Stanley Books

I bought about ten of these because they are so easy to carry around and are printed with easy to read type and sell at a very good price. I have many other editions of Shakespeare's plays but these are perfect for what I wanted. I have lots of other editions with introductions, evaluations, etc. and I don't really need that in my bag. These editions are a great way to read the plays without carrying around five pounds of book!

this is shakespeare's most accessible comedy. it's a farce about mistaken identities among identical twins. nothing complicated here. the play has it's funny moments. it's not the bard's best comedy; that's 'much ado about nothing', imho. but this is not a bad place to start.

Shakespeare's vision grew tremendously over the course of his writing career. However, this play demonstrates that his uncanny power as an artist grew quickly and was present in some form from the very begining. It is exceedingly hard to buy the common notion that this was his first comedy when it is so much better than "The Two Gentlemen of Verona" in nearly every way. The dialogue is fast paced and screamingly funny. The characters interesting if broad and there are some surprising touches that, aside from being interesting in and of themselves, point down the road to later, darker comedies. Chief among these is the amazing opening, perhaps still unequaled in all comedy for the level of grimness. These are the first words uttered in a play long seen as a kind of sitcom of Shakespeare's plays: "Proceed, Solinus, to procure my fall, and by the doom of death end woes and all." The speaker is Egeon, a merchant about to be put to death for simply coming from the wrong country. The whole first scene feels like a cloud is hanging over it and there is a sense of fear-infused urgency that catches the mind off guard and makes the joyous, lunatic story all the more welcome while at the same time coloring it with real drama, making it all the more exciting. To be sure, there is little real depth and much of the play is like a sitcom but only the best of sitcoms and perhaps "Monty Python" at their most absurd is a better comparison. The plot is well chosen (from the Roman comic dramatist Plautus) and well handled. For some reason the play is not well known even among the early comedies which is a shame. It is probably the best of them, even surpassing the wonderful "The Taming of the Shrew". Aside from being an easy read, keep in mind the play is good to perform as it holds up well and doesn't suffer from being tinkered with. I've seen one production that was mostly straightforward but did a few weird things that worked like magic. They would've sunk almost any other Shakespeare comedy. I must also mention the last moment between the two clowns. It is as heart-warming and humane as it is funny. The master is already present AND growing. Do yourself a favor and pick up this play, you'll laugh your head off!

I recently re-read THE COMEDY OF ERRORS prior to attending The Colorado Shakespeare Festival's performance of this farce-like play under the summer stars here in Boulder. Based on Menaechmi by Plautus, William Shakespeare (1564-1616) produced this romantic comedy between the years 1592-93 and published it in the First Folio in 1623. While on its surface this early play may seem superficial and frivolous when measured against KING LEAR or HAMLET, it is not without its own unique depths. It also shows that the Bard had a sense of humor. It tells the hilarious story of two, identical twin brothers (Antipholus of Syracuse and Antipholus of Ephesus) and their identical twin servants (both named Dromio), all of whom were separated at sea during their infancy until redisdovering each other through a series of madcap mix-ups, mayhem, and mistaken identities in the apparently insane town of Epheseus. Meanwhile, Egeon (the father of the Antipholus twins), has been granted a day to raise local ransom for illegally entering Ephesus. In that day, the separated twins are reunited, Antipholus of Ephesus pays his father's ransom, and Egeon discovers his long-lost wife (Aemilia) living in the local priory. In the end, THE COMEDY OF ERRORS is as much about the power of family as the search for completing oneself. It is a play that reminds me that it is perhaps better to re-read and understand Shakespeare than to devour one bestseller after the next.

G. Merritt

One of the problems that great artists present to us is where to begin in getting to know their works. Their masterworks are often so full of what they have spent a lifetime developing that most of it is lost on those who have not yet put in a significant amount of effort becoming familiar with that artist's style and means of expression. Yet, if one begins with their apprentice works one may become discouraged because they lack the miracles of the masterworks. So, where does one begin?

Shakespeare offers the reader an additional challenge of an English that is removed in style and idiom from us by 400 years. It is not an insurmountable challenge. In fact, it is quite easy to overcome with a bit of time reading it and getting into the flow. It just seems strange in the beginning, but it really does become easy to read once you spend some time with it. However, getting over that small hill has kept many from enjoying the glories of Shakespeare.

This play, "The Comedy of Errors", is clearly an early work. It has many virtues, but despite them it does not offer much of what we really value in Shakespeare. It is a very fine play and is constructed very well. It is a wonderful first work to read of Shakespeare because it is short and has a very simple plot. The new reader does not have to spend much effort contemplating characters or the immense subtlety of language of the great works. Its charms are direct and what it has to offer is pretty much on the surface of the words.

The plot is, like all farces, ridiculous. It involves twin brothers who are served by twin slaves. They are separated early in life and when the play opens one set does not know the other exists. One set (the Antipholus and Dromio from Syracuse) visits Ephesus where the other set (the Antipholus and Dromio of Ephesus) lives. The play involves people confusing the two sets to the bewilderment of those suffering from the confusion. It really is quite funny. Of course, eventually, all is resolved to everyone's delight.

This edition, like all of the individual editions Arden offers of these plays, has a wonderful opening essay that offers a great deal of background on the play including a discussion of its performance history, sources, and discussion of the play itself. The appendices in the back offer excerpts from the sources and some brief information on the Gray's Inn performance of 1594.

If you desire to study Shakespeare and are willing to spend time reading many of his plays, "The Comedy of Errors" is a good work to start with just to ease into the language and get a feel for some of the conventions of Elizabethan theater. Just don't stop here. Shakespeare has so much more to offer that you owe it to yourself to continue your exploration of this supreme artist.

I have to say, this book is awesome. It taught me how to build models and understand why I am doing what I am doing. I use it all the time and hopefully he will release a new version for us folks who will outgrow this one. Covers all bases and it's worth 2x what I paid for it...

this is very good because it teaches step by step and it makes sense too.

The book is a very clear, step-by-step of all the processes involved in making a game character leading up to the animation. The animation is covered but not in as much detail. Everything else is though, including the awesome rigging machine which comes with the book.

Its refreshing to see that someone wasnt limited by a publisher to keep the book size down, and he obviously was able to take his time really illusrating every step.

Its a great book.

This is my first time to write this kind of review, therefore, I don't know how to do a good one. But what I can say for this book is it is easy to follow and the method of modeling that I have learned from it is very useful. If you can follow the tutorials patiently, you can gradually build a very good foundation of your modeling skill. ^-^.. I am looking forward for the next edition.

1)This book highlights some important issues in modeling & rigging that no other books bother to emphasis.

2)The accompanying CD contains very insightful scripts (that acutally works) - goodies other books only PRETEND to give.

3)It guides beginners and ease them through relatively advanced topics in character animation.

4)If you really need to achieve something in a hurry in Maya. Yes, this is the book to get.

This book arrived in great shape and in a very timely manner. Like all his books, Stanley writes so the average person can understand fully.

The whole theory of God is in control of every single thing amazes me. Is He is control of the abortionist hand as he rips the baby from the womb? Free will is a part of this world. So I suppose most would say when someone dies at an early age the old adage of "well, it must have been Gods will" tell that to that persons children, that will really help out in their relationship with God. People wake up, quit giving credit to God for things that we as humans have goofed up ourselves. Everything that happens doesn't mean it is Gods will just because it happened and He didn't stop it. Was it His will for the abortion law to pass? No, because that would go against His word, but it did pass didn't it? So what happened? We as children of the most high God have a responsibility to utilize the weapons of warfare He left us such as His and The Holy Spirit. We need to rise up and come against such tragedies in prayer and stop giving God credit for bad things in our lives. Satan is the one who comes to kill steal and destroy....Not God. Read john 10:10 satan and God are not co-conspirators working togethor to refine our character and teach us lessons etc read eph 4:11 If God is in total absolute control of every little thing, then He's not doing such a great job is He? This world is full of a lot of bad things and I refuse to believe God is up and heaven and is controlling the shooter and he kills kids in a school...makes no sense. Anyway I would recommend reading the b ook :God is not your problem" by Billy Joe Daughtery It addresses many things such as the sovereignty of God etc amazing book in my opinion...

This book is helpful and wonderful in reminding us that God is in control of every situation. The photography throughout the book, which was done by the author, is also a beautiful reminder of God's magnificence in the world. The book is easy, quick reading but still has a powerful, profound message to deliver. I recommend this book for everyone.

This is a wonderful book that just opens up some insight into the reality of our relationship with God. He is so great and yes in the end He really does have all control if we just allow it

Rover1 asks in his/her review if " God is in control of the abortionists hand as he rips the baby from the womb". The way he/she structured the question reminds me of the old Groucho Marx joke " have you stopped beating your wife?" It is a "no-win" question, and reveals Rover's misunderstanding of Christian theology.. If you say "yes", then God becomes an accomplice to murder(abortion). If you say "no", then God has no control. The question should be: Is it within God's will that the abortionist be given the opportunity to abort the baby?' This places the guilt on the proper shoulders ( the abortionist's) , but still recognizes God's omniscience/omnipotence. God does not want the abortionist to do it, but gives him the free will to make that choice. Of course, the abortionist must answer for his evil actions later, but that's a whole different theological topic.
Hope this clears up Rover's bad theology.

Product was used but in good condition. Description was helpful and accuraate. Mailed at a reasonable timeframe and rate.

I'll keep this short - READ this book. Well written, scarey as heck and true ! A must-read for true crime buffs.

Stephanie Stanley was a reporter for the Times-Picayune in New Orleans in 2002. She proves to be a talented true crime author with this book.

There is a common theme with some serial killers-an abusive petty criminal breaks the law with impunity and recieves little or no punishment. As a child nothing is his fault. Derrick Todd Lee shares that theme with Kenneth McDuff.

The investigations into the multiple murders that Lee committed were hampered by two factors. First,the usual routine of looking at those closest to the victims as suspects. Husbands and boyfriends. Next was the F.B.I.'s profile that suggested a white male was the serial killer. The author spotlights the pain and disappointment of victims' families as well as some members in law enforcement that believe Lee could have been investigated 5 years earlier, sparing lives of latter victims.

Another problem in the investigations was the fact that he killed in multiple jurisdictions, crossed racial lines in selecting victims,and used different means of killing. A versatile murderer. It took time for authorities to link up the crimes.

As with many cases, DNA evidence was crucial in eventually connecting Derrick Lee to 6 victims. The author explains some of the process without getting too technical.

"An Invisible Man.." is one of the better,recent true crime books that I have read. I recommend it.

This is a must read if you like to be scared and love true crime. I read a lot of true crime but must say this book really got me scared. Reading it late at night, I double, triple checked all the locks before I went to bed! This story of a serial murderer who gets into women's houses in nice neighborhoods to brutally murder them, is frightening and terrifying.

I read loads of true crime, and this one is very well written and is a good story. I wasn't familiar with this case and I like to learn the details of a case as I go along, and that is the way this is written. Some true crimes give the ending away in a preface, or a first chapter which I do not like. This is very a very intersting case of a serial killer, and I can only imagine the horror this man inflicted, seemingly for his own satisfaction. Well, I guess that is the definition of a serial killer/psychopath/sociopath. Call him what you will, he is an awful man and belongs where he is! Held my interest from first page to last page. Hopefully Stephanie A. Stanley has written other books ..... I keep up-to-date on new true crime books through the search button at Amazon, and always read the reader reviews, if there are any. This book had good reviews, and they were right on. Thanks to all the readers who review at Amazon!

Charles Stanley gives practical plus scriptural references on how to avoid
hidden dangers in the life of a Believer. We only go around once, and we want to make the right choices to avoid the landmines. This book along with all the books I have read by Charles Stanley are on my 'Recommend List'. Buy, read, study, listen, & then apply.

This book is highly recommended to all Christians as it provides some valuable insight into living a Godly life. I know I need all the help I can get. However, the truth is that life is short so pick and choose your teachers wisely. Charles Stanley is a senior pastor with quite a bit of experience in studying and teaching the word of God. I would even say that this is an important book to read. While it is fundamental that we understand we are saved by grace through faith alone, and God will never stop loving us- nothing can prevent God from loving those who are His- we ought to make the effort to learn from the wise how to detect and avoid "landmines" in life. That way we can make the most of our walk with the Lord here on earth, while enjoying His blessing as we walk in obedience, avoiding things that displease Him. He will still love us no matter what though- but what sense is there in missing out on the abundant life that can be ours? As far as wisdom and insight, this book does offer gems.

Excellent tool in identifying and dealing with the struggles a Christian
has in his spiritual walk. Highly recommended.

This book is REALLY awesome! It reminds us all of what we need to be working on to be more obiedient to God. Dr. Stanley is one wise and sincere Christian.

This is an excellent read; Charles Stanley is one of the great Christian Authors of our time. Sound doctrine; a great read.

Phillip Thow

This book is amazing. I have studied under and spoken with Jerry Cook on many occasions and he and his ministry and this book have changed my life and my own ministry, i highly suggest any and every Christian and or minister (as they are the same thing) purchase this book and read it, and read it again.

It brings to light everything that is simple and right about Christianity and the church, and how we as members of the body of Christ should be ministering and living our lives.

Jerry Cook puts into words my hearts cry!
He reminds me to hope and dream of what the Body of Christ could be.
I love this book so intensely it's looking rather worn.
After reading it over and over myself, I bought copies for my board and staff.
I even preached a sermon series inspired from its pages and encouraged my entire church to purchase and devour it!
If the people of God knew how to really love, accept and forgive, we would truly be Jesus with skin on.

PS...thank you Jerry Cook and Stanley C. Baldwin for letting the Holy Spirit use you to positively change THE church...

This book will ignite passion in you and equip you to do the work of the ministry. It's message expresses the heart and mind of our Heavenly Father and His desire and purposes for the church in the earth today. The church should be an active force in the world providing a place for the borken hearted to be healed and the captives to be set free.

I became familiar with this book back in the late 70's. This book has much to say to Christians who want to be actively and accurately involve in their Church and their faith. Love, Acceptance and Forgiveness lives up to its sub-title very well: Equipping the church to be truly Christian in a non-Christian world.

I sat down with this book and did not get up till I finished it. That is not amazing due to the few pages there are. The amazing part is how my faith, my worldview and my Chrisitanity was so radically changed by such a small book.

The Bible is the original text while this book if the Cliff Notes in applying the real Christianity.

I now see Jesus in the eyes of the homeless; the prisoner; the "pain in the neck" people and therefore my christian expression has changed.

Do Not read this book if you do not want to change your actions toward people.

The exercises found in this book are great, when you are first diagnosed and the coming years.

It is a great tool to have because you do not deal with your MS the same way on a daily basis. There are times that, even if it is in written form, you need to look for answers.

The way the book is written, it is a sure sign that you do not have to have MS to write a good book, but as an MSer you do know what we face every day.

Great book, will keep using for future reference.

this book provides the person with MS or their caregiver with much needed information on emotions, thought problems, communications, and other areas in which MS symptoms affect functioning. it is well-written and quite easy to read. it offers a nice summary of functioning as well as a few strategies for managing the different symptoms. i found that this book is a good augmentation to the MS Workbook, which provides a more comprehensive background and worksheets than the current book. several times, the author stated something that i hadn't read before, and i wanted to read the original source, but none were provided. i only discovered about one dozen typographical errors, no errors of fact or grammar. this is a very good book for the non-clinician and non-academic.

When I read this book I felt it was written for me! I could relate and identify to almost everything the author was saying. I wish I had extra copies to give away, it is sooo relavent to anyone. You have to get this book for yourself and your library. You won't be dissappointed!

As someone with MS, it's good to know that you are not the only one struggling with certain feelings and insecurities.

I originally got this book at the library. I hesitated because some MS books can be very heavy or dry. This book was excellent! I found it very helpful, even though I've had MS for years. I bought one for myself & had some of my family read it, too. I even got a couple for gifts for friends with MS. I highly recommend it, especially if you have people in your life who could use a little MS education. It's also great to validate things for you personally. It's an easy read & definitely worth the time.

My son has been struggling with a broken marriage, and the resulting loss of his job, his home, and his pets, as well as the "one person who he thought would never hurt him, and the one who hurt him the most" for the past 9 months. It seemed there was nothing more I could do or say to get him through his days without extreme sadness and lack of self esteem. A good friend of mine suggested this book, and it has literally turned his life and his attitude around. I asked him if I could please read it when he was done, because I am so amazed that one book could have such an impact! Whatever Dr. Stanley has shared with him has certainly given him new hope, and I can't thank him enough for sharing his wisdom!

Dr. Charles Stanley writes prolific prose about finding the blessing in everyday occurance. This is a comfort book. Buy it.

I write as a Catholic, who strongly disagrees with certain of Dr. Stanley's doctrines, such as his notion of eternal security, but I find that he offers very sound and wise advice in a number of areas of the spiritual life, and one of these areas is the problem of suffering.

The main portion of this book walks the reader through the sufferings and profound setbacks endured by many of the great figures in the Bible, such as Joseph and Moses. Stanley's exposition of these stories, in themselves, is comforting to the suffering reader -- he sees that others have walked the path before him.

Importantly, Stanley makes no false promises about escaping from suffering. While he encourages the reader to pray, and to maintain hope and faith, he does not offer false assurance that such prayer will inevitably alleviate suffering.

Finally, Stanley offers a well-thought-out discussion of the benefits of suffering - how, painful though it can be, it allows us to grow in spiritual maturity.

There is much else that can be said about this book. It is written simply and straightforwardly, but with penetrating insight and wisdom by a man who obviously has thought and prayed a great deal on the subject. It is also written with great warmth, and is a comforting book to read, reflecting, I'm sure, Stanley's long experience as a pastor.

As a closing aside, I might mention that as someone who has been immersed in Catholic life, practice and sensibility since childhood, it seems to me that Stanley's take on suffering is very Catholic indeed! There is very little if anything in this book that is contrary to Catholic teaching on the subject -- whether formal doctrinal teaching, or the informal teaching found in the writings of the saints. The Lord has planted the thought in my heart that Charles Stanley should be a Catholic, and that is something I pray for.

This book has been such a Blessing and a fraction of the original cost. The book looked like new and came in a
timely manner.

When life deals a severe blow, it's one thing to hear "you'll be all right," but another to hear "you'll be blessed." "The Blessings of Brokenness" is a reassuring blend of grace and truth that ministers both to the emotions and to the mind. Stanley shares reasons, obstacles, processes, and blessings of being broken. While offering truth to hold on to, the book has the relational tone of a compassionate friend, rather than a detached, academic counseling guide. It's small size, substance, and tone make the book a good choice for giving to those in pain, including grief. (It's also available in audio, a format that could be useful, since sometimes reading even a small book might be too much exertion for a friend who feels like [...], pierced, pummeled, shattered, or just plain world-weary.)

I have attended a few of Charles Stanley's program tapings in Atlanta, GA at the First Baptist Church of Atlanta. I have also enjoyed his programs on television as well as reading some of his books. If you are wanting a reading that will put things into plain english then this book is for you. Charles Stanley is an ordained Baptist Pastor yet he does not really preach to you. To me he is more of a teacher and put things into day to day english that even I can understand. He doesn't do the fire and brimstone preaching - He talks to you whether on tv or books as if he is talking in plain english just to you. He explains in details things you might not understand or just reiterates things you already know. So if you are ready to sit down and meditate on God's word then this is for you.

I only use "snack" to describe the chapters in this book because the subjects are offered in manageable amounts of nourishing, informative, fulfilling and soul satisfying nourishment. I read a subject or two each night as I lay in bed before I go to sleep. Very satisfying to my mind, body and soul!

If you have a question about anything Biblical or your personal life, this book is for you. In a concise, understandable writing, Dr. Stanley spells it out clearly. Add this book to your library.

This is a great book. This book will deepen your walk with Christ. It is easy to understand. Perfect for the new Christian or the seasond Believer. You will see Dr.Stanley walks with Christ, and his desire is for you to have a deeper walk as well!

I first want to say that I have read many Christian books and study the Bible frequently, and I am an ordained Baptist Deacon. This book has been so helpful to me when I have been feeling down or confused about the simplest topics. I recently had lots of doubts and fears over a new job that I had taken, which was causing me so much stress that I felt, I could barely deal with it. The stress was so great that it was interfering with my work, my time spent with family and with my time spent with God. When I read the section on stress it was like a battery recharge, it helped me to put my work stress in perspective and literally made me feel better immediately. Nothing here is new material for me, but it is presented in such a way that it will open your eyes and lift your spirits.

We are all growing everyday and it is our choice how we grow depending on what we feed our minds.

This book is a must have for every Christian family, and I highly recommend it.

Apologetics Concerning the Nature of Religion

Apologetics or is it antiapologetics, I have read Hodges arguments about cause and effect, primary and secondary causes in his work on systematic theology which was written a hundred years after this work. RC Sproulamong others discuss similar issues today with a contrary conclusion. David Hume's dialogue about the existence of God and the attributes of God does form some of the frame work for further philosophic and theological discussion. Some seems quite aimless like his discussion whether God is wholly other. Some theologians may make this statement and argument, but this certainly is not fundamentalist or scriptural perspective of God. What I found most interesting in this work is his discussion of causality. Mr. Hume's focus was on Natural theology or the idea that God could be perceived or not perceived through nature. But also included was knowing God through rationalization. To this he compared three notions:

{1} That there is a self existent Being who always existed, never created, and is the ultimate Cause of the whole universe. Something that never was caused, but is the cause of all else.

{2}That there is no ultimate cause. History is an infinite amount of causes and effects that has no starts or ends. Matter in some form has always existed and matter has always been in motion. Universe or galaxy may have a point of beginning, but not what it is composed of.

{3}At a point in time there was no matter, then at another point of time there was matter. The matter move in motion to develop things as we know it.

David Hume does not discuss the concept that simply nothing really exists. I would guess in an earlier work he had dismissed it in some form. It is my conclusion Mr. Hume found point one as absurd as point 2 or 3.

The other major focus of discussion in this work how an all knowing creator, who has all power, and has the capacity to perceive every thing that is going on can create a world that has the highest being of creation suffer pain and evil among each other. The argument is made in this work that the universe does not function in a rational manner, therefore such all knowing, all powerful and all powerful God does not seem to exist. Some reviewers consider it a complete debunk of intelligent design and it certainly a source of comfort for those who do desire.

With the possible exception of his incalculably influential A Treatise of Human Nature, this, I think, is Hume's finest work. The Dialogues is a paradigm of sustained philosophical argumentation on a single subject, and I can't think of a more inspiring work of philosophy. Another reason to read this book is that Hume is one of the few philosophical figures whose work is worth reading as literature. His prose is, of course, lovely and clear as can be; and the Dialogues is packed with the sort of evocative passages that readers of Hume except to find in his work. Furthermore, he's clearly mastered the dialogue format as a way of writing philosophy. He never turns his interlocutors into ciphers spouting the details of their respective positions. Each character has a forceful and distinct personality, and each of them comes to the debate with a well-defined position and adequate means of defending it. In short, I can't recommend this book highly enough.

Most of the Dialogues is devoted to discussion of a posteriori arguments for the existence of God. The main argument considered here is the classical argument from design, which Hume seems to understand as an analogical argument of the following sort: the complexity and order of the universe show that it is similar to artifacts created by human intelligences; similar causes have similar effects; therefore, the universe must have been created by a being with something like a human intelligence; therefore, the universe must have been created by God.

Hume's objections to this argument are legion, and many of the individual objections are both ingenious and forceful. He provides reasons for thinking that the universe isn't all that similar to artifacts created by human beings. He argues, for instance, that at least in some respects, the universe resembles animal or vegetable life more than it resembles artifacts created by human beings. Hume also provides for thinking that, even if we think the universe is similar to a human artifact, we ought to think the universe was created by a being quite unlike God. The relevant empirical evidence, he argues, provides us with no good reason to think that the universe wasn't created by multiple beings (large human artifacts are usually created by multiple beings), or that the being(s) who created it are still alive (human creators die), or that the being(s) who created it were infinite (it's not clear that creating the finite universe would have required infinite power), or that the being(s) who created it were morally perfect (the universe, with all its misery and despair, certainly isn't what one would expect from a perfect being). Furthermore, he proposes certain alternative naturalistic explanations of the existence and nature of the universe; and he claims that it's unclear why an appeal to divine creation is to be preferred to these speculative naturalistic stories of the universe's creation.

As I hope this all-too-brief synopsis suggests, Hume's cumulative case against the argument from design is quite impressive. It is, of course, possible to avoid some of these criticisms in various ways, and his speculative naturalistic explanations leave quite a bit to be desired. But the total case is a philosophical demolition par excellence. Indeed, I'm pretty sure that Hume has shown that the argument from design is more or less worthless as support for anything resembling traditional theism. So, if you're enamored of that argument, I suggest you pick up book and wrestle with the criticisms found here.

Now, this isn't all Hume discusses in the Dialogues. There's a section discussing a priori arguments for the existence of God; it focuses on arguments against a version of the cosmological (i.e. first cause) argument. And Hume's arguments concerning the cosmological argument also rule out any sort of ontological argument, as he claims that no sense can be made of the idea of a necessarily existing being. The book also includes a few some brief discussion of particular issues concerning religion.

Where, in the end, does Hume come down on the issue of theism? It's hard to tell, as it's not clear that any of the particular characters speaks for him. Philo, the character who often appears to be speaking for him, never denies the existence of a deity; he simply denies the ability of human reason to discover anything substantial about what such a being is like. That Hume agrees with this is, I think, the most we can glean from this text about Hume's own religious views. It seems clear that he has no sympathy for organized religion, or for any religious views that purport to describe the nature of God, His intentions, or how and why He created the universe as He did. And the only positive religious claim that is given respectful treatment here is the bare claim that we have reason to think that the cause of the universe as a whole is somewhat similar to a human intelligence.

But does acceptance of this minimal thesis amount to his being a theist? Again, it's very hard to tell. First, of course, one might wonder whether this fairly vague positive view is enough to amount to some form of theism. But let's put that issue to one side. Even if it is enough to support some form of theism, it's often difficult to tell whether Hume means to be advocating such a position here. The problem is that it often seems Hume's explicit advocation of this position amounts to little more than a description of what he thinks is an inevitable human tendency to think this way. Given how our minds actually work, he seems to think, we're bound to think something like this about the origin of the universe. Yet it's somewhat unclear that he thinks forming beliefs in this way is reliable. It may simply be that we have a brute instinct to think in a way that insures we'll see the world as resulting from some human-like intelligence, and it's at least not clear that that isn't a debunking account of the plausibility of theism. (For more support that this is a debunking explanation, see his The Natural History of Religion, where the explanations of various religious beliefs certainly seem to be one's that suggest those beliefs simply aren't plausible.)

David Hume made a reputation by writing on reason and its limits. The main thrust of the Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion is to question whether theological arguments for God that assign Him positive attributes (omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, etc.) go beyond reason's limits in assigning these attributes. We watch Cleanthes (believer in theological arguments), Demea (believer more on faith) and Philo (disbeliever in theology's efficacy) hash out whether reason and experience alone give us reason to say anything whatever about God.

Hume explores all of the major arguments for God's existence. First, the a posteriori argument is explored; the argument that just as seeing a house gives us reason to assume an architect and builder, seeing the world should give us reason to infer a designer. Hume (through the skeptical voice of Philo) sees much wrong with this argument. Why? Because the reason we infer a builder for a house is because experience has shown us that houses have builders, thus when we see a house, we assume that, like other houses we've seen, this one too has a builder. But experience does not tell us that where there is a world, there is a designer. The leap is extra-experiential. Further, even if we DID infer a designer, why infer just one? Houses have construction crews of multiple people; if we analogize between the house and the world, then why not infer that the world, too, might have infinite creators? (And why infer that the world's creator is omnipotent, if all that is needed to create something is to be more powerful than the thing created - no more, no less?)

Next, we go through the a priori argument - the argument from first cause. Hume (Philo) is quick to point out the obvious flaw with this. If everything needs a cause, then what caused God? If God is said to be eternally existing, then why couldn't the natural world - rather than God - be thought eternal instead? And further, why is a infinite chain of causes and effects so unimaginable, anyhow? (Isn't it just as sensical as an eternal God itself not caused?)

Lastly, Philo brings up the argument from evil. In a nutshell, Philo suggests that while theology sees all the perfections of the world, proclaiming them clear evidence of remarkable design, theologians dismiss or downplay the imperfections. If God is said to all-good Himself, then why did he create humans with such flaws? (one assumes that an all-powerful, all-good God could have avoided those errors).

Still, the main thrust of this book is that Philo, far from challenging whether God exists, challenges theologies capacity to assign ANY characteristics to God by reason and experience alone. Hume does a good job not only in outlaying arguments as to why reason is not capable of knowing a thing about God, but also in making believable dialogues (compared to Plato, whose characters are all made to be one-dimensional foils for "Socrates.") As in so many other areas, Hume was a pioneer in the realm of the philosophy of God. This book furnishes strong proof of that!

David Hume, a philosopher of the period often classified as British Empiricism, is the intellectual associate of philosophers John Locke and George Berkeley. Born in Edinburgh in 1711, he attended the University of Edinburgh but did not graduate. He went to France during his 20s, and spent time there working on what would become his most famous work, 'An Enquiry into Human Understanding', first published under the title 'Treatise of Human Nature'. However, Hume was a prolific writer, and dealt with many areas of philosophy, including politics and ethics, epistemology, and metaphysics. He wrote in the area of history as well, and had a politic career as British ambassador to France and a post as a minister in the government for a few years. His final work, 'Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion', was published posthumously in 1779, although work had begun on it as early as the 1750s.

Hume was very concerned about rationality. Hume was never publicly and explicitly an atheist, but his rational mind, concerned about sensory and intelligible evidence, led him to question and doubt most major systems of religion, including the more general philosophical sense of religion and proofs of the existence of God. The primary arguments in his 'Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion' deal with the Argument from Design, and the Cosmological Argument. There is an assumed distinction here between natural religion and revealed religion, an especially important distinction in the Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment philosophical structure.

- Natural Religion and Revealed Religion -
Natural religion is the idea that we come to know and understand God (and, consequently, what God wants or expects of us, if anything) simply from nature and our sensory perceptions, as well as our interpretations (emotion and rational) of this kind of understanding. From very early in his writing career, Hume attacked the idea of natural religion and most of its conclusions, drawing a sharp line between what we can actually know and what ends up being fanciful extrapolations based on other-than-rational ideas and evidence. Revealed religion is primary what most religions base themselves upon - the burning bush to Moses, the resurrection and post-resurrection appearances to the Apostles, the Buddha's enlightenment under the tree - these are examples of revelation. While Hume does take on the idea of revealed religion in his other works, this particular text does not concern itself with that topic, and stays in the domain of addressing natural religion.

- The Argument from Design -
Arguments from Design have always had a strong appeal to believers within religious frameworks; they have often been used as tools of evangelism, as attempts to show that beyond the revealed doctrines, the very nature of things points to a creator. In very short order, the Argument from Design in Hume's newly-industrial time might have read like this:

- Machines are designed by beings with intelligence.
- The world and the universe it is in resembles a machine.
- Therefore, the world must have been created by means of intelligent design.

This is an argument by analogy, and is convincing to some, but often more convincing to those already inclined to believe in the existence of God.

- The Cosmological Argument -
The Cosmological Argument is at once both more subtle and more simple. The most simple way of stating it would be that God is the 'first cause' of everything. If everything has to have a cause (even the whole universe), then that first cause must be God. In the twentieth century era of thinking of a universe that began with a Big Bang, it seemed to some that the Cosmological Argument was confirmed.

Hume would have been familiar with Leibniz's more subtle form of the Cosmological Argument, which argues for a world of infinite contingent causes. However, there has to be something outside of this system of infinite causes that produced the series - thus, even in a universe with no set beginning or ending, there would still need to be an overarching cause.

- Hume's Arguments -
Hume argues on many levels. His first criticism of the Argument from Design is that this analogy (as are most arguments from analogy) is faulty and not exact; we have no idea if the universe is like a machine. Even if it was, machines are often designed and built by several designers - why argue for one God rather than several? How do we know that matter and the universe don't have their own, internal self-organising principles?

With regard to the Cosmological Argument, the argument is a little more strained. Hume argues that, in any series of causality, once one knows about each cause, it makes no sense to inquire beyond the sequence of causes to some other effect. This is a very Empirical argument, to be sure, and while perhaps not entirely satisfying, it still has merit in philosophy to this day.

- Hume's Structure -
This is a dialogue, set up in the classical way of people talking with each other about the subjects. Hume draws primarily from Cicero, whose work 'On the Nature of the Gods' uses characters of the same names. However, whereas Cicero was concerned about the nature of the Gods (their attributes, powers, etc.) and not their existence, it is the very existence of God that occupies Hume's thoughts.

Hume, despite many years of work on this text, probably never quite thought it was finished. He left the work to Adam Smith (the noted economist, and friend of Hume in Edinburgh), who also thought the arguments against the existence of God were too strong, and likely too damaging to Hume's overall reputation. The tug-of-war over the publication makes for interesting reading in and of itself.

These are important arguments, worthy of discussion and dialogue in philosophy classes, theology classes, and among others who ponder the existence of God.

This short and artfully written book was published after Hume's death. Hume did not wish to experience the controversy engendered by the arguments advanced in the book. It is likely as well that Hume was concerned also with offending some of the moderate Presbyterian clergy who were his personal friends and had been his partisans in other controversies. This book is primarily an attack on the idea that the exercise of reason and logic provides support for religion, and particularly that application of reason leads to strong evidence for the existence of a beneficient God. This line of thought had become particularly popular among liberal theologians in the first half of the 18th century and was a widely held notion among Enlightenment intellectuals across Europe and North America. This idea is still widely held today and can be seen in the writings of the so-called 'intelligent design' advocates of creationism. Hume's criticisms, then, are not only of historic interest but continue to have relevance to our contemporary lives.

The Dialogues are constructed as a 3 cornered argument between three friends. Demea, a man upholding revealed religion against the idea that reason provides support for the existence of God. Cleanthes, an advocate of natural religion. Philo, a skeptical reasoner who attacks the positions held by Demea and Cleanthes. For those who like Hume's sprightly 18th century style, this is a fun book to read. Hume artfully divides some of his strongest arguments between Cleanthes and Philo, and gives the Dialogues the real sense of a dispute among 3 intelligent friends. Philo is generally taken to represent Hume's positions but Cleanthes articulates some strong arguments and provides some of the best criticisms of Demea's fideism. Much of the book is devoted to attacking the argument from design, which Cleanthes attempts to defend against assaults from Philo and Demea. In many ways, the argument from design is the major idea of those supporting the natural religion approach to existence of God. Hume's critique is thorough and powerful. It even includes an anticipation of Darwin's idea's of selection, though the basis for Hume's critique is primarily epistemological. In the later parts of the book, Hume attacks also the comsological argument for the existence of God, though this discussion is relatively brief and a bit confusing. Hume's analysis is consistent broadly with much of his philosophical work. In many ways, his great theme was the limitations of reason, and this book is an example of his preoccupation with the relatively limited role of reason in establishing certain facts about the universe. He finishes with short criticisms of the idea that religion is needed for a stable and well ordered society and defends the usefullness of skeptical reasoning.

It is important to view the Dialogues as part of a critique of religion that Hume sustained in several works. His Natural History of Religion, the On Miracles section of the Enquiry Concerning Human Understacing, and other essays comprise a broad criticism of religion. Other pillars of religion, such as the existence of miracles and revelation, are criticized in his other work. While Hume denied being an atheist and was apparently disturbed by the dogmatic atheism of French philosophes he met in Paris, he was certainly not religous in any conventional sense.

This is a short and very readable book but the power of its arguments are totally out of proportion to its length.