definitely the right purchase for us.

This book is a compilation of Ayn Rand opining on a diverse collection of topics that are not addressed in her essays or in her novels. Ever wonder what Ayn Rand's opinion was on gun control? Ronald Reagan? Barry Goldwater? Abortion? Pollution? Alexander Solzhenitsyn (author of The Gulag Archipelago)? Senator Joseph McCarthy? Robert Nozick? Don Quixote? the works of Leo Tolstoy? the works of Fyodor Dostovevsky? Katherine Hepburn? the fictional detective Mike Hammer?

These are just a small sample of what is contained within! This book also has a detailed index, which makes it very useful as a reference.

Here's a quick intro to Ayn Rand's thought. It's not a big book but it's pretty wide-ranging. She talks about specific people and issues but her favorite topics are philosophical. With those topics, she explains her chain of reasoning as best she can within the brevity required of the Q&A situation -- so she manages more than a superficial answer. Finally, of course, you get a taste of her difficult personality. That's part of Ayn Rand, too.

Ayn Rand's opinions on all things -- and I mean all things -- political, economical, aesthetic, ethical, metaphysical -- are inside of this book. At ~220 pages, it's good to read in short blocks, jumping around to wherever you like, or as reference. It's an excellent book for all fans of Ayn Rand and/or Objectivism -- new or die-hard. A good insight into Rand's opinions. I only have to wonder if she'd have changed her mind about Reagan or the Libertarian Party today.

As a sidenote -- this book looks and feels great! I love Penguin Publishing (publisher of the New American Library series).

A great compilation of the best of Ayn Rand's question and answer periods following her lectures.

Robert Mayhew's excellent editing organizes the questions and answers into chapters drawn around broad themes (e.g., politics, ethics, metaphysics and epistemology, and art), then into smaller sub-sections. This keeps the reading flowing, instead of jumping around from topic to topic almost at random as would occur in a live Q&A session.

While some of Ayn Rand's answers will be obvious to long-time students of Objectivism, many of them shed new light on her philosophy, and almost all of them give the reader a better picture of Ayn Rand as a person, whether it is her quick wit, her warm benevolence in giving the benefit of the doubt to most questioners and patiently explaining her philosophical principles to them, or her righteous indignation at genuinely dishonest, hostile, or insulting questions. Even her answers to questions on narrow, concrete issues at the time of the session (such as the Vietnam war) are applicable to events today (such as the current Iraq war) because her answers address the deeper abstract principles involved (such as proper foreign policy).

On my first reading, I noticed only two drawbacks. First, a few of her answers leave you wanting more, and you wish that she were still alive and in the room with you so that you could ask her follow-up questions. That's not to say that she doesn't give a full enough answer to the question as asked, given the context of a live public Q&A session, but rather that her intriguing answers leave you feeling sad that you are merely reading a book and not actually in the room during one of those Q&A sessions. Second, if you've ever heard a recording of one of her Q&A's (or were lucky enough to have attended one), you are aware of how much you are missing from the live setting--for example, from the audience reactions, as they audibly gasp in shock or indignation at some remark Ayn Rand makes, but by the end of her answer after she explains the comment, they are cheering. That's an added bonus of the live setting that the book format unfortunately can't reproduce, but if you're a student like me and can't yet afford to spend a few hundred dollars on recordings of all her lectures, this book is the next best thing.

This book is a good clear and concise guide to Ayn Rand's thoughts on a variety of issues. From taxes to ethics to Ernest Hemingway to capitalism to homosexuality, Rand forthrightly, clearly and honestly answers many questions put to her.

This book also cleared up many questions I had about Ayn Rand and this book solidifies here as the great intellectual and philosopher she was.

While the book is not, as Robert Mayhew points out, official Objectivism, due to the editing, anyone interested in her philosophy would find this book useful if they would like a short but pointed look at her thought.

As far as the editing is concerned, in my view that's really Robert Mayhew sort of eating his cake and having it too. If it can't be considered Rand's ideas because he edited it then why edit it? Why not release it as she said it? Because if he did they would destroy the myth that she always said brilliant things off the cuff instead of horrible things which she later had to restate and edit.

I also cringe at the term "official Objectivism" since that implies there is a body, in this case the Ayn Rand Institute, that decides what is official. Yet the philosophy itself is supposed to be based on reality. If it is reality based then no one can control it except reality.

I can also see where Dr. Reisman is coming from but, overall, this book is a good introduction to the genius of Ayn Rand.

There are alot of books on this subject. Most of them are highly emotional, which is understandable given the subject. Wilson's book is unique in the intensity of its scholarship. He has read everything on this subject. He can and does cite social science and scientific evidence bearing on every aspect of this issue -- and he views the issue very broadly. Unlike pretty much all the other books on this issue, there is little or no polemic here. Instead, there is simply an extraordinary range of intelligently assessed facts. Anyone interested in the subject has to read this book.

James Q. Wilson's book is an enlightening look at the state of marriage in America (although he cites statistics from other countries as well.) The work is easy to read and is credible. The reader will gain a clearer understanding of what is happening to families in the U.S. The children, of course, are the victims in the breakdown of the family. As they grow up, the cycle of divorce and single parenting continues. Wilson gives adequate solutions to these grave social problems that we face.

Wilson's book goes beyond the surface of a lot of the talk about the state of the family today. Unlike some other publications geared toward the religous community, this is purely a secular work, even if it does confirm many of the problems pointed out by pro-family Catholic and evangelical groups.

The thesis is this: in the wake of society's overall material wealth and the advancement of individual rights, both good things in general, the state of marriage as a societal good has declined considerably. In too many cases, the cohesive unit that functioned as a means of protection, support, and guidance for children has lost its glue, and the government has come to step in and perform some of these functions in certain situations, which isn't necessarily a good thing.

The chapter-by-chapter layout takes a look at the problem from different angles (single motherhood, divorce, African-American slavery, etc.) and compares the trends not with a romanticized ideal, but with what other cultures have done historically, to determine whether this trend is an anomaly or something to be expected, and where it might lead.

Among the more interesting tidbits is the fact that for whatever problem no-fault divorce has had today, it was not the result of a nefarious plan by feminists or others whose goal is to take down the family structure. Rather it was the unintended consequences of a plan to make technical corrections to the law to comply with what had become practice. The drafters of the no-fault laws were working under the naive assumption that these changes to remove the threat of a judical order finding fault would be complemented with government incentives to enter therapy and reconcile before the order be given. When this didn't happen, the no-fault divorce provisions made it easier to dissolve the marriage without any restrictions.

This detail was to highlight that you're not getting a political or cultural polemnic in this book, but rather a systematic discourse on the problem with angles not normally seen in this debate.

Marriage is a problem, argues Wilson. That is, it is in a problematic state. Marriage is good for societies, for individuals, and especially for children. But the Western world is quickly moving away from marriage. As a result a host of problems are arising.

Wilson begins with what are now well-known and depressing figures. Any other type of relationship but marriage is bad for the adults and especially bad for the kids. Take cohabitation, for example. People who cohabit before marriage short-change themselves and their children in numerous ways. First, the average duration of a cohabiting couple is 1.3 years. Cohabiting couples are far more likely to divorce when they do marry than couples who did not cohabit before marriage.

Moreover, children of cohabiting couples are likely to be as poor as children in single-parent families. And in England, children of cohabiting couples are twenty times more likely to suffer child abuse than kids from married couples.

Or consider step-families. The homicide rate for children in such families is seventy times higher than for those living with both biological parents. Child abuse is also much higher in these families. The evidence merely confirms what common sense has always told us: "people care for their own children more than for those of others".

Wilson then examines the social, cultural and biological/evolutionary evidence for why marriage and families exist. In addition, the historical development, and recent decline, of marriage and family are discussed. While a combination of nature and nurture, biology and culture, made marriage a civil necessity, the doctrines of the Enlightenment sowed the seeds of its demise.

Beginning with the Enlightenment, marriage began to be seen less as a sacrament and more as a contract. Today it is seen less as a contract and more as an arrangement. Individual rights and freedoms, the product of modernism, have undermined the rationale for and the basis of marriage. Thus it is surprising that people bother to get married at all in the modern, secular, individualistic West.

Wilson also examines how government policies, especially economic policies, impact on the family. He acknowledges that many policies have a negative impact on families, but questions to what extent government policies can in fact help families. While marriage is in the best interests of children, there are limits as to how much a government can do to encourage marriage. After examining a number of federal programs aimed at doing just that, Wilson concludes: "getting single mums to marry is harder than keeping married couples together".

Thus while financial incentives from the government can help to an extent, they are no panacea. Indeed, the cultural incentives, or disincentives, to marriage, may be more crucial. And these cultural trends may be harder to overcome. A concern for relationships has replaced a concern for marriage. This is the result of larger cultural shifts such as the Enlightenment, with its attendant rugged individualism, rampant secularism and often amoral utilitarianism. How these forces can be offset is no easy matter. Interestingly, Wilson sees a revival of religion as a major factor if we are to see cultural trends reversed.

While Wilson himself displays no deep religious convictions, he does acknowledge the role religion has played in the past both to curtail some of these forces, and to under-gird and affirm marriage and family. One way religion does this is by acknowledging the value of stigma and shame. Our society, says Wilson, "has managed to stigmatize stigma so much so that we are reluctant to blame people for any act". Thus our no-fault divorce laws, for example. No one wants to take responsibility for their actions anymore, and our laws are beginning to reflect that.

Wilson argues that we somehow need to recover the positive nature of stigma and shame. We need to recognize that not all behaviors are in society's best interests. Illegitimacy, for example, is one of them. Forty years ago a mother who brought a child into wedlock had a clear understanding that this was not something to boast about. Today no such moral compunction exists. But it should.

Perhaps part of the way to make for a better future is to recapture an accurate sense of the past. Marriage and family are not dead yet, but have taken a severe hammering. We need to redouble our efforts to affirm and protect these most vital of institutions. This book is an important component in such a defense.

"Two nations, between whom there is no intercourse and no sympathy." Benjamin Disraeli was speaking of the nations of the rich and the poor, but Wilson sees underlying causes. One nation is married, reasonably affluent, educated, and invests heavily in their children. The other nation is fatherless, poor, and does not invest in their children. On page 11 he quotes a study by William Galston, a former advisor to President Clinton. Galston shows that you only have to do three simple things to avoid being poor: finish high school, marry before having a child, and wait until age 20 to have a child. Only 8% of people who do these three things are poor, compared to 79% for those who do not.

The problems in the fatherless nation go beyond poverty. Children of single mothers are more likely to be delinquent; they are more likely drop out of school, become suspended and suffer from emotional problems. This is not from the lack of financial resources; the researchers Sara McLanahan and Gary Sandefur were able to show that the poverty that resulted from being a single mother only explained about half the difference in outcomes between children with single mothers and children with married parents. The results for cohabitation are not much better, particularly since cohabitating relationships typically end in less than two years, sometimes in marriage, but about as often in separation. Furthermore, the marriages that result from cohabitation are more likely to end in divorce.

Wilson develops the theory of sex ratios. When the ratio between men and women is high, men have to compete with each other for women, and women that bargaining power to secure monogamous relationships. But when the ratio is low, women have to compete for the limited supply. This results in women having to accept sex outside of marriage, polygamy (depending on the culture), and a general loosening of morals as women use their sexuality to increasingly "outbid" each other for the limited supply of men.

This explains a great deal of why single motherhood has devastated the black community in America; with many black men in jail the sex ratios are extremely low. But the research shows that sex ratios do not explain the full story. A whole host of research, from that of Guttantag and Secord, to Mark Fossett and Jill Keicolt, to James Wilson himself, show that the correlation between sex ratio and illegitimacy is stronger for blacks than it is for whites or Latinos. Wilson partly attributes this to slavery, and partly to the lingering effect of various African cultures, and makes a convincing case.

Wilson also takes on the "disappearing jobs" theory of the increase in black out of wedlock childbirths. It suffers from numerous flaws. Christopher Jencks looked at black men with steady jobs. 80% of them were married in 1960, but only 66% were in 1980. The difference is that men with jobs were less inclined to marry. Furthermore, Robert Lerman and others have shown that immigrants in the same urban neighborhoods have lower rates of illegitimacy despite living in the same neighborhoods. In some cases when there isn't work, they will take long bus rides to available work.

The conclusion is that the increase in out of wedlock childbirths is driven by two factors: welfare benefits and the loss of the social stigma for unwed mothers. Wilson defeats two main objections to the welfare theory. The first objection is that welfare benefits have been declining relative to inflation, but Robert Moffitt has shown that when you also account for other benefits besides welfare, such as Medicaid, food stamps and public housing, welfare benefits did keep up with inflation. Another objection to the welfare theory is that some states offer much higher welfare benefits despite having lower rates of out of wedlock childbirths. This objection fails because different states have different cultures. When you compare how people make decisions you find that welfare benefits do have an influence. On page 147 he cites many researchers making that point, ranging from Mark Rosenzweig, the economists Jeff Grogger and Stephen Bronars, and by the 1998 research of Robert Moffitt (not to be confused with his earlier 1992 research on the subject).

Finally, Wilson spends much of the book putting marriage in both a sociological and historical context. This review is already long so I'll just touch on it briefly. Wilson notes that critics of monogamous marriage are correct when they point out that our current "white dress, vows, big ceremony" notion of marriage is a fairly recent invention. But they miss the larger point; marriage is generally most strongly formalized in societies in which the ties between parents and their children are fragile. In more robust societies with strong senses of social obligation, cohabitation and common law marriage produce the same results as our formalized marriages: a tangible claim on the father for help with both raising the children and supporting the mother.

I would also recommend Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality by Thomas Sowell, who shows the importance of culture, for example, African Americans of West Indian descent made 94% as much as whites back in 1984, compared to 62% for African American's as a whole.

I found this book for free and read it based upon the rating of 4 stars that Amazon.com readers had given it at the time. I'm sorry, but it's definitely not worth a 4. Even giving it a 3 is being generous. It's a decent book, but, given all of the other better things out there to read, this book isn't worth your time. The story has some interesting twists. But, for the main, it is contrived, lacks energy, has flat characters, and lousy dialogue.

Higgins has pretty much mastered this genre and has been known to "phone a few in, but COLD HARBOUR does a nice job within the confines of Higgins' rather straight forward style. Playing around with the typical conventions of cross channel warfare, identical twins(never a good idea), and a foray into LeCarre territory, a nice thriller emerges. The story does have its flaws with a rather obvious villain and a few too many twists to hold onto the realism that Higgins generally strives for but overall it works its way to its inevitable conclusion effectively. Other than the ridiculous cover on this paperback, as astutuely mentioned by another reviewer-a U-Boat which has nothing to do with this tales of an E-Boat and espionage, this one's a rather nice page turner and not bad for a quick thriller to fill in on the plane trip or at the beach.

...and that is precisely what I did with this book. The characters were laid out, then they subtley changed and then yet another twist altered your perception again. I was constantly flipping the pages, ready and as nervous as the characters themselves, to find out what would happen next.

Buy the book to save the cover. It display a German U-Boat. There's a partial photo of a submarine on the back page. And, each chapter is signaled with a small image of a submarine. So, it's about a submarine, right? Wrong. The only boat in the book is a German E-Boat. The cover designer didn't know the difference between a German U- and an E-boat! :-} One has to wonder how this got past the proof readers!! Meanwhile, the story is fair, but in places it leaves the reader saying, "Naw, that wouldn't happen."

This is not a milestone book on the scale of Higgins' "Eagle Has Landed" but it is, in my opinion, a little gem of a book. Higgins - who, let's not forget, lives in the Channel Islands - has a strong sense of place, and well captures the sometimes melancholy feel of that stretch of water. Sure, some of the story is a little soapy, but what do you expect in a WW2 French Resistance/British Navy wartime adventure? Solid stuff.

This work is a serious research into the Q'ero mystical tradition of Peru. There are a few folks out there who claim that everything we read in English on the Q'ero is just wrong. They decry even mixed bloods (mestizo) who are the current leaders of getting the Q'ero ways out into the world. Problem is, most of the complainers are not explicit in what is 'wrong' with the material presented and do nothing themselves to promote understanding. It's easy to complain, not so easy to communicate mystical or spiritual truth. And in today's world pure-bloods are disappearing and so too would all their spiritual traditions if not for works like this.

What the author has done is to document her experiences in talking directly with the Q'ero who represented a genuine lineage behind an ancient tradition which probably reaches back to the Inka. This book is a combination of interviews and reliable information on Q'ero worldviews. The challenge here is that to really step into a living tradition such as that of the paqo/shaman, you need something more than a book, you need some face time, not necessarily in Peru, and not necessarily speaking Quecha, but time with someone who knows their stuff. The author presents information in this book that she knows hers.

I was disturbed but unsurprised to see the average customer review at 5 stars. My review is not meant to put down the author or the book in question, rather, to express my deep interest in a factual portrayal of friends of mine, their lifestyle and spiritual traditions. I have lived in Cusco, Peru for over two years and have become close friends with a dozen or so paqos-- shaman-mystics-- from Qeros. I speak Spanish and Quechua. I am the godfather of a six month old boy from Qeros. My house has become the place of lodging for five Qero shamans when they are visiting Cusco. I share these statements as a reality check.

The author --apparently-- speaks neither Spanish nor Quechua, and has as her primary source of information, translation, and spiritual guidance two shamans who are decidedly Non-Qeros, these being Ñunez del Prado and Yabar. Rather than state my bias towards these two purveyors of Andean shamanism-mysticism, I would simply use this space to state the obvious-- that the author presents an unresearched and uninformed portrait of the Qero through the eyes of her mestizo teachers. It should come as no surprise, then, that when interviewing her Qero informants, she often realizes that they have no idea what she is talking about. Her statement of the westernized so-called Andean traditions lacks true Andean character. See, for one shocking example, the supposed Quechua names for the chakras-- these are Inventions of Ñunez del Prado!!

There are parts that save face for both the author and her westernized teachers, like the biographical interviews she conducts. Even so, I was generally saddened to find yet another book written from the point of view of a relatively ignorant foreigner who has decided to share an idiosyncratic, romanticized and westernized image of the Andean spiritual universe. In my experience, when we strip the Qero tradition and other autoctonous traditions of comparative mysticism, or of our western cosmovision, we do ourselves a tremendous favor.

If you want to learn about the Qero or Andean mysticism, come to Peru. If you want to learn about one North American woman and her (mis)conceptions about these people, read this book.

I couldn't agree with the previous reviewer more. Although I've never been to Peru, I've been exploring Native healing practices for over 10 years, in several other countries. I've cooresponded by email with the author, and stopped when she accused me of taking a position I never took about healing practices, and refused to provide evidence that I had done so. This book romanticizes the Qero, and her role in telling their story. Conversations I've had with a Peruvian curandero who has studied with the Qero confirm that she has made errors in her book. Given her lack of both Spanish and Quechua, and all the above, she is clearly not interested in accuracy.

I have been a student on the path of mystical knowledge for over 20 years. This is one of the most detailed and enlightening books I have read. The knowledge for true seekers is what this world needs and Joan has not only done a remarkable job at reseaching the subject, her clear and detailed explanations are right on.
This is one book that any true seeker will gain from. The exercises included, when performed, bring lasting and enlightening results.
Any seeker on the path of truth will tell you there is a lot of "shallow" materal on the market today. This book is anything but shallow. Joan's depth takes you places few have journeyed and I HIGHLY HIGHLY HIGHLY recommend it. Make sure you "DO THE EXERSICES". Do not just read them, and I am certain you will be recomending this book to others too. Great job Joan.

Joan Wilcox has done an exceptional job not in capturing the essence of the Q'ero (it is something that cannot be held prisoner) but at taking down the curtain between their tradition and ours. In a time when many profess to be in possession of a sacred knowledge that flows from them, Wilcox has managed to truthfully allow it to flow through her, acting as a conduit and empowering that ancient wisdom to make its own twists and mysterious turns as it will, and as it has for eons. Keepers of the Ancient Knowledge accurately chronicles the inner story of the Q'ero in all that can be spoken, and at the same time allows for all that cannot be told outside of personal experience to begin to shine its light as well. These are words and experiences from the mouths of the Elders, healers and masters themselves, and I deeply admire the objectivity with which she and her cohorts have chronicled the Q'ero's energetic journey.

Reading the book was like uncovering an overgrown ruin, where on the outside the crumbling walls do not meet your lofty expectations, but on the inside the simple truth emerges as something one could have never quite imagined.

There is an immense amount to be said for the starkness and grace with which she has presented such valuable knowledge at such a dire time of need. Any who take the time to read Keepers of the Ancient Knowledge will only be moved positively on their path of understanding, energy work, and enlightenment, and will be aided with extraordinary tools gifted from the Elders, made manifest by catching a privileged glimpse into an ancient tradition, for which Wilcox has provided here an incredibly clear window.

The questions I had when checking this book out from the library were as follows: 'How much is my personal moral sense skewed into good or evil by my experiences and how I interpret them?' and 'What can heal a damaged moral sense (unhappy childhood) or destroy a strong moral sense?' and 'What is the relationship between intelligence and moral sense?'

My questions were not answered by this volume.

A distinction between tolerance (you put up with something because you have to) and acceptance (you have no objections to a practice) is not made. On page seven moral relativism is equated with refusing to condemn strange customs in a foreign society. Wilson makes no distinction between tolerating a practice that you have no influence or control over vs. accepting it. I tolerate clubs catering to smokers (I hate smoking); it doesn't mean I am a smoking advocate, as Mr. Wilson implies. I recognize other people have a right to smoke, just not around me.

No mention of Ayn Rand's objectivism; on p234 it is called 'vainglorious' without being named. As the modern answer to relativism, it says, things do have values, and some (like my life) are more valuable than others (like a corrupt regime's whims). Objectivism also restates and simplifies Wilson's entire argument with foundational premises and structured conclusions. Wilson uses Christian family values, post modern relativism, emotional psychology, variants on Darwinism, and social/cultural norms as his reasoning tools. The empirical evidence is documented psychological studies, widely open to interpretation, and presented without [supporting] context. (Floating abstractions.)

Part one entitled "Sentiments" involved the wonders of altruism. Mob justice, social networks, and self interest get nods. Altruism is expanded around throughout the entire book in various guises (fairness, duty, self-control, behaviorism), rather than a simple 'charity is a personal choice.' Instead of asking 'why do we choose this?' Wilson documents (and interprets) behavior that shows moral choices being made in specific (controlled) instances. Selfishness is equated with evil.

Part two, "Sources" explores from where the moral sense is instilled, (Social groups, families, bonding), but no *new* analysis is made on methodology. Baumrind's parenting studies (pp150-1) are cited. A pointless chapter on gender is followed by historical Western philosophy lessons (not relevant as fundamental human nature doesn't change between societies or centuries).

Part three, 'Character,' finally asks about moral universals (premises). 'We are human' is the only one. More philosophy reaffirming the author's Western Christian 'modern' world view -- "Believing individuals are everything, rights are trumps, and morality is relative (to time and place), such thinkers design laws... that leave nothing between the state and individual save choices, contracts and entitlements. Fourth grade children being taught condom use is only one of the more perverse of the results(p250)." Book ends with an extended metaphor on light.

Apparently morality can't be objective and intelligent, it can only be relative in modern society. Otherwise, it's vainglorious and not fitting for individuals. What tripe!

�Even criminals believe in morality, at least as they grow older. . . . When asked, at aged thirty-two, weather they would be �very angry� if their son or daughter committed a criminal offence, over three-fourths of those men who had themselves been convicted of a crime (and often several crimes) answered yes. Even the most hardened criminals�those with at least eight convictions�agreed. They may not be very good fathers, but they don�t want their sons or daughters to be very bad children.� (11)

This is quite an interesting book. It focuses on the moral sense, an idea whose heyday was coeval with the Scottish Enlightenment and the American Revolution. The central thesis of the book is that there is we have a moral sense, a sense that certain things are right and that certain things are wrong. Wilson observes that his book differs from other research in that �many conducting this search have looked in the wrong places for the wrong things because they have sought for universal rules rather than universal dispositions.� (225) This is not so much a quest for absolute laws, as C. S. Lewis did in �Abolition of Man,� and in �Mere Christianity,� but it is a rather psychological-heavy inductive study ob what people actually do and say.

The book is divided in to three sections. After the overview chapter, Wilson covers different aspects of our Sentiments, focusing on Sympathy, Fairness, Self-Control, and Duty. These four areas provide a grind in which our feelings of morality are properly expressed. I found the chapter on Sympathy quite interesting, since Sympathy is the lynchpin of Adam Smith�s landmark �Theory of Moral Sentiments.� We in essence see ourselves projection into the life and situation of other suffering persons. Moreover, we head the voice of �the man within the breast� who urges us on to good actions, which Lincoln called �the better angels of our nature.�

The second half of the book is a study of the sources of these feeling of rightness and wrongness. The four chapters are �The Social Animal,� families, Gender, and the Universal Aspiration. He makes the case for much of our sense of morality is rooted in evolutionary biology. Darwin will always select in favor of the people who are pro family, since that is how we will survive fitly. Moreover, we have this �herd instinct� which binds us together into cities, poli, and bodies politic. In fact, the greatest realization that came to me was that we nee morals precisely because there are other people with whom we have to deal with, work with, and to ultimately love!

The last part is one chapter long, and it focuses on the moral sense and character. Wilson makers the point that we cannot �prove� in a positivistic sense that there are moral standards or laws out there any better than we can prove Platonic forms. However, people do act as if there are moral standards, and the idea of morality itself is evidence.

Mr. Wilson has a soft, quite and gentle voice and tone that could double for a relaxation tape. I have heard him in person, and must say that it like the announcers at a golf match or an announcer on National Public Radio. This works to his advantage, since many of his ideas are quite controversial. This book is perfect for discussion, and ponderous thought. Now all we need is more research along these line to sharpen our picture of the moral sense.

I mentioned that the book is rather psychosocial heavy. Let me amend that by saying that there is a substantial amount of psychological data, but no psychobabble. Moreover, Mr. Wilson liberally quotes from Aristotle�s �Nichomachian Ethics� and his �Politics,� so we have a healthy mix of both the old and the new in this book. It is quite refreshing to see someone bridge the ages, and bridge the gap between philosophy and practice, and theory and data.

The main question that vexes me is that you could not tell the difference between a people who does not have a moral sense and one who ignores his or her moral sense. The outward behavior would be the same. The only clue that we have is the lie detector, which measures biological reactions to lies. We may tell lies, but our body knows that we are lying. (106-107)

Two major pieces of conventional - wisdom are undermined in the present work. The first is that we are all merely selfish creatures who act only out of considerations of our own self- interest. The second is that there is no objective morality and that no action can be taken to have a real moral value- but rather that all is simply ' relative'.
James Q. Wilson presents in this work a general theory which explains and justifies our 'moral sense'. He does this in part through his reading of eighteenth - century Enlightenment moralists, Adam Smith, Frances Hutcheson, David Hume but also through his reading of Darwinian evolution.
Primarily however he examines in ordinary clear language cases and examples from our everyday life and experience , and through them helps establish that the 'moral sense' is present in most of us.
He opens his work with a chapter on the Moral Sense, those dispositions which enable us to intuit what is right and wrong. He then considers four sentiments central to the Moral Sense- Sympathy, Fairness, Self- Control and Duty. In writing for instance of Sympathy he shows how this ability to feel for and understand others is a much approved and commendable quality. And how there are clear cases of Sympathy which cannot simply be classified as manipulations for self- interest. He considers too how Sympathy may inform heroic action, as in the most dramatic case of a soldier giving his life for his fellows.
Wilson discourses in his third section the Sources of the Moral Sense. His chapters here are 'Social Animals' ' Families' 'Gender' 'The Universal Aspiration'. He concentrates on how the close- ties within the family are one of the strong sources of Morality , and how those ties are extended to reach out to wider and wider parts of humanity.
His final chapter is on 'The Moral Sense and Human Character'.
Wilson throughout supplies a very large number of examples and cases which he reads in a moderate, intelligent interpretative tone.
There is a quiet convincingness in the whole feel of the work.
It is as if 'common sense' were restoring to us a sense of ourselves our possible goodness and dignity which modern Sociology, Psychology and Anthropology may have deprived of us.
A key book for understanding ourselves and how we might be better human beings in a better world.

I'm junior in high school and have been exploring options of carrer choice since I'll be going to college in two years. I'm very interested in the human mind and psychology and socialogy, so I thought I would like this book. It's very interesting and thought-provoking. I would reccomend this book to anyone interested in human interaction.

This is an important book. If one has only one book to read on morality and ethics, I cannot recommend a better book than Wilson's "The Moral Sense." It's the first and, to my knowledge, the only, book that is a thoroughly modern, naturalistic, and intuitionist theory of ethics to date. The book begins with the challenge facing modern readers: Do we accept the total relativism of Rorty and other pragmatic academics who argue there is no moral sense whatsoever, or do we accept the polar opposite that only revealed religion or Kant's and Benthan's absolutist maxims give us a moral sense?

According to Wilson, both extremes are to be avoided by conciliating the theory of moral sentiments advanced by David Hume, Francis Hutcheson, and especially Adam Smith in the 18th century with the theory of evolution advanced by Charles Darwin a century later. Wilson arrives at a thoroughly modern conception of human nature and what it means to have a natural moral sense without prescriptive religion or deontological maxims to guide us. It is a wonderfully entertaining and highly thought provoking book to read on what can sometimes be a dull subject.

Obviously, modern moral developments have not all been positive. As Wilson observes, we've come to our senses about equality, fairness, and empathy towards others, but we may have left behind self-control and duty to others. I think he's absolutely on target. Unless and until we recognize that morality is not divinely-instituted, but rather empirically established by who we are by nature, and yes a Darwinian nature, then our moral sense will be always miss its target. All four: (1) Fairness, (2) empathy, (3) self-control, and (4) duty must operate concurrently for our morality to be balanced. Wilson's diagnosis of modernity is that they are imbalanced: We've largely omitted self-control and duty from our moral sense and become a tad bit self-absorbed (although recent developments may suggest otherwise).

The first-third of the book rehearses the theory of moral sentiments and the applicable theory from evolution to establish the four "impulses" or "intuitions" of morality: Fairness, empathy, self-control, and duty. Notice these are universal, naturally-endowed impulses, not religious or philosophical maxims or prescriptions. We "intuit" these concepts, and from their application with our experience of family, friends, and society, we develop character. This interaction thusly develops a "conscience" to guide us. This is the substance of the second-third of the book. The last-third of the book explains how conscience (i.e., habituated character) forms affiliations, rights, and responsibilities. Here the author's adds his insights and applies them to a few case examples.

The book is not flawless, but it is the most comprehensive, modern, and naturalistic book on ethics to appear in a single volume. That's a mighty claim, but I think it holds despite my criticism. I have two: (a) Wilson tends to be disorganized to the point of distraction; key concepts almost become ancillary. It's a problem of organization that could have been avoided by a matter of style. (b) The second criticism is a kind of sloppiness occurs in the final section: Besides trying to "humanize" his theory excessively, many of his personal reflections are too time-bound to be perennially relevant. These flaws would not be so egregious if the third section kept to a simple summary of key concepts; but instead of a simple summary Wilson addles between a summary and ruminations. Because the third section is perhaps the most expansive, these criticisms are all the more glaring.

For these reasons, I think the reader would be well-served to precede this book with Matt Ridley's "The Origins of Virtue," even though they cover some of the same territory. Ridley is a much more disciplined and focused author, whereas Wilson has a more expansive and developed sense of a intuitionist morality. If one can't read both - and if the reader is careful to focus on the key concepts rather than the supporting evidence and ancillary reflections - then this book is the one to get. Extreme relativism and extreme religiosity are no longer necessarily appropriate for an intuitional moral disposition. Moral balance, based on the four intuitions, are sufficient and necessary for a virtuous life.

This book provides some excellent Project Management questions with detailed explanation of the right AND wrong answers following PMBOK book. This material will help reinforce the right PMI methodology and best practices.

This book is a valuable tool for preparing for the PMP exam. While the actual questions are atypical of the actual PMP Certification Exam, this book provides a great opportunity to reinforce learnings from the PMI's PMBOK Guide. The book is set up and laid out by each corresponding chapter making in it easy to navigate and use as a reference later for exam preparation.

Just buy it - you wont regret it. :)

It's full of multiple choice questions. I use it as a summary, self assessment tool in conjunction with my PMBoK.

I will be taking my exam the first weekend in April and I feel that this book is an excellent tool to help you prepare. One of my co-workers who just took her exam said she saw 2 questions from the book on her actual exam. She passed and I am confident that I will pass also.

Be warned that it doesn't contain the same type of situational questions that you will find in the PMP test. While these simple questions about concepts in the PMBOK might help you to practice for the CAPM test, the author doesn't even claim that the book will help you prepare for any test.

I bought this little book because I wanted to practice a little more, and because it was on sale. I finished it in less than two hours and never touched it again. A 100% success rate with these easy questions doesn't mean that you are prepared to pass the PMP test.

This is an excellent resource that will help you understand and review several concepts in the PMBOK Guide. The only problem is that the answers provide quotes from the PMBOK Guide and no explanations. The questions are simplistic: may be good for the CAPM exam, but not for the PMP exam.
To prepare for the PMP Exam, I used the PMP Exam Quicklet by Paul Sanghera, which contains very realistic questions.