Greece Books

This is a perfect introduction to Homer in Greek. As described in another review, about 15-20 lines of Greek are on the left page, with copious vocabulary and grammatical notes to help one through. I'm sure one's experience will vary depending on how much previous Greek one has studied, but I found myself rarely going to the glossary to look up any words - the vocabulary words she chose to gloss were perfect for my level. And having the regular scansion notes is great, as well. I would highly recommend this volume to anyone interested in either dipping into Homeric Greek for the first time or in reviewing what they used to know.

This edition was a good choice for me, a beginner who had just finished an introductory class.

The notes on vocabulary, grammar, and allusions to mythology are on the same and the facing pages as the Greek. This eliminates flipping through a dictionary or the back of the book - although there is, in fact, a complete glossary in one of the appendices.

The editor includes "scanning notes" at the bottom of each page to help the uninitiated deal with dactylic hexameter. I found this very useful because my pronunciation is so bad and I really was not hearing the music of the poem.

There is a good bibliography and suggestions for further reading.

Finally, this edition limits itself to just one book of the entire poem. Arguably, Benner might be a more sensible choice to get more of the poem, but I found it much less daunting to deal with just the first book.

The size and style of the Greek text make it very readable. It is convenient that the notes are located on the same page as the text. This book is useful for a beginning Greek student or someone interested in reviewing (or resurrecting) ancient Greek. I was not satisfied with the commentary in the books introduction or the author's recommendations for further reading.

More advanced students will be sorely disappointed with this text, but it is a good way to review ancient Greek or to read an original work for the first time.

I have been a student of Greek for over a quarter century. In all that time I have never found a better aid for the study of Homer, whether as a beginner or for a review.

After a brief introduction and explanation of grammar, the student is brought into immediate and satisfying contact with the text of the Iliad. Ms. Draper provides a dozen or so lines of the Greek text on the left-hand page, followed by a line by line vocabulary help and occasional commentary which flows over, as needed, to the right-hand page. She also includes an explanation of any difficult scansion. As a cherry on top, she adds a concise, user-friendly glossary at the back of the book. It is altogether usable.

I have my copy and have been recommending this book to students and friends.

Henty is amazing at capturing your interest and at the same time giving you a history lesson. Knight of the White Cross is so far my favorite of his books. There are pirates, battles, adventures, and young maidens to protect. I highly recommend this book, especially to junior high or high school boys.

Gervaise's father wishes that his son will grow up to be a Knight of the White Cross, and so Gervaise leaves his dying mother and travels to Rhodes. When he arrives at Rhodes he never dreams of all the adventures he will be undertaking, and the excitement he will be involved in. First comes the rescuing of Ricord and Santoval, after which the Grand Prior knights Gervaise and his comrade, Ralph, which is a great privilege for the boys. Some time later, after visiting the house of Signor Vsados, Gervaise mentions to Ralph that he did not like the looks of the Greek who had also been at the Vsados household. Ralph laughs at him, but Gervaise's suspicions are aroused even more when he sees the man talking to a slave of the Order. After reporting to Sir John Kendall Gervaise suggests he disguise himself and go among the slaves, to try to find out if a plot is being arranged. What will he find? Gervaise has many more adventures, and also a little romance, for Claudia De Forli bestows her colours on him. Gervaise also sets an example by the boy-galley that he was put in command of. It is the only galley ever to have only young knights appointed to it. In the end Gervaise takes part in the Siege of Rhodes, which was a bloody affair. Don't miss reading this story of a gallant Knight of the White Cross!

This is an awesome book. One will feel that they are there, fighting the corsairs or seeing the great fortresses at Rhodes. The scenes are vividly described, and the whole story is incredibly exciting. Gervaise is the ideal knight - strong, brave, loyal, and willing to give his life for Christendom. One feels like they know him in real life, so vividly is he described. The Turks can be pictured ad well, with their huge cannons and keen scimitars. The adventures of Gervaise are very perilous, and sometimes it seems there is no way out. Yet, there is a way, and he always finds it somehow or other. His exploits are phenomenal. He does everything from defending the fort of Rhodes to impersonating a Turkish prisoner, all in the name of the order. There are a few words in the story that most middle school students wouldn't know, but these don't interfere much with understanding the story as a whole. There is some violence in this book, but nothing else that would be considered repulsive. This book is a great read for anyone who likes action, adventure, history, or the Middle Ages. I give it an A.

England is embroiled in the War of the Roses. Young Gervaise Tresham is sent from his war torn homeland by his father to join the Knights of St. John. Initially, this order was a semi-religious organization with its members taking vows of obedience, chastity, and poverty for the purpose of ministering to pilgrims traveling to the Holy Land. With more incidents of pilgrims being attacked, robbed, and enslaved by the Moslems, the Hospitallers quickly changed, out of necessity, to a great military organization.

Proceeding to the stronghold of Rhodes, Gervaise is eventually appointed commander of a war galley. The war galleys of the Knights of St. John patrolled the Mediterranean which was infested by Moorish corsair pirates.

Tons of adventure, fast paced story tellign and great attention to historical detal make this yet another great Henty read.

It's frustrating & infuriating to realize that most of Sappho's work is lost to the ages, burned by the small-minded & intolerant. Yet what little remains is stunning in its directness, its clarity, and its celebration of both the joys & pain of love. Reading these poems is like sifting through a handful of glittering golden fragments, each one hinting at the full beauty of what's been lost. Even so, the splinters of a single line are often more intense & moving than the complete poems of others. And in a way, the fragments invite the reader into the act of creation, making us struggle to glimpse the rest of the poem.

This is a fine edition, with informative but never pedantic notes, and a basic introduction to the poet & her world. The material on translation will make the reader appreciate just how difficult a task it can be, and just how much artistry the translator must bring to the work. Most highly recommended!

The fragments themselves are quite beautiful, but I found the commentary much more interesting. Since so little is known about the subject, the translator provides notes along with each fragment that lets the reader know from where the fragment came. The commentary also includes citations from many writers of Greek lyric poetry. The result is not a work that gives one man's perspective of Sappho but a work that says: "here -- this is what scholars today say about Sappho and her native Greece." The book also includes an interesting essay by the translator, cute sketches, and a glossary of people and places.

I love saPpho! Stuffin cake in my mouth..Feelin the sexual feelings..A LeSbo historical figure writin Lesbian poetry and we get to see the historicity..Well Blow me dOwn as Popeye says..

Sappho was the greatest lyric poet of Greece, and any modern reader of her poetry can easily see why. Although she admittedly suffers in translation, one must learn to ignore the frustration caused by the occasional awkward translation. One must also try to ignore the fragmentary nature of her poems. There was once a definitive edition which consisted of nine books, but it was burned in hte Middle Ages because of the lesbian love poems. The poems we have now are just papyrus fragments or quotations. However, even in English, even with only a few extant pieces, Sappho's poetry is vibrant and beautiful.

I bought three books about Greece by Matina K. Psyhogeos, including (i) Olympic Games, Past, Present and Future: Passing the Torch to a New Millennium; (ii) Make Your Journey to Greece an Unforgettable Experience; and (iii) History of Greece in a Nutshell. I shared her books with some of my friends and we very much enjoyed reading them. Although there are many books about Greek history, travel, and Olympics out there, they can't be compared with Ms. Psyhogeos' books as her books contain resourceful information (a lot of which could not be found somewhere else) and rare pictures. Combined with her unique writing style (which distilled the information in a thoughtful manner), the stories in the books have become very interesting to follow indeed. We've learned a lot about Greece and the Greek people from her books. Moreover, the layouts and font sizes in her books make the books very easy to read without straining the eyes. This is also a very important characteristic of her books. Many other travel-related books are generally inconsiderate to readers as they are published in very small font sizes which can hardly be read. With all these unique and positive characteristics, we rate these books of hers five stars.

B. Boonyaketmala (Author of various books and articles on Thai politics, media, films, and culture)

Don't travel to Greece without reading this book! Make Your Journey to Greece strikes a balance between educating the reader about ancient and modern Greece, and provides essential information for a most enjoyable vacation. This book also devotes 40 pages to teaching the reader some basic Greek words and phrases so that you may navigate through Greece without a tour guide. The author has decorated the book with beautiful pictures, introducing the reader to the fascinating sights waiting to be seen. Best of all, this comprehensive history/language/tour guide is small enough to carry with you on your excursions.

This is the only book you need to learn everything about Greece. Actually there are 4 books in one. The book contains: the summerized long history of Greece; the language section for communicating in the native tongue (if you wish); the historical treasures and archeological sites; the most fascinating, important cities and beautiful islands; and one of the most significant sections - all information and advice a visitor needs to make his/her journey unforgettable indeed. It is a unique travel book that will fascinate you, it is the ultimate tour guide. My family and I adore it and we often consult it, since this spring it will be our third trip to the Greek islands. We highly recommend it.

I bought this book while traveling in Greece and it was the best investment I ever made. It's wonderful, don't leave home without it... You learn a lot from it.

This edition was very helpful to me because I didn't always understand what the original text meant, so reading the modern version right after the old version was very helpful. The book was one of my favorites - it's such a comedy! The characters are so unique and interesting. I definitely reccomend this book to everyone - it's short and doesn't take long to read, but so lasting and classic!

I am not a very big reader. I read this book and fell in love with it. It has a lot of everthing:romance, comedy,and pure poetry. After reading the story, my class and I put on a play of this book, everyone enjoyed it of all ages. So if you are not a big reader like me read this book you will change your mind.

It was a riveting and classical masterpiece with an enchanted twist of creative and whimsical imagination.A timeless tale!

This edition was very helpful to me because I didn't always understand what the original text meant, so reading the modern version right after the old version was very helpful. The book was one of my favorites - it's such a comedy! The characters are so unique and interesting. I definitely reccomend this book to everyone - it's short and doesn't take long to read, but so lasting and classic!

Breathtaking photographs that would convince anyone to travel to these villages. Excellent source of information pertaining to the photos as well.

This book with its 285 magnificent colour pictures takes the reader on a journey through mainland Greece and its islands. The introduction contains a history of Greece from the earliest times. The book is divided into sections for the mainland, including the Peloponnese: Arkadia, Messinia, Lakonia and The Mani, and Pelion, Epiros and Evritania. The second section covers the islands like the Cyclades, Dodecanese, Ionian, Chios and the Argo -Saronic. A small map covers every section. The book includes a traveller's guide with a map of Greece, sections on festivals and holidays, hotels, restaurants and food, and concludes with a bibliography. This stunning book reveals a glorious picture of Greek village culture in its attractive photographs and engaging text. It is the perfect guide for prospective travellers of for those who wish to familiarize themelves with the charming village life of modern Greece.

I love the whites and blues of the hillside villages overlooking the Mediterranean. This book is an inspiration for a quality of life that we simply don't have in the US. Simplicity is an art in these wonderful villages and homes we are allowed to explore in this wonderful book. Flowers abound. Life is wonderful. This book is something to treasure until you get your chance to see it for yourself. And in response to that silly editorial review....not everyone is watching that Raymond TV show!

I saw this book at a friend's home and thought it was perfect for a Christmas gift for my husband. Since we are both of Greek descent and my husband's family was from the island of Halki, I know he will love it. The copy I received from David Starcher is in excellent condition. The pictures are beautiful and the information on each village is very well written and makes me want to visit each one of them. I am thrilled with this book.

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.

Aristotle was a philosopher in search of the chief good for human beings. This chief good is eudaimonia, which is often translated as 'happiness' (but can also be translated as 'thriving' or 'flourishing'). Aristotle sees pleasure, honour and virtue as significant 'wants' for people, and then argues that virtue is the most important of these.

In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle makes the claim that happiness is something which is both precious and final. This seems to be so because it is a first principle or ultimate starting point. For, it is for the sake of happiness that we do everything else, and we regard the cause of all good things to be precious and divine. Moreover, since happiness is an activity of the soul in accordance with complete and perfect virtue, it is necessary to consider virtue, as this will be the best way of studying happiness.

How many of us today speak of happiness and virtue in the same breath? Aristotle's work in the Nicomachean Ethics is considered one of his greatest achievements, and by extension, one of the greatest pieces of philosophy from the ancient world. When the framers of the American Declaration of Independence were thinking of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, there is little doubt they had an acquaintance with Aristotle's work connecting happiness, virtue, and ethics together.

When one thinks of ethical ideas such as an avoidance of extremes, of taking the tolerant or middle ground, or of taking all things in moderation, one is tapping into Aristotle's ideas. It is in the Nicomachean Ethics that Aristotle proposes the Doctrine of the Mean - he states that virtue is a 'mean state', that is, it aims for the mean or middle ground. However, Aristotle is often misquoted and misinterpreted here, for he very quickly in the text disallows the idea of the mean to be applied in all cases. There are things, actions and emotions, that do not allow the mean state. Thus, Aristotle tends to view virtue as a relative state, making the analogy with food - for some, two pounds of meat might be too much food, but for others, it might be too little. The mean exists between the state of deficiency, too little, and excessiveness, too much.

Aristotle proposes many different examples of virtues and vices, together with their mean states. With regard to money, being stingy and being illiberal with generosity are the extremes, the one deficient and the other excessive. The mean state here would be liberality and generosity, a willingness to buy and to give, but not to extremes. Anger, too, is highlighted as having a deficient state (too much passivity), an excessive state (too much passion) and a mean state (a gentleness but firmness with regard to emotions).

Aristotle states that one of the difficulties with leading a virtuous life is that it takes a person of science to find the mean between the extremes (or, in some cases, Aristotle uses the image of a circle, the scientist finding the centre). Many of us, being imperfect humans, err on one side or the other, choosing in Aristotle's words, the lesser of two evils. Aristotle's wording here, that a scientist is the only one fully capable of virtue, has a different meaning for scientist - this is a pre-modern, pre-Enlightenment view; for Aristotle, the person of science is one who is capable of observation and calculation, and this can take many different forms.

Aristotle uses different kinds of argumentation in the Nicomachean Ethics. He uses a dialectical method, as well as a functional method. In the dialectical method, there are opposing ideas held in tension, whose interactions against each other yield a result - this is often how the mean between extremes is derived. However, there are other times that Aristotle seems to prefer a more direct, functional approach. Both of these methods lead to the same understanding for Aristotle's sense of the rational - that humanity's highest or final good is happiness.

There is a discussion of the human soul (for this is where virtue and happiness reside). Aristotle argues that virtue is not a natural state; we are not born with nor do we acquire through any natural processes virtue, but rather through 'habitation', an embedding process or enculturation that makes these a part of our soul. However, it is not sufficient for Aristotle's virtue that one merely function as a virtuous person or that virtuous things be done. This is not a skill, but rather an art, and to be virtuous, one must live virtuously and act virtuously with intention as well as form.

Of course, one of the implications here is that virtue is a quantifiable thing, that periodically resurfaces in later philosophies. How do we calculate virtue?

This is a difficult question, and not one that Aristotle answers in any definitive way. However, more important than this is the key difference that Aristotle displayed setting himself apart from his tutor Plato; rather than seeing the possession of 'the good' or 'virtue' as the highest ideal, Aristotle is concerned with the practical aspects, the ethics of this. Based on Aristotle's lectures in Athens in the fourth century BCE, this remains one of the most important works on ethical and moral philosophy in history.

This Oxford translation of Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics is the work of Sarah Broadie and Christopher Rowe. It's easy to pass over since Amazon doesn't have a cover-photo nor any product description, but it should be one of the first translations you consider getting of the Ethics.

The translation is proceded by an 80-page 'philosophical introduction' by Broadie that is superb. She does a good job explicating the Ethics in a reasonable and general way, given a lot of the dispute over the most basic analytic concepts in the literature (for instance the inclusive-dominant debate over eudaimonia). The introduction alone will make it essential for anyone trying to write on the Ethics while giving an overall view of scholarship out there.

The translation itself is very readable, with large print and the proper citations in the column.

Watch out for editions that don't include those, they are usually useless. For instance, Barnes & Noble bought the rights to an edition of the Ethics (one not available on Amazon for obvious reasons) and produced it in a paperback form. It doesn't have the numeric sections accompanying the text, though, and the translation itself is simply a reprint of a fifth edition translation from the 1890s (if an author felt he had to do five editions in ten years, simply spitting it out again 100 years later is a travesty).

A lot of work on the Ethics cites the Barnes collection, and I think it is useful to read this translation side-by-side with that one. My biggest objection is in how this Oxford edition translates "phronesis" and "sophia." The distinction between these two types of knowledge are crucial in understanding Aristotle's ethics. "Phronesis" is usually translated as 'practical wisdom,' and sometimes as 'prudence.' "Sophia" is usually translated 'knowledge.' In this translation "phronesis" is translated as 'wisdom' and "sophia" is translated as 'intellectual accomplishment.' It is very important to keep that in mind when you are reading the text, and if you are interested in Aristotle's discussions of prudential excellence. Anytime 'wisdom' appears in this text, Aristotle is talking specifically about practical wisdom/phronesis, and likewise with 'intellectual accomplishment.' Any apparent vagueness on this note is due to the translation, and frankly I'm surprised they decided to do that. Luckily I read Broadie's introduction, which mentions this on page 46, or else I might have been confused about this later on. Thus, one needs to be very aware that 'wisdom' in this translation is being referred to as a very specific kind of wisdom, namely the ability to reason practically. Not taking this into account will lead to some erroneous interpretations, I believe, and will make some of the discussions in the secondary sources seem confusing and obscure when they don't need to.

Part 3 of the translation is the line-by-line commentary, another commendable quality of this translation that makes it essential. They even do things like chart out the disposition as well as provide useful cross-references. A useful glossary in the back is also helpful, in fact probably essential to deal with any translation confusions like the one I outline above, especially if you are trying to compare translations. There is also a brief topical bibliography of select works as well, and they separate the index into names and subjects.

Overall, this is a great edition. Very well though out, very very useful to the student of Aristotle.

I admit that I have not personally seen this book yet, but I posted a query about translations of the Ethics on the Philosop internet list, and the majority of respondents (university professors) favored Sarah Broadie and Christopher Rowe's translation, which includes an extensive and useful commentary, over all others.

This is not really a book for scholars, though they could certainly benefit. It's a book for the rest of us who wondered where science comes from and what science has to do with the fight to change society. This is a very readable and lively book, both focused and far-ranging, with insights into everything from English literature to physics and union politics. Novack points out that materialism is totally linked to science, including the science of changing society. The Marxist method is the necessary update for the scientific approach that was begun by the Greeks. This book is written to provide the nonphilosophy student with some very necessary tools. While amazon may sometimes list this book as not available from time to time, it is always available from booksfrompathfinder. Click on the "new and used" line above and then scroll down.

What does reality consist of and where did it come from? These are questions that have vexed human beings ever since they began to think. They are also questions most people figure they don't really need to spend time thinking about. But George Novack, who was a serious student of philosophy and a leader of the Socialist Workers Party for many years, does a great job of explaining just how relevant these basic questions are to ordinary people who want to change the world. What makes this book so helpful is that it does not assume the reader is an academic philosopher. The book looks at the evolution in ancient Greece and Rome of a materialistic outlook, which began to understand that human beings could make sense of the world without relying on ideas of god and the supernatural. He shows how and why the Greeks in particular made incredible advances in thinking which were shunted aside, only to be rediscovered more than a thousand years later by later materialistic thinkers in Europe during the Renaissance. You will understand more about these ideas in reading this book than by reading twenty academic tomes on philosophy. Save your money and buy this one.

I read everything by George Novack that I can get my hands on-- all his works on politics, history and philosophy. He has a way of presenting ideas precisely and clearly, and of explaining the historical setting and importance of each one. And while he meets high academic standards, he writes directly for working people who want to understand the world and figure out how to act to change it. He helps you see why questions of materialism vs. idealism, dialectics vs. formal logic, history and change are important and helps you grapple with them seriously.

Here Novack gives a sweeping overview of the rapidly changing Greek society over five centuries BC. He explains not only what happened in the great development of human ideas, philosophy, logic, reason and scientific inquiry, but also why it was possible and likely that they would occur when they did.

I strongly recommend some of Novack's other works as well, including: America's Revolutionary Heritage, Democracy and Revolution, The Logic of Marxism, and Polemics in Marxist Philosophy.

Does reality exist independent of human (or superhuman) consciousness? What is the relationship between mind and matter? Is there any spirit that creates or changes the world at will? These questions are as old as human society itself. George Novack traces the evolution of materialist thought, and its opposite, idealism through ancient Greek and Roman society. He explains why the rise of the Roman slave empire, and the later establishment of Christian orthodoxy, crippled the development of both materialism and scientific discovery in Europe for some 1,200 years. He contrasts the earliest forms of materialism with the rationalism of the Enlightenment and the dialectical materialism codified by Marx and Engels.

That is the question that burned in the hearts of those Greeks, who by their own excellence, or ARETE, made lasting contributions to humanity's imagination about being fully human. Just to add a few words to those reviews below:
This is one of those books that simply cannot go out of print as all who have read it and learned from will not let that happen. It's that important! No study of anything Greek would be complete without reading this book. The mesmerizing power that the ancient Greeks continue exert on all intelligent persons everywhere is summed up in their formulation of PAIDEIA, and the manner of their ASKESIS (discipline involved in forging one's true self) in embodying it. Read it well and this book will cleanse you of the muck of modern education, especially of the public kind, and help you think more nobly. That is to say, clearly.

The book shows how the greek people were the first to concentrate their attention on the perfection of MAN and his place in society. Jaeger traces this fact from Homeric times through Plato and explains it through many outstanding writers such as Hesiod, Solon, Sophocles, and many more. He shows the powerful Ideals of the greeks in all their beauty which continue to live on in the world today. He reveals how Poetry, Philosophy, Rhetoric, Politics, Medicine, etc. have their basis in the quest to reach the highest standard imaginable for man and society. The space contributed to Plato is subtantial and the first volume is really only an intro to Plato by the authors own admission. That's a four hundred page intro! But it all leads to the greatest of inventions...Philosphy. I enjoyed the whole book, but the second volume "the search for the divine center" was the best part explaining many things about Plato. To understand in greater depth the influence of these ideals on the western world I recommend reading a book (which I read first) called "The Classical Tradition" by Gilbert Highet whom is also the translator of this book. That book reveals how most of the surviving great works throughout western history were written by authors who were well aware of the greek world and their ideals including many writers in the Christian tradition. Jaeger wrote a short book called "Greek Paideia and Early Christianity" which shows that connection very well. He has convinced me beyond doubt of his statement that the ancient greeks are the educators of the western world.

Anyone with an interest in Ancient Greece must read this book! Jaeger weaves elements of history, anthropology, philosophy, and psychology with masterful dexterity. I've read a number of general texts on Ancient Greek culture. There are some quite good ones out there. H.D.F. Kitto's, The Greeks, is another favorite of mine. Nevertheless, Jaeger's work stands well above the others. He provides a great deal of depth and detail but it never seems to wane as his genius provides a stunning insight on every page. Jaeger uses a concept well-known to classicists, arete, as a synthesizing thread. Paideia, which is roughly equal to our idea of culture, in the sense of 'she is a very cultured woman,' defined the aims and ideals of a Greek education. Arete, a blend of excellence, virtue, nobility, and skill provided a telos for that process of education. Jaeger, using the framework of educational ideals, came to present the true spirit of Ancient Greek culture. This idea, of using educational ideals to survey the depth and breadth of a culture, would rightfully scare a well-educated American. For our educational aims, which are primarily vocational or simply technical, represent a vacuum of higher values and ideals. Even the once powerful currency of 'honor' as a unifying goal has long since expired. A review of Ancient Greece, steeped in values and appreciative of the finest things in life, may rekindle the search and development of values in our own time and place. This book should be a guide for the quest.

Chalk me up as another mesmerized reader. Paideia will take you back to the beginnings of Western Civilization to examine how the Greeks conceived of excellence or arete and the disputes that arose as the new definition ran into the old definitions. Plato is the anchor of the three volumes, and Jaeger treats him with a sense of awe, while I found his ideas as listed in "The Republic" unnerving.

The find of the books for me was Isocrates, the master of rhetoric and a hypochondriac who almost lived to 100. The stories of Isocrates and Demonsthenes renewed by interest in the study of rhetoric. Homer, Hesiod, Pindar, Socrates, they are all here. Overall a fantastic trilogy.

This version is a really nice one, better than others I've seen. It's easy to navigate because it has the table of contents and the text is actually formatted.

Makes me wish I had read it when I was younger. Perhaps I wouldn't have liked a required reading in school, but as an older adult I found it interesting.

There probably isn't much I can add in a scholarly vein to what people have already said about Plato. So I thought I would make a few personal observations from the standpoint of a somewhat philosophically literate, 21st century man who is reading such an august classic in middle age.

I came to this book with more of a background in modern epistemology and the philosophy of science than in classical philosophy. So political philosophy isn't exactly my strong suit, but nevertheless I found the book interesting reading in a way I hadn't really thought of before.

Actually, I had read portions of this book 20 years ago when I was a young student first studying philosophy, and I have to say, there is something to be said for having a more mature outlook in approaching such a venerable work. At the time I thought political philosophy pretty dull stuff, and besides, I felt there was no real way to answer any of the important political questions that get debated here, despite the easy way Socrates disposes of everybody else's half-baked opinions and theories.

The fact is, if you move ahead 2400 years and read something like Karl Popper's "The Open Society and Its Enemies," an advanced modern work, you can see how much, or how little, political philosophy has progressed in the last 24 centuries.

Well, that may be true, but at least with this book you know where it basically all started. The best way to decide this issue is to read the book and decide for yourself.

Although entitled "The Republic," this society isn't like any republic you've probably ever read about. Plato proposes an ant- like communism where there is no private ownership of property, philosophers are kings, kings are philosophers, people cultivate physical, moral, and ethical qualities, and the idea of the good takes the place of political and social virtues.

Another odd facet is that the bravest citizens are permitted more wives than those less brave in battle. And then there is the infamous proposition that all poets and artists are to be banished since they are harmful purveyors of false illusions.

I find the Socratic method as a way of moving along the dialogue between the participants sort of interesting, and it is certainly an effective device. However, none of these people, even the famous Sophist Thrasymachus, are really Socrates' intellectual equal, so he really doesn't have much competition here.

(Cheap shot from the "Peanut Gallery"--not to digress too much, here, but if Socrates was supposed to be so wise, how come he married such a shrewish woman for a wife, Xantippe? They joked about how funny and incongruous that was even in Socrates's day).

There was one other thing I was wondering about. If ancient Athens disproportionately had so many towering intellects, relative to its small population (about 20,000 people, most of whom were slaves anyway), you'd think they would show up in Plato's dialogues more. But all we seem to get are second-raters who are really no match for the clever Socrates. Of course, since the dialogues we have were written down by Socrates' most famous student, Plato, perhaps the cards were stacked a little in his teacher's favor.

Yet I would say this is still a great book. Classical scholars say there are more perfect, less flawed dialogues than Plato's Republic, but none that are as profound, wide-ranging, and as influential and important for later philosophy. As someone once wrote, in a sense the entire history of western philosophy "consists of nothing but footnotes to Plato." After finally reading it, I can see why there is so much truth to that statement.

Plato's 'Republic' is one of the most important works of ancient Greek philosophy, and one of the foundation pieces of political science and political philosophy of that and subsequent ages. It was one of the first pieces I read when undertaking a political science degree.

Plato was not only a great philosopher, but also a great writer. While few master the classical Greek language sufficient to undertake its study in the original language, the text appears in countless translated forms of varying degrees of integrity. This particular translation is one that is often used in schools, and is fairly careful to the original text.

The text is traditionally divided into ten sections, although some scholars see this as being a function of the papyrus and scrolls of original composition more than being integral to the structure of the text itself. One of the interesting features of the Republic is that it was not originally intended for scholars and philosophers primarily, but for the common (albeit educated) reader, and remains one of the more accessible texts of ancient Greek philosophy.

In typical fashion, this is done in a dialogue fashion, with the lead character Socrates (fashioned after Plato's teacher, the great philosopher Socrates, although the words Socrates utters in this and many other Platonic dialogues are undoubtedly Plato's own). There is a discussion on method (the Sophist Thrasymachus shows up early to make disparaging comments about the Socratic method) whilst trying to determine an adequate definition of justice, as well as a discussion on the virtues and/or utility of wealth and old age early in the text. Socrates moves the discussion of justice away from the individual toward the communal, and this is where the political philosophy gets played out in full.

Book II shows the setting out of an ideal city (city-states being the most common form of political organisation in Greece at the time of Plato, with Athens and other cities competing for dominant role). Division of labour becomes an immediate necessity if a city grows beyond a small village setting, according to the theory here. These essentially become classes of people, with different rights and responsibilities, and different expectations of education and material well-being. The guardians or army class is the first one introduced, including an extensive discussion of the type of education and indoctrination such a class should have - this involves political and religious aspects.

It follows from this discussion that censorship is not only tolerated, but selectively preferred. The guardian class is elaborated upon - they are to be divided into rulers and helpers (officer and enlisted class, perhaps?), and they should live separately from the city they guard, owning no private property so as to not be corrupted or corruptible.

After establishing the just foundation of the city, the discussion returns to justice for the individual (interesting to note that what is not discussed is if justice is attainable in a non-ideal city). Justice, after all, is that state when everyone is doing what he or she should be doing, not meddling in other affairs, and exhibiting the virtues of moderation, wisdom, and courage. Justice becomes one of the virtues, and is part of an inner state of the soul of one living in such a society.

Interesting parts of the Republic include the very early idea for equal rights and responsibilities for women, particularly in the guardian class. It is unclear whether Plato was aware of how self-serving his dialogue would seem, since his argument leads to the `natural' conclusion that the only ones who could really be in charge in such an ideal city would be the philosophers. Plato is not an advocate for democracy, and pokes fun quite a bit at democratic structures; he similarly disapproves of most of other types of government (oligarchy, plutocracy, timocracy, etc.) - one can discern the frustrated politician here.

However, the real power of the Republic lies in Plato's remarkable images and metaphoric stories in the second half of the dialogue. These include his expositions on theories of the Forms, and trying to explain what the Good is, and how humankind interprets such things. The images of the ship, the Sun, and the men in the cave are powerful images that have lasted in popular literature since the time of Plato.

This is a classic of Western literature and of world literature.

The particular text here is from Benjamin Jowett's translation of 1873. It has been rendered into a form for public performance by actors; the editor makes the reasonable claim that Plato might have had the intention of having this acted out for and among the students. This same technique could be used to put more life into the material for present-day students. While the interpretation of the text may be a bit sketchy at times (there are much better editions available now than Jowett's), it still is an intriguing idea.