Ethics Books

I'm still looking for my own copy, unfotunately I couldn't read it all, but what I read was very close to my own ideas and, I think, many of my friends. I liked very much examples from literature and History Mr Savater uses all along the book; congratulations.

Although somewhat of a contradiction in terms, this book is a touching discourse from a father to a son on how to live life on his own terms. He gives his perspective on everything lofty that he ahs ever come in contact with but underneath it all is the suggwestion that this is merely his take, and the most important interpretation is a persons' own.

If you are in search for your calling or pursuing your calling, this selection would be of a very good asset. It is a great investment for our well beings under the Spiritual Realm. It grasps the vitality of Christian Leadership in the New Testament Church.

This is a must book for all Christian to read. The writer clearly authenticate one's calling from God.

This is one book that every christian must read.The writer is right on the mark with his point and God"s calling.

I read this book for a graduate seminar on Aristotle. I think Aristotle's ethics is his most seminal work in philosophy. In the early 1960's virtue ethics came to fore. It is a retrieval of Aristotle. It has very close parallels to the ancient Chinese philosophy of Confucius and the modern philosophy espoused in the 1970's called Communitarianism.

For Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics, (EN) is about human life in an embodied state. Area of inquirery for EN is "good" this is his phenomenology. What does "good" mean? He suggests good means "a desired end." Something desirable. Means towards these ends. Such as money is good, so one can buy food to eat because "eating is good." In moral philosophy distinction between "intrinsic good" vs. "instrumental good." Instrumental good towards a desire is "instrumental good" like money. Thus, money is an "instrumental good" for another purpose because it produces something beyond itself. Instrumental good means because it further produces a good, "intrinsic good" is a good for itself, "for the sake of" an object like money. "Intrinsic good" for him is "Eudemonia=happiness." This is what ethics and virtues are for the sake of the organizing principle. Eudemonia=happiness. Today we think of happiness as a feeling. It is not a feeling for Aristotle. Best translation for eudaimonia is "flourishing" or "living well." It is an active term and way of living for him thus, "excellence." Ultimate "intrinsic good" of "for the sake of." Eudaimonia is the last word for Aristotle. Can also mean fulfillment. Idea of nature was thought to be fixed in Greece convention is a variation. What he means is ethics is loose like "wealth is good but some people are ruined by wealth." EN isn't formula but a rough outline. Ethics is not precise; the nature of subject won't allow it. When you become a "good person" you don't think it out, you just do it out of habit!

You can have ethics without religion for Aristotle. Nothing in his EN is about the afterlife. He doesn't believe in the universal good for all people at all times like Plato and Socrates. The way he thought about character of agent, "thinking about the good." In addition, Aristotle talked about character traits. Good qualities of a person who would act well. Difference between benevolent acts and a benevolent person. If you have good character, you don't need to follow rules. Aretç=virtue, in Greek not religious connotation but anything across the board meaning "excellence" high level of functioning, a peak. Like a musical virtuoso. Ethical virtue is ethical excellence, which is the "good like." In Plato, ethics has to do with quality of soul defining what to do instead of body like desires and reason. For Aristotle these are not two separate entities.

To be good is how we live with other people, not just focus on one individual. Virtue can't be a separate or individual trait. Socrates said same the thing. Important concept for Aristotle, good upbringing for children is paramount if you don't have it, you are a lost cause. Being raised well is "good fortune" a child can't choose their upbringing. Happenstance is a matter of chance.

Pleasure cannot be an ultimate good. Part of the "good life" involves external goods like money, one can't attain "good life" if one is poor and always working. Socrates said material goods don't matter, then he always mooched off of his friends! Aristotle surmises that the highest form of happiness is contemplation. In Aristotle's Rhetoric, he lists several ingredients for attaining eudaimonia. Prosperity, self-sufficiency, etc., is important, thus, if you are not subject to other, competing needs. A long interesting list. It is common for the hoi polloi to say pleasure=happiness. Aristotle does not deny pleasure is good; however, it is part of a package of goods. Pleasure is a condition of the soul. In the animal world, biological beings react to pleasure and pain as usual. Humans as reasoning beings must pursue knowledge to fulfill human nature. It must be pleasurable to seek knowledge and other virtues and if it is not there is something wrong according to Aristotle. These are the higher pleasures and so you may have to put off lower pleasures for the sake of attaining "higher pleasures."

Phronçsis= "intelligence," really better to say "practical wisdom." The word practical helps here because the word Phronçsis for Aristotle is a term having to do with ethics, the choices that are made for the good. As a human being, you have to face choices about what to do and not to do. Phronçsis is going to be that capacity that power of the soul that when it is operating well will enable us to turn out well and that is why it is called practical wisdom. The practically wise person is somebody who knows how to live in such a way so that their life will turn out well, in a full package of "goods." For Aristotle, Phronçsis is not deductive or inductive knowledge like episteme; Phronçsis is not a kind of rational knowledge where you operate in either deduction or induction, you don't go thru "steps" to arrive at the conclusion. Therefore, Phronçsis is a special kind of capacity that Aristotle thinks operates in ethics. Only if you understand what Aristotle means by phronesis do you get a hold on the concept. My way of organizing it, it is Phronçsis that is a capacity that enables the virtues to manifest themselves.

What are the virtues? Phronçsis is the capacity of the soul that will enable the virtues to fulfill themselves. Virtue ethics is the characteristics of a person that will bring about a certain kind of moral living, and that is exactly what the virtues are. The virtues are capacities of a person to act well. All of the virtues can be organized by way of this basic power of the soul called Phronçsis. There are different virtues, but it is the capacity of Phronçsis that enables these virtues to become activated. Basic issue is to find the "mean" between extremes; this is how Aristotle defines virtues.

Humans are not born with the virtues; we learn them and practice them habitually. "We reach our complete perfection through habit." Aristotle says we have a natural potential to be virtuous and through learning and habit, we attain them. Learn by doing according to Aristotle and John Dewey. Then it becomes habitual like playing a harp. Learning by doing is important for Aristotle. Hexis= "state," "having possession." Theoria= "study." The idea is not to know what virtue is but to become "good." Emphasis on finding the balance of the mean. Each virtue involves four basic points.

1. Action or circumstance. Such as risk of losing one's life.
2. Relevant emotion or capacity. Such as fear and pain.
3. Vices of excess and vices of deficiency in the emotions or the capacities. Such as cowardice is the excess vice of fear, recklessness is the excess deficiency.
4. Virtue as a "mean" between the vices and deficiencies. Such as courage as the "mean."

No formal rule or "mean" it depends on the situation and is different for different people as well. For example--one should eat 3,000 calories a day. Well depends on the health and girth of the person, and what activity they are engaged in. It is relative to us individually.
All Aristotle's qualifications are based on individual situations and done with knowledge of experience. Some things are not able to have a "mean" like murder and adultery because these are not "goods."
Akrasia= "incontinence" really "weakness of the will. Socrates thought that all virtues are instances of intelligence or Phronçsis. Aristotle criticizes Socrates idea of virtue, virtue is not caused by state of knowledge it is more complicated. Aristotle does not think you have to have a reasoned principle in the mind and then do what is right, they go together.

The distinctions between continent and incontinent persons, and moderate (virtue) and immoderate (not virtuous) persons is as follows:

1. Virtue. Truly virtuous people do not struggle to be virtuous, they do it effortlessly, very few people in this category, and most are in #2 and #3.
2. Ethical strength. Continence. We know what is right thing to do but struggle with our desires.
3. Ethical weakness. This is akrasia incontinence. Happens in real life.
4. Vice. The person acts without regret of his bad actions.

What does Aristotle mean by "fully virtuous"? Ethical strength is not virtue in the full sense of the term. Ethical weakness is not a full vice either. This is the critique against Socrates idea that "Knowledge equals virtue." No one can knowingly do the wrong thing. Thus, Socrates denies appetites and desires. Aristotle understands that people do things that they know are wrong, Socrates denies this. Socrates says if you know the right thing you will do it, Aristotle disagrees. The law is the social mechanism for numbers 2, 3, 4. A truly virtuous person is their own moral compass.

I recommend Aristotle's works to anyone interested in obtaining a classical education, and those interested in philosophy. Aristotle is one of the most important philosophers and the standard that all others must be judged by.

Urmson offers a clear, concise, and even handling of all the major issues Nicomachean Ethics contains. The thematic structure of the book is outstanding. Urmson is like a grandfather who understands the "modern" difficulties of the day but is peacefully removed from their "pull."

This book is a keen analysis of Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics. Although only 130 pages, Urmson explains Aristotle's ideas very precisely. Urmson's diction and economy of words are evidence of his great learning on the subject. He thinks and write like a master. My only complaint is that the two page index is inadequate. But in a short book, that is not fatal.

Candy Paull demonstrates how she lives her life, and invites us to follow her lead and discover all the blessings that come to us each and every day. I have featured "The Art of Abundance" on my website www.PlatinumPearls.com since the book was first published. I recommend this book. Buy extra copies for gifts!

I was having a really hard time in my life, when I saw this book on Oprah. I don't watch Oprah normally, so call it fate. I read this book, and my spirits were uplifted. Mind you, my problems didn't go away, but I was able to put them in perspective.

Now, I'm lending this book to everyone I know, and making my own list of life's treasures. I felt like a little kid, seeing things in the world I had forgotten about.

Highly recommended for spiritual healing.

I have given this book as a gift three times. It is a quiet reminder of the simple good things in life that we rush by taking for granted. I loved the beautiful simplicity of this book and hope the author will write another.

The Art of the Impossible is, indeed, a very good introduction to the political philosophy of a great leader. Every lecture and article contained in this volume holds fabulous, almost poetic passages, and offers insights into the difficulties of leading a nation away from the physical and psychological devastation of communism. On some occasions Mr. Havel looks at his own position from a critical point of view, something we don't see very often in this kind of work.

This is a rather optimistic book, and every person who aspires to making our world a better - and safer - place for everyone, should definitely read it. It does not, however, provide us with solutions, but this is not what this work was intended for in the first place. What it does is identify the areas of politics we ought to concentrate on. The passages in which he argues for an increased participation of "intellectuals" in politics is particularly enlightening.

A commendable collection of lectures and essays, beautifully translated, which offers us a glimpse of a truly admirable man.

The essays and speeches contained in this book provide an excellent introduction to Vaclav Havel, one of the most intelligent and conscientious political figures of this century. His discussions about democracy, forgiveness, the future of the former Soviet Union, the future of the Czech Republic and other themes are thoughtfully composed and eloquently expressed. No review that I can write can do justice to this man's incredible vision for his country, our world, and our future.

I hope Havel's own words (he is one of the few presidents who writes his own speeches, consistently with his life motto "living in the truth") will inspire you to buy and read "The Art of Impossible" and other books written by this humble and couragoues man. From Havel's writings one can learn much about history, politics, philosophy,psychology and art/theatre. Moreover, everyone reading Havel's works with an open mind and heart will be challenged to reflect on his/her own place in this world.

"For forty years on this day you heard, from my predecessors, variations on the same theme: how our country flourished, how many million tons of steel we produced, how happy we all were,
how we trusted our government, and what bright perspectives were unfolding before us. I assume you did not propose me for this office so that I, too, would lie to you. (New Year's Address to the Nation, Prague, January 1, 1990)

"But this is still not the main problem. The worst thing is that we live in a contaminated moral environment. We fell morally ill because we got used to saying something different from what we thought. We learned not to believe in anything, to ignore each other, to care only for ourselves. Concepts such as love, friendship, compassion, humility and forgiveness lost their
depth and dimension, and for many of us they came to represent only psychological pecularities, or to resemble long-lost greetings from the ancient times, a little ridiculous in the era of commuters and spaceships. ...When I talk about contaminated moral atmosphere, I am not talking just about the gentlemen who eat organic vegetables and do not look out of the planes windows, I am talking about all of us. We had all become used to the totalitarian system and accepted it as an unalterable fact of life, and thus we helped to perpetuate it. In other words, we are all-though naturally to differing extents-responsible for the operation of the totalitarian machinery. None of us is just its victim: we are all also its cocreators. (New Year's Address to the Nation, Prague, January 1, 1990)

"...we must accept this legacy as a sin we committed against ourselves. If we accept it as such, we will understand that it is up to us all, and up to us alone, to do something about it. We must not blame the previous rulers for everything, not only because it would be untrue but also because it could blunt the duty each of us faces today, that is, the obligation to act independently, freely,reasonably, and quickly. ...Freedom and democracy require participation and therefore responsible action from us all. (New Year's Address to the Nation, Prague, January 1, 1990)

"We agree that the basic prerequisite for a genuine friendship between our nations is truth, a truth that is always expressed, no matter how hard." (The Visit of German President Richard von
Weizacker, Prague)

"Interests of all kinds-personal, selfish, state, national, group, and if you like, company interests-still considerably outweigh genuinely common and global interests. We are still under the sway of the destructive and thoroughly vain belief that man is the pinnacle of creation, and not just a part of it, and that therefore everything is permitted to him. There are still many who say they are concerned not for themselves but for the cause, while they act demonstrably in their own interests
and not for the cause at all. We are destroying the planet that was entrusted to us. We still close our eyes to the growing social, ethnic, and cultural conflicts in the world. From time to time we say that the anonymous megamachinery we have created for ourselves no longer serves us but,rather, has enslaved us, yet we fail to do anything about it. In other words, we still don't know how to put morality ahead of politics, science and economics. We are still incapable of understanding that the only genuine core of all our actions-if they are to be moral-is responsibility. Responsibility to something higher than my family, my country, my firm, my success. Responsibility to the order of Being, where all our actions are indelibly recorded and where, and only where, they will be properly judged. The
interpreter or mediator between us and this higher authority is what is traditionally referred to as human conscience. If I subordinate my political behavior to this imperative, I can't go far wrong. If on the contrary, I am not guided by this voice, not even ten presidential schools with two thousand of the best political scientists in the world could help me. (A Joint Session of the U.S. Congress, Washington, D.C., February 21, 1990)

After reading "The Art of Impossible" I would also recommend the following writings:

Havel, Vaclav. Open Letters: Selected Writings 1965-1990. Translated by Paul Wilson. New York:Alfred A. Knopf, 1991.

Sire, James W. Václav Havel: the intellectual conscience of international politics: an introduction, appreciation, and critique. Downers Grove: IVP, 2001.

This is William Craig's most detailed book containing the evidence and thoughts centered around defending the resurrection of Jesus. He has successfully debated this material with other scholars. No other Christian apologist tends to be attacked more by non-believing scholars than William Craig. They constantly look for ways to defeat him in debates without much success.

I noticed that Amazon.com lists the publication date as 1989. Don't let the older copyright date fool you. The current edition being sold here at Amazon is the "revised edition" of 2002.

This book is not for laymen (which I am). In fact, it assumes you can read Greek. Craig enters into discussion in New Testament Criticism, with full awareness of the work of top scholars, to evaluate the evidence for the ressurection of Christ. His arguments are extremely logical and compelling.

William L. Craig is probably the leading Christian apologist for the historicity of the resurrection. He has several popular treatments available, the most recent being The Son Rises. Although I have benefitted from these treatments, I wanted to see the more detailed and in-depth research behind these popularizations. So I forked over the money and bought it. Did it live up to my hopes and the price I paid? Yes. Worth every penny.

This book is, in essence, a passage-by-passage discussion of the historicity of the New Testament passages dealing with Jesus' resurrection. Craig has spent a great deal of time conducting research in Europe and it shows. At over 400 pages, Craig uses every bit of space to cram in informed discussion. He interacts with a tremendous amount of European and U.S. research, from all sides of the discussion. You would be hard pressed to find so much ground covered with so much familiarity.

After a brief preface, Craig spends about 150 pages dealing with the Pauline evidence for the resurrection. He makes a compelling case for the early origins of Paul's formulaic recitation of the 1 Cor. 15 tradition about the death, burial, resurrection and appearances of Jesus to various witnesses. There is also a convincing and thorough examination of the nature of Jesus' resurrection body in Paul's letters--a physical resurrected body. This discussion should be enough to drive a steak through the heart of the lingering skepticism that clings to the belief that Paul believed only in a "spiritual" resurrection (which is, a Craig shows, a contradiction in terms).

After wrapping up the Pauline evidence, Craig turns to the Gospels and continues his methodical, passage-by-passage discussion of the evidence. As with the rest of the book, you will be hard pressed to find one scholar who engages so many different theories and approaches in one book. Finally, Craig wraps it up and makes his case for the resurrection. Those who have read one of Craig's popular books or even heard him in a debate will immediately see the origins of those treatments. It was nice to see how well the research and background supporting the final argument actually fit together.

Despite all this praise, I must provide a few notes of caution. The substance of the book is excellent, but the presentation leaves much to be desired. It looks like it was cranked out on an ancient type writer. The lines are sometimes wavy and the Index appears to be off by a few pages on at least some subjects. Nevertheless, I give this book my highest recommendation as a tremendous resource on the resurrection.

Note: I have learned that my copy of the book was an older edition. The print and index have been improved for later editions.

Awakening Warrior is a must read for anyone interested in our military and national security. Challans explains how and where the US went wrong in thinking about combat, just war, military ethics, and military training. His unusual background includes experience as both an infantry officer and classically trained philosopher, so he is one of the few people capable of this level of analysis.

His book is a kind of manifesto that provides the philosophical grounding for revolutionizing how we recruit, educate, promote, organize, lead, administer, and operate our national security establishment.

I wonder why the Army has relegated Tim Challans to his current job in Kansas when it could have him at the right hand of decision makers in Washington. Then again, of late we've seen too many talented, intellectually gifted officers pushed to the far corners of the Homeland or out of the military altogether because they didn't seem loyal enough, religious enough, conservative enough, or obedient enough to endure the erosion of a military that they probably love.

A century from now, if we are unfortunate enough to still need armies, the military may be ready to hear what this book has to say.

_Awakening_Warrior_ is a provocative look at the ethics of warfare and a critique of the jingoistic warrior memes that currently substitute for a genuine moral culture in the military. It is worth a careful read. In fact, it should be on the Army Chief of Staff's reading list for field grade officers-- though it would be difficult for some to swallow whole. Nevertheless, the issues covered are crucial to the future of both our country and our corps of officers. There are ideas within that are worth talking about, arguing about, and pursuing.

Those who oppose the War on Terrorism and who are skeptical about the current administration's ethical rationale will find the book's tone agreeable. Others will find it a little off-putting (Chaplains will find it down-right shocking) up front and near the end, but they should stay tuned for frank and adequately supported reasoning behind its main themes.

Challans, a retired Army Lieutenant Colonel who taught at West Point and The Command and General Staff College, is also a Kuk Sul Won Black Belt and Doctor of Philosophy. His qualities and qualifications rarely intersect in the officer ranks, and here they provide special insight.

He offers the reader an eclectic, behind the scenes critique of the current moral training that military members undergo. He goes on to describe a radical but conceivable alternative, emphasizing autonomy over the current mix of acronymism, unquestioning obedience to authority, and a hodgepodge of moral narratives, all of which currently take the place of a potential coherent system of education.

Thank the gods someone is finally critiquing the loathsome church-like culture our military has morphed into over the last 20 to 30 years. Professor Challans has written a scathing analysis that calls the bad-faith bluff of so many of the self-deceived leaders who have changed our military into a quasi-religious organization. If the Air Force's cloying advertisements on Armed Forces Network are any indication (the damn things sound word for word like some blathering god-awful prayer; NO KIDDING!!), then the US military has already prepared for the slide over the precipice into the abyss of theocracy. Professor Challans lays out in a systematic philosophical attack exactly how and why, logically, the US military has fallen into grave moral error in letting chaplains take over the teaching of ethics and how religion has suffused almost every detail in leadership theory and doctrine as it is currently practiced in the service. He also, in the process, unveils a supremely blistering critique of the Cheney administration and the formation of the mindset of an American Taliban, showing why America has headed down this path of assumed moral superiority that is in fact morally benighted. The moral affectations of Bush and crew will be the laughing stock of posterity if reason and logic have their say in the future, and Challans is the first real philosopher to show exactly why that will be the case. Highly recommended for everyone who wants to understand why there will be howling laughter in the classrooms of the future about our current era. Every officer of the US military who takes his or her oath to support and defend the US Constitution should read and digest what Challans says in this extended argument. They should do so to avoid being complicit in this nightmare of intellectual regression. The future freedom of our society may depend on people in the high places finally getting it, finally understanding why we are headed for disaster if we continue down this religious road.

The last thing this country needs is a military that thinks it is morally superior to everyone else because of their religion firstly, but for any other reason as well. It is dangerous for the democracy and it is dangerous for the world for any military to assume the ridiculous burden of moral rectitude. Witness the slaughter on 911 if you need further elucidation. Challans argues this point clearly and suggests the military begin systemic changes toward a principled method of ethics instruction, one derived mainly from a deontic perspective devoid of a substratum of apocalyptic metaphysics. He says chaplains need to get out of the ethics business and a system of principle should replace that of authority. Such a principled approach will help us avoid the problems of means/end confusion and is/ought conflation that have plagued the US military for so many years and have obsessed the poor and poorly educated.

Challans is significant in that he is a military insider who understands more than conventional academics what the military is all about and how they fail to inculcate any sense of moral autonomy. As a professional soldier (a highly decorated infantry officer) and a professional philosopher, his logic runs rough shod over the amoral mental meanderings of outsiders like neo-con guru Victor Davis Hanson, free-lancer Ralph Peters, and the other like-minded pundits who have no combat experience but favor torture and other relaxations of the rules of war.

The unfortunate irony here is that Challans will be ignored or attacked by people who think he represents some kind of misguided liberal agenda. His major critics will be those who cannot understand principle and will think it means something completely different. Challans supports reason only, but reason has become the enemy of those with a received world view (chaplains, romanticists, and the great mass of those in need of heteronomous authority). Ever since "faith based" made its way into the modern lexicon, there has been an increasing assault on reason in America as though it were a socialist plot. Challans has no liberal agenda. In fact reason, as he implies, is no friend of left wing extremism. The principles Challans suggests we embrace in reasoning about ethics are already embodied in the well-wrought judgments of those who enumerated the just war tradition as it exists in the Geneva and Hague Conventions. It is a sorry comment on America that we now represent a resistance to that body of thought.

As Bertrand Russell said, "Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth -- more than ruin -- more even than death.... Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible, thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habit. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid." Challans is recommending we engage in thought.

I actually had the pleasure of reading this book and discussing it with Jason Hill, the author himself. This was part of a course he taught through my university, DePaul. I must say Hill encompasses the very root of global political issues through a ideal, yet logical approach to Cosmopolitanism. Also, he looks great in black! I highly recommend this as a must-read.

I also had the wonderful oppurtunity of taking Dr. Jason D. Hill's multiculturalism class (ISP 200). He teaches the class with two texts, one of them being his own Becoming a Cosmopolitan. Dr Hill is a wonderful person, and his book is almost poetic in nature. He has a profound love for all of humanity and is a very admirable person.

His book inspires you to look beyond the boundaries of race, color, creed, nationality and gender, and accept everyone as constituents of the human race. Beauty is an intrinsic quality of all human beings, according to Hill.

His class at DePaul University and his book has given me a new way of seeing and interacting with other people: through moral cosmopolitanism.

This is a must read to get a full fledged idea of how inherently beautiful humanity is.

This beautifully and poetically written book is perhaps the first of its kind. Hill, I believe has two purposes here. The first is the idea that all fights against racism, ethnocentrism and nationalism are doomed until one begins to question the legitimacy of and then fight against their root foundation: tribalism. It is tribalism that Hill feels is the real danger of the modern world and the root cause of, as he puts it, all the carnage and butchery of human existence.He refers to tribalism as a form of infantilism in which the need for parental protection is sublimated and mapped on to the nation/race or ethnos. He thinks that tribalism is evil because it demarcates a set of what he terms, arbitrary and morally irrelevant attributes of people and then use them as moral criteria in judging their worth and value as human beings. He believes that there is virtue in forgetting where we came from (we, meaning humans in general) not as a way of denying our history, but as a form of benevolence in showing that we are willing to open up ourselves to the process of "becoming" (Hill's coinage); to show that we don't take our starting points in life as absolutely defining us in who we have to be for the rest of our lives. The second purpose his book seems to fulfill is that of providing a psychological way of actually becoming a lover of humanity. He thinks the self has to be re-socilaized all over again and he sort of provides a blue-print for how it can actually be done. His ideas range from the notion of moral masking, to adopting the view of the self as a construct of narratives or stories. The end result he believes is one that will bring about a kind of radical self-invention and real comsmic freedom. This book will require careful reading. The author is a philosopher. But he has tried to write for a broad audience. I can't say for sure whether the world Jason Hill wishes to come into existence is really possible. He gives us litle advice on how on a political level a comsopolitan universe is possible. But on the personal level he has tried to communicate how, as he terms it, a radical soul transformation is possible.

If you're one of the people glued to their TV as the Enron verdict was announced, if you've watched one of the many news programs or read the magazine and newspaper articles about the Enron collapse--or, perhaps even more importantly, if you've done none of the above quite yet, you're really in for a treat!

Most of what you've heard about Enron just touches the surface of some very intriguing questions: Were Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling ruthless monsters or just ordinary people? What could have driven them to commit the kinds of actions that eventually led to the complete collapse of one of the world's most acclaimed and admired companies? Denis Collins's book actually shows that the seeds of the actions that ultimately brought the Enron giant to its knees may not be that uncommon in business organizations!

There was nothing inevitable about Enron's collapse, nor was it something that happened overnight. But how can one effectively deal with ethical dilemmas--even on a much smaller scale--that can truly change the course of an entire organization and the lives of all its employees? What can business leaders ultimately learn from the Enron scandal? How can real people, with real weaknesses, who make real mistakes, take steps to build an organizational culture based on integrity and ethics? Nowhere have I found answers to these questions in a concise, compelling, and convincing manner--until I came across this remarkable book!

Of course this comes as no-surprise: The first time I heard this award-winning author speak about the Enron scandal was on a National Public Radio program that made me stop dead on my tracks and listen eagerly: I was later delighted to discover that the direct, insightful, conversational style of that program is exactly what characterizes the book Behaving Badly! It tackles serious issues in a way that's exciting, meaningful, and offers food for thought: Whether you're a business leader or someone who aspires to become one, whether you're fascinated by politics and current affairs, or simply strive to better tackle the ethical dilemmas in your own life, this book is definitely worth reading! Something tells me you might even pick up a couple of extra copies; after all, this book is sure to make a positive difference in the lives of people you work with or care about. Enron might be what sparked the idea for this book, but its lessons are surely timeless.

This book is great. Very interesting and keeps the reader involved. Very contemporary given the guilty verdicts. Read this book and you will understand why.

The Enron Case has become synonymous with corporate greed, a breakdown of business ethics and destroyed organizational lives. Why another book on this well publicized event? There is a simple and compelling answer. It is because this one is unique.

This is the very best book on this topic in the marketplace. It is well written, well researched and is far more than just another report of what happened. Behaving Badly is written in such a way that the broader issues of business ethics and how they relate to organizational decision-making are presented. To differentiate this book further, Dr. Collins invites readers to place themselves in the role of decision maker. Enron is the backdrop, but the main focus of this superior book is to dissect the elements of the process that led up to the well-known and highly publicized outcomes. By doing so, Dr. Collins has taken the event out of the headlines and given us an incredible teaching/learning tool.

As one who believes that Business Ethics is not an oxymoron, I find the focus of this book to be both informative and useful. It puts the spotlight on how decisions were made at Enron and provides the reader the opportunity to input their own views in a more enlightened, value driven way. Readers who are organizational leaders will be able to test their own ethical framework. It's stimulating and thought provoking.

This book is more than a great read. Corporate leadership in businesses of all sizes should buy Behaving Badly in bulk, distribute them to all of their employees and then gather to discuss the issues and decision points presented in each chapter. It is a fantastic tool to use in focusing attention on core values and their use in corporate decision-making. It would be an excellent catalyst to sharpen the commitment of all members of an organization to its best ethical inclinations.

Training and development professionals should use Behaving Badly to generate discussion and engage in corporate self-discovery. What would you do? What would your colleagues do? How would your organizational culture react to your responses? Extremely important questions. You have to discuss the issues before they become universally understood, embraced and applied.

In addition, Behaving Badly should be used in college classrooms as supplemental reading. It is academically strong and well researched. Students can apply their understanding of ethics to an actual, very familiar case.
.
Buy this book. Read it. Think about the issues. Discuss them with colleagues. Buy the book for your boss and leave it on her desk. It is a great opportunity for personal and professional growth and development.

Everyone should read this book. It is definately not just for Doctors. I think knowing what is expected of Doctor and patient alike is very important as far as touch is concerned. I had some questions about what is and is not acceptable in the Doctor's office. This book made that very clear. The book is very easy to read and understand. I would recomend, Behind Closed Doors to everyone.

Everyone should read this book. It is definately not just for Doctors. I think knowing what is expected of Doctor and patient alike is very important as far as touch is concerned. I had some questions about what is and is not acceptable in the Doctor's office. This book made that very clear. The book is very easy to read and understand. I would recomend, Behind Closed Doors to everyone.

Any health professional that thinks they don't need to learn more about this topic is naive. Dr.Redleaf delivers a thought-provoking book that can help doctors better serve their patients and protect themselves.