Spencer Books

I received this book as a birthday gift from a coworker, and I must say it is a delight. Kwong Kuen Shan has created a wonderful, inspiring piece that stimulates the mind, soothes the spirit, and pleases the eye.

The book combines timeless wisdom with intriguing images that allow one to ponder on the texts' meanings. Each cat-filled illustration looks like a Chinese painting, a style that is both fresh and interesting to the Western eye. In the bottom margins of the "wisdom" pages, the author comments on the upcoming image, explaining symbols and any Chinese characters used. This adds to the joy of viewing the image and studying details.

One of my favorite parts of the book is "The Three of Us," pages 16-17...

The given wisdom on page 16:

"People can learn together but go different ways,
Go the same way but achieve different standing,
Stand together but have different aspirations and judgement." --Confucius

The given image on page 17:

Three content cats snuggled together under an arc of Chinese characters that says: "Be as calm as still water and insight and understanding will come" // Other embellishments are on the image and explained by the author.

This book is derived from a series of articles my father wrote for the Jazz Journal, these were updated and brought together in a better order with plenty of additional material.

It is not a handbook for beginning pianists...This is the handbook for Jazz Pianists, whether just starting out or of some experience, he covers everything from basic chords and chord structures to a simple lesson in jazz improvisation, in between covering harmony, 5ths, scales, patterns, blues and good jazz introductions.

If you are a jazz pianist or want to be one having a good grounding in piano then this is the book for you

Never before have I read a more well researched, well written, or more complete text on this essential event in our nation's history. The author is to be lauded for this truly amazing and inspiring work. I only wish i could meet the man himself.

In 1912, Cahrles Dawson and Arthur Smith Woodward "discovered" what was then claimed to be the missing link in human evolution at site known as Piltdown. What follows represents the unravelling of one of the greatest scientific forgery the world had ever seen.

Spencer's work represents first the challenge to explain how Piltdown Man (eoanthropos dawsoni) came to be regarded as the missing link in human evolution. Then, the challenge came to be how the scientific community held onto Piltdown Man despite the conflicting scientific evidence found in other parts of the globe. Finally, how the investigation of Weiner, Le Gros Clark and Oakley in 1953 exposed the fact that Piltdown Man was an elaborate and meticulous fraud.

From there, Spencer then explores the suspects and possible motives of the suspects of this most elaborate forgery. Spencer runs the gamut of suspects before indicating his belief in the collaborative efforts of Charles Dawson and Arthur Kent. Like any good detective, Spencer employs the requirement that the perpetrator(s) of this fraud must have had both motive and opportunity. Unfortunately we will likely never know the true identities of the perpetrators.

In the end, the invesitgation in 1953 revealed that the Piltdown skull was nothing more than a human skull and an unrelated lower jawbone of an ape. The fact that in 1912, this discovery was heralded in the scientific community as the missing link reflects both on the sophistication of the forgeries and the desire by many to have the mssing link be found in England. Spencer explains all with great scientific detail coupled with a touch of panache. All in all, highly enjoyable.

Recommend reading Spencer's Pine Leechers. A unique Sci-Fi with a blend of horror. Worth the cover price.

Completely enjoyed this book, well written, thoughtful, easy to read, concise, without boring you with tedious detail, a overview of the plains Indians, who they were, how they lived, many interesting facts, stories, and loads of great history. I really enjoyed the book and will keep it for reference a long time. Mr. Carlson, did an outstanding job on this writing!

This book is recommended to dispel two longstanding, pernicious myths. The 19th century sociologist and philosopher, Herbert Spencer, has long been the bete noir of progressives and socialists for supporting an allegedly anarchic laissez faire policy of government non-intervention and social Darwinism. The odd thing about today's Republicans, "conservatives" or "right-wingers" is the way they seem to join with the left in denouncing Spencer and laissez faire. For instance, many Republicans staunchly defend the Democrat party's largest government programs as if they were defending their own mother: Most Republican politicians today not only refrain from attempts to abolish the New Deal Social Security program but actually express eagerness to save and preserve this Democrat expansion of the welfare state, and in doing so often reject the alleged laissez faire policies of the 1930-40s conservatives who opposed the New Deal . The mystery grows deeper when we actually read the 1930-40s opponents of the New Deal such as Ogden Mills in his anti-New Deal manifesto, The Seventeen Million, and find that this Depression-era conservative also distanced himself from laissez faire in favor of some level of intervention (Mills 1937 p.40). Even Hayek, who apparently knows the true meaning of laissez faire (Hayek 1994 p.89-90), spends some ink denouncing certain "wooden" or "dogmatic" laissez faire attitudes (p.21,41).

What might, but should not, surprise modern readers is that Spencer supported government intervention because laissez faire does not reject all intervention (1981 p.21). Indeed, laissez faire requires government intervention. Laissez faire is not anarchy because we already have a word for anarchy called "anarchy." Laissez faire is the exact opposite of anarchy because laissez faire is the rule of law. The premise of laissez faire is to establish the framework in which individuals may freely allocate resources, a legal framework established by government intervention to secure defense, fair trial and property rights (guaranteed process). Thus, a laissez faire government does not order what contract you must sign but, once you freely contract with someone, the laissez faire government is pledged to intervene to enforce your contract rights if the other party defrauds or reneges. This is opposed to the central planning of socialism which prevents individuals' free allocation of resources and freedom to contract in order to engineer some pre-ordained social goal (guaranteed result). Social democrats oppose many market results which occur when laissez faire "only" guarantees process-- although it is not quite clear how government central planning is more democratic than the market result from the aggregate preferences of millions of free-choosing consumers.

The other longstanding myth, which even modern conservatives propagate, is the false caricature of Spencer as a callous, social Darwinist and classic, Victorian scrooge. First, it is important to understand Spencer's argument that certain imperfections and undesirable results hardly invalidate laissez faire, because "it is not a question of absolute evils; it is a question of relative evils-- whether the evils at present suffered are or are not less than the evils which would be suffered under another system" (8). Although Spencer opposed the socialism of many "progressives," it is clear that Spencer was a progressive who desired the amelioration of the common man and working poor-- improvements most likely gained by laissez faire, according to Spencer. In this 1891 book, Spencer took pains to avoid any misunderstanding on this crucial point, although his ideological enemies and history seemed happy to ignore his efforts: "Let me again repudiate any erroneous inference. Any one who supposes that the foregoing argument implies contentment with things as they are, makes a profound mistake. ... My opposition to socialism results from the belief that it would stop the progress to such a higher state and bring back a lower state. ... It is not then, chiefly in the interests of the employing classes that socialism is to be resisted, but much more in the interests of the employed classes" (p.29-32). Thus, the other benefit of this book is to indicate the humane compassion of this poor, traduced, laissez faire advocate.

This is the advantage of primary sources; to read not what others wrote about Spencer's thoughts and writing but to read what the man actually wrote. A greater effort to verify claims by primary sources would redress a legion of falsehoods. This book provides not just the original writings of Spencer but those of numerous, able thinkers of the Victorian era.

Simply the best source of pre-expansion hockey information I have ever seen. It's rare and precious, so if you see it, grab it! Topics are arranged alphabetically; just choose a key word and read all about it. Discover legends like Cyclone Taylor, Joe Malone and Newsy Lalonde. Track significant rule and equipment changes. Read about teams like the Kenora Thistles, Ottawa Silver Seven and the Montreal Wanderers.

A wonderful book written by a good friend who passed away today.

Polarized America is a difficult, but valuable read. Nolan McCarty, Keith Poole, and Howard Rosenthal, three political scientists wrote the book for other political scientists. Nevertheless, reading and then rereading the book is time well spent. Their arguments about our current political polarization are thoughtful and detailed. I will not summarize the book beyond a list of the chapters and a follow-up sentence.
1. The Choreography of American Politics
2. Polarized Politicians
3. Income Polarization and the Electorate
4. Immigration, Income, and the Voter's Incentive to Redistribute
5. Campaign Finance and Polarization
6. Polarization and Public Policy
7. Where Have you Gone, Mr. Sam [Rayburn]
Excellent graphics and tables, which the reader should avoid the temptation to skip, illustrate the chapters.
A one-sentence summary of their thesis is that America is politically stuck and is likely to remain so until tectonic social events move the parties from the political edges back to the middle, the position from which American political institutions work best.