Ross Books

Our household was introduced to the illustrations of Ross Collins in "Jack and the Dreamsack". My daughter enjoyed looking at the pictures when she was very very small (3 months), particularly the page with the black and white dream tree where Jack picks up a seed. He uses bright colors and seems to have a crazy dreamlike imagination. This makes the pictures fun for kids to look at but also less boring for you the adult as they are not your typical cutsie baby images. Once we had "Jack" we picked up this book (Opposites) and our daughter (16 months now) carries it over to me all the time. I like that it comes in board book and is sturdy enough to handle the traffic it's getting. It also only has one sentence per page so when she was small and was just in it for the page turning I could get it out but now that she's becoming more tolerant I read the sentence and then point to the small dude and say he's small and then to the big dude and say he's big. I also comment on other items in the picture (like this is an umbrella). We also have "The No-Nothings" (we don't love this one that much) and have "Numbers" and "Busy Night" on their way.

This is a really cute book. My 16 month old son is learning basic words and concepts and loves this book. The illustrations explain the concepts. A nice existential twist makes it more interesting for the adults as well.

Living Adventures from American History: Volume Two is a one hour audio CD containing the stories of three individuals that shaped American History: Betsy Ross- The Star-Spangled Lady, Crispus Attucks- The Martyr of Boston Massacre, and Benjamin Franklin- The Wise Man with the Crazy Ideas.

I really thought the choice of great Americans was well thought out showing a variety of different types of American triumphs. Betsy Ross sewed the flag that would unite the early American colonies into what is now the United States. Crispus Attucks was a run away slave who put himself in peril to speak out against wrong. Benjamin Franklin dreamed up seemingly crazy ideas that helped build the foundation of the United States. Despite their very obvious differences, however, these three individuals shared a will to be true to themselves and what was right no matter what the consequences.

I own all the "eye in the ear" cds. There are three cds of "Stories to Stir the Imagination", five cds of "Living Adventures in American History" about the Revolutionary War, and three cds of Bible stories. I have four children, a nine year old, seven year old twins, and a three year old. They all LOVE these stories. All of them are excellent, but I love in particular the American History ones as they are so educational as well, and build a sense of patriotism which is increasingly lacking in this country. Everyone I've loaned my CD's to loves them also. I carpool a lot and have yet to meet a child who is not entertained. I'm the favorite car for field trips because I have the best stories.
Buy them. You won't regret it!!

This man is a genius! Not your everyday cardiologist, he is interested in *preventing* heart disease, cancers, osteoporosis, other dread diseases and so on. If you take care of your cells, all these problems can be reversed and as a by the way, you WILL lose weight (if you need to), you WILL gain more energy than you thought possible, and you WILL have a healthy body for life. In this he explains the why's, and also the important how's. He gives precise details of what needs to be done and the results that can be expected. This is a most fascinating book, and I recommend it to anyone who breathes! To breathe is to live, and therefore it is a forgone conculsion that that you need to read this. I have seldom been so certain of a dynamic book to beat all odds. NOW is the only time to get this!

An essential book if you are serious about transforming your eating habits and nutrition.
Full of a wealth of information on HDLs, LDLs, fats - the Good and the Bad, how these substances affect your metabolism and many other subjects that offer a real solution to eating healthly for your heart and body - as well as your mind and spirit!
I thoroughly enjoyed this book and had trouble putting it down.

Though she hates to admit Kate Campbell is totally gone over Alec Mackenzie, but she's going to divorce him anyway, and then she's going to get him to take part in her companies Bachelor Auction. But first she has to get to him - which means a quick trip into the jungle. Indiana Jones meets a city girl and looses his heart in JoAnn Ross's Mackenzie's Woman. A fast paced, story of love and adventure that will melt the hardest of hearts.

was the last place Kate Campbell planned on finding her true love. Unfortunately, I'd lose since Kate was responsible for finding her husband - her ex-husband - on the block. Alec was the man she'd dreamed of, the man she married and divorced - but was he the man she should bid on? She should take a chance on him and the things he did to her heart? Mackenzie's Woman is a story that delights long time fans and new readers alike! JoAnn Ross is one of my "must buy" authors. Her stories make me laugh, make me cry and make me sigh over love and what it does to a human heart. In Mackenzie's Woman, Ross once again delights her readers with a story that spans the globe, from the city to the jungle - a story that no matter where it goes leads its readers right back to their heart.

I am a kindergarten teacher who uses and loves this book. The kids get excited picking the page to 'make'....the illustrations are colorful and fun. This is a fantastic book.

I work with kids in my church, and have run into way too many "kid's crafts" that are anything but kid's stuff. This book, however, proves to be exactly that, a KID'S craft book. The projects are do-able, with instructions that even a 4-year-old can understand. My child liked this book so much that she would choose it for her bedtime story.

From back cover:

"Maria Sabina, visionary and shaman, has long been celebrated in her native Mexico as an extraordinarily gifted woman. She emerges as a living practitioner of religious customs stemming from pre-Columbian times, and is the fount of wisdoms long thought lost to the world. She was born in Huautla de Jimenez - by her own reckoning over 90 years ago. She still lives there, speaking only her own native Mazatec dialect."

About the author:

"Alvaro Estrada, born to the same village as Maria Sabina, now resides in Mexico City where he makes his living as an engineer and as a journalist. His work in this book is direct oral testimony based on conversations with Maria Sabina in Huautla de Jimenez and on the shamanic chants which she recited in ritual ceremonies."

I spent time with her in the early 70's. Before I was introduced to her, I had no idea who she was. Fancy that. I went to Huautla de Jimenez because a beautiful young woman, in Tampico, had told me to go there if I wanted to "see God". I was in the ministry of tourism, looking at a big map of Mexico. She saw me and remarked, I can see that you are looking for a "very special" map. I said, yes. She said, I can tell you where to go. I followed her advice, met someone who was well acquainted with Maria Sabina, and spent some time with her, participating in and learning about her Velada. Maria was in possession of a very special map, whose pathways she followed when she sang. At that time, I felt as if my entire journey had been conditioned by Strange Attractors to deliver me to this encounter at just this particular moment in time. In the Christian spiritual tradition, which Maria was apart of, there is a concept of a specific moment in time when history is swallowed up by eternity. This book is important for someone who wants a little more background information about her and wants a good translation of one of her veladas. The woman was an existential Saint. The significance of this is hard for sophisticated urbanites to entirely grasp. She was an extremely advanced and individuated master of spiritual healing. When she sang, it was as if her voice shaped space and time in such a way as to draw the perceptible boundary of another, superluminal, dimension. This book provides a little insight into her personal history, but if you are unfamiliar with her original cultural context, you will not be able to read between the lines, which is essential to understanding.

Michael Ross' book is a comprehensive and well thought out book with practical applications to real issues encountered in training. This book is a must-have for any competetive or committed cyclist, runner or skater. The subjects are also applicable for other athletes, providing useful information regarding common medical problems and situations encountered with physical activity.

Dr. Ross' witty prose makes this book easy to read as well as helpful...He is well versed and knowledgeable about this very important subject.

I look forward to Dr. Ross' next installment!

Maximum performance by Michael Ross is one of the best books on the topic of sports medicine for endurance athletes, especially cyclists. What makes the book an invaluable resource for athletes is its foundation in evidence-based medical research. (Dr. Ross lists complete references with every chapter.) Dr. Ross has a way of synthesizing the research into a practical format which non-medical readers can easily digest, comprehend, and apply to their exercise routines. The cycling world should welcome this book to their libraries as a standard essential text and await further work from Dr. Ross.

I came to Amazon to locate a copy of this book for a friend -- and discovered that the author has a new book coming. I can hardly wait. "Mercy, Lord" is a delicious little book. It makes you feel that you want the author as a best friend. She touches feelings and experiences we all share with a deftness that makes you feel wrapped in her knowing compassion and wonderful wit. If time has ripened her terrific writing skills, her new book is going to be a huge treat!

this short book of poetry is fantstic. It's funny and charming. Toby is a great writer who just happens to be my mother. Hope you all rally to get it back in print.

I read this book for a graduate seminar on Aristotle.
Topic of Metaphysics is Ousia=substance and being. What is the meaning of being? With respect to matter and form, it is primarily about form. Analytically both can be separate and distinct, but not in reality. One can analyze matter by potentiality and actuality. Matter can't answer the question of being without form. Some natural things are always a composite of matter and form, it is the answer to the question of what is ousia or being in nature. Matter by itself can't give us the answer to what a thing is.

Ousia=substance and being. Ousia= Being is the "this" spoken of in primary ousia. This is contrary to Plato. Categories vs. Metaphysics. We can talk of the "being" as quality as "not white." Being spoken of in many ways but only of one thing, i.e., "the focal being." Word being has flexibility. Other flexible words is essence. (the what it is to be). In Greek for Aristotle, a bed is not an Ousia because it is from techne=craft it can have an essence. Ousia is reserved for material things self manufactured in nature. All things are derived from a primary ousia.
This has to do with focal being, health is such a word. When we talk about different aspects of health, it is not a universal definition like Socrates looks for. Aristotle says you can't find it. Thus, the word "being" is just a word in a sense a focal point like the word health, i.e. healthy skin, healthy food, then there is health, for Socrates what is health. Aristotle says no, health is unity by analogy. Aristotle is OK with using examples. Math is not independent knowledge, it is dependent on things math is not a primary existence. Being is neither a universal nor a genus, (genus is animal in hierarchy). It is as though Aristotle wants to say that the primary meaning of being is the "this" the subject, i.e. Socrates not human all by itself, not animal all by itself.

Ousia= Being is the "this" spoken of in primary ousia. This is contrary to Plato. Categories vs. Metaphysics. "This" is ontologically primary. Ontological= the most general branch of metaphysics, concerned with the nature of being.

In the categories discussion, he doesn't talk about the distinction between matter and form, it comes later on in the Physics and then the Metaphysics. The "this" is ontologically primary in terms of what the "being" something, what something is. Why would it be wrong to say that primary ousia can't be primary from the standpoint of knowledge, it can't be the distinction between ontological and epistemological? Why would it be wrong to say that the "this" the perceptible encounter wouldn't be primary from the standpoint of knowledge? Because, whatever the categories are whatever the notions of say "horse" the "this" is a horse, the "this" is ontologically primary, but it can't be epistemologically primary because a "this" by itself is just a "this" the question "What is this" called a horse is to involve the categories of knowledge. Therefore, from a knowledge standpoint, secondary ousia, which is things like categories and context, they have primacy in knowledge. However, from the standpoint of "being" the perceptible "this" has primacy. This is just a technical way of distancing him from Plato. In the Metaphysics, the question of form is primary Ousia. Ousia =form in Metaphysics. In Metaphysics, the "this" is simply matter. Aristotle did not give up on Ousia as form. This matter and form is never separated for Aristotle, thus a composite of matter and form is in the Metaphysics. In realm of nature, form and matter can't be separated for Aristotle. If you only talk about matter, you have nothing definable. You never come across things without their form. God is only exception to form and matter together.

Ousia as form and essence. The essence of a thing is "what" it is, it gives us knowledge. Definition= essence. Bronze can't be essence of circle, the form is important, not the matter.
Can't use abstract math to explain a human. When it comes to knowledge, we must emphasize the ousia as form. It isn't that first you have material things, and then the mind adds form to it, whatever the particular thing is, it always was that form. Then when we learn about it, we actually just discover what the thing is. Therefore, it is a process of coming to understand the universal, the essence, but that was always there in the thing, it just needed to be done. So what he is emphasizing in the Metaphysics is the idea of ousia as form, as some kind of essence, but never separated from matter!

Ousia --1. Grammatically basic. 2. Ousia As Ontologically basic, something that exists in its own right. The 1st example is how humans speak, the 2nd example is how things really are, both are both side of the same coin.

Principle of Noncontradiction
Arche= principle, beginning and rule. Aristotle thought that this was the firmest of all principles. It is impossible for the same thing to both belong and not to belong to the same thing at the same time to the same thing in the same respect. An important governing thought in Western philosophy. A thing is what it is, it can't be equal to its opposite. Aristotle thought reality was organized this way. It has to do with both knowledge and being. Aristotle states that if this principle is true then it is the firmest of all principles both for knowledge and reality. In the same respect, what does it mean? It shifts depending on circumstances. From standpoint of knowledge and reality principle of noncontradiction is stable. The three factors of the principle are: the same thing, in the same time, in the same respect, is what Aristotle is calling the principle of noncontradiction. In order for knowledge to be reliable, these factors are in play. Can't be going up and down a hill at the same time. 1 of 3 factors has changed, time. A "hill" is both up and down but meaningless unless you think in relation of motion. Aristotle believes when it comes to knowledge and reality the principle of noncontradiction is most basic and most fundamental and evident principle, because without it we can't communicate or think about things. Aristotle explains well how we lead our life by the principle a very pragmatic explanation. This is a principle we live by as humans thus, no one can deny it!
If you talk about change as a potentiality, you have a way of solving the puzzle. This actually serves as a slap at Renee Descartes in the future wondering if he is conscious or in a dream state. All philosophy stems from wonder and puzzlement. Aristotle makes distinction between worthy puzzles or useless ones.

Emphasis between primary and secondary being, Ousia.
For Aristotle Ousia or being is not just a thing, many ways being can be understood. Primary Ousia is things perceptible in nature. Secondary Ousia or being is sometimes being is how we understand things, i.e., big or small, etc, this is how we talk about things. He stretches the way Ousia in many ways. Matter can't be primary being like atomists, nor form alone like Platonists. However, when we analyze beings, we can use secondary being. Idea of "is" or "being" will shift depending on what you are talking about. The term "being" has plurality to it, depending on how we regard it (like using a hammer as a paperweight). Even though Metaphysics emphasizes form, it is "this form." Primary thing is the "this."

He wants to move away from Plato's idea that we can separate matter from form. A things essence is going to be the ultimate answer to the question of what is being. However, a things essence can't be separated from its statement of thing, it is almost as though that this essence is going to mean the definition of a thing, "what it is." Then in some respects, it has the characteristics of a secondary being. If you want to know what is the big deal about the perceptible "this," the primary ousia? Again, and again, the best way you can get a handle on that is he is critiquing Plato! He wants to move away from Plato's idea that it is possible to understand beings apart from the material world. Aristotle does make certain commitments; he makes certain commitments to the idea that the primary sense of being must be used in nature that are evident to us.

The Platonist in Aristotle says if the mind desires and is naturally inclined to pursue knowledge and he gives us a map how does it acquire knowledge. The Platonist in Aristotle says in the Metaphysics that if all there is, is matter and form then there is always an element of elusiveness in things because matter cannot fully deliver how we know things. When he gets to the question of the Divine, he does so because he believes that the natural desire of the mind can know that it will not have a final resting place with respect to just composite things. Especially since these composite things are always changing because nature is the realm of movement and change and the idea of form will at least give us access to how we can know changing things and actuality and potentiality. Changing things will always have this element of excess, beyond the minds capacity to grasp.

His talk of the Divine is the idea that there is something in reality that will satisfy the minds' desire for the ultimate stable resting point. If change were the last word, the mind could never come to rest. This is what Heraclitus argued for, Aristotle didn't like it. He wants to grasp the final. For him the Divine is satisfaction for the mind to grasp reality.
Uber Ousia. Aristotle here is talking about 2 senses of eternity.

1. Endless time.
2. Timelessness. 1st is never begins, never ends this is eternity or infinity. 2nd is in order to understand whole world there has to be something, the unmoved mover.

Ideas of potentiality and actuality criticizes Platonic idea. Potentiality has idea of negation in it. Thus, a thing in nature always has actuality; we are always on the move. Divine is pure form and actuality without matter and potentiality. Ontology now moves to theology. This is his theological science. (Theology in the Metaphysics is speaking about God for Aristotle). In reality, composite of form and matter is always in motion until it ends. Any actualization has potentiality it is prior. Actuality is prior to potentiality; this is his ultimate metaphysical statement. Two ways Aristotle proves this idea. 1st is human reproduction brings us into being. Our parents actually reproduced us. 2nd is God the ultimate sense of actuality prior to potentiality.

Talking about other philosopher's ideas. Hesiod question of the Gods in poetry, night comes before day, thus we don't have access in the "dark" symbolic of precedence of something unknowable, and Aristotle doesn't like it. Thus, for him he has the unmoved mover.
The pure actuality of the Divine is Aristotle's nominee for the principal that explains why there is this movement in the first place. Limitation in nature is matter which is unstable but all things in nature strive to their potential. Thus, you have pure actuality of Divine. God is Prime mover or final cause not efficient cause for Aristotle.

Rational and non-rational potentiality. This is how Aristotle recognizes the phenomenology of human thought. What rational means here is human drama of seeking what might or not work out. Now rational is stable when you heat water it boils no other potentiality. Thus, non-rational movement is very regular. Human reason is precarious we may not use potentiality to reach actuality. When we practice medicine, it might not work out.

Theoria=contemplation. There are three kinds of ousia, all are a study of secondary ousia in some way.

1. Physics-study of material and moveable.
2. Mathematical-study of ousia that is non-moving, (1+1=2 always), but is derived from matter.
3. Theology is study of ousia that is non-moving and non-material.

This is scheme of understanding the nature of understanding something. 3rd level is big for Aristotle. 1st two levels have limitations to them. We begin from wonder (ignorance) philosophy is to illuminate wonder with answers. He doesn't deny Greek deities but the way poets depict them is deficient.

Movement is a way of understanding change we see this in the Physics. Movement is actualization of potential. Psuche=soul which is the word he uses for life. Things in nature that are alive. Soma=body. Plato separates soul from body, Aristotle doesn't. Aristotle's text De Anima is on "The Soul" is a philosophical biological treatise. We have three-part soul, plant, animal and human all are part of this.

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.

Most people believe that if they read some ancient author, it is only the work that counts and the translation doesn't matter. Well, things aren't that simple, especially when it comes to Philosophy works. So, if you wanna read Aristotle's Metaphysics, keep in mind that if you don't understand some of the philosopher's ideas, the fault could be the translator's (it happenned to me). And to avoid this, it is best to choose a good translation, such as Ross's one. This translation is recommended by many of the specialists in Greek Philosophy and they probably know what they're talking about...

So...we're at our local library and my 5 year old son finds this book on the shelf and asks me to read it to him. OK!! so, I start to read this book and think "oh, what a cute story" and then I get to the end....and WOW! I am completely overwhelmed! My breath catches and my voice quivers and I'm sitting on a little couch in our library with tears rolling down my cheeks. EVERY MOTHER should read this book! This book is so sweet and so pure...It is PERFECTION! Ms. Camp & Mr. Ross, Thank You!!

We have owned Midnight Feast for 4 years now (our
eldest child is 7), and we'll get quite a few more years use out of it. It's the story of a brother and sister (sister looks smaller, but is definetly in charge) who decide to pretend to be asleep so as to stay up for a midnight feast. The brother is sent to fetch all the necessaries (cookies and apples, aka pomegranites and lobsters, something to sit on etc.), while the sister waits for the princess to arrive. Girls will like it that they are in charge, boys will like the fantasies the little boy has whilst getting the supplies and mums will enjoy the ending (read it and see why).