I was very disappointed with this book. From our extant sources, the Stoics' holistic conception of life was backed up with a rich web of interdependent propositions and rigorous argumentation. In Becker's book, I was stunned to find the school's most influential thinker (Chrysippus of Soli) reduced to a total of eleven references.

I seriously doubt Stoicism can be practiced without a naturalistic ontology. Immediately, Becker divorces Stoicism from the very core of its set of beliefs: the organic "hegemonikon" which the Stoics posited ruled the universe. Rejecting the inherent teleology of this view leads one right into a suspension of interdependent "meaning" for events (lekta, as the Stoics called it), which in turn leads one to a type of skepticism.

As the founder Zeno himself likened it, the Stoic practice was a threefold whole, and one could not separate them without collapsing the structure--their logic, which underpinned the spoken proposition, was meant to be isomorphic with the causal nexus of the physical world; their ethics for the most part hinged upon aligning ones' own "hegemonikon" with the "hegemonikon" of the universe; and their physics, with its Herclitean concept of the "guiding fire" tied the individual subject, who was in possession of a single spark of the same, to the guiding fire of the whole. Our reason, our possession of the logos, allows us to choose to align ourselves or not to the "greater will" which called us into existence in the first place. Virtue can result, in a physical way, from the very perception of this continuum (this is another Stoic innovation--that a physical change occurs...We may liken this today to a change in brain chemistry, or activity in the central nervous system, a "Stoic calm" which results from "receiving the will of God").

A disappointing book of academic philosophy. Stoicism is meant to be lived, not studied. This book suffers from the same problem as most modern philosophy:it is an endless academic debate with little real purpose. The same problem that has moved philosophy to the back burner of academia. If you want to learn about a philosophy that has true value, that of teaching others to live a happy life, read Seneca or Marcus Aurelius.

I spent much time considering why I would ever want to undertake the maximally arduous task of perfecting (improving) my agency, which Becker advocates. Why improve my agency when I could be lying on the couch watching reruns?

Here is Becker's best argument why I might want to try to perfect my agency: "Further reflection reveals that even if my most comprehensive and controlling endeavor is solely to perfect the exercise of my agency based upon the sort of practical reasoning that I ought to do, and if I succeed in that endeavor, then I will by definition succeed in optimizing the success of all my endeavors - over my whole life" (116).

So that's it then. The key to maximizing success in life is the perfection of one's agency. That would be remarkable if it were true.

This book would be better as over-the-top Tony Robbins style self-help: "be the best you can be: perfect your agency now!" As it is, the very real insight is lost somewhere in the forest of verbosity. That's too bad, because Becker might have hit upon the secret of maximizing the success of all our endeavors over our whole lives after all - and that secret can be yours for just [$$]

This book is good for the smarter-than-average right-winger. If you are suspicious of any ideology, specially about those that claim to have easy solutions to the world's problems, then you are not going to like this book, like me.

This is a collection of articles Becker has published during his career as an economic contributer to Business Week. After having read some of Becker's other books, I came to the conclusion that this book is two things:
1) An easy to understand intro to the usage of economic principles to solve problems. Becker's other books were essentially on similar topics, but with a much more rigorous analysis.
2) An intro to new topics that could be approached from a much more rigorous standpoint. Becker's curious mind actually points out to many issues (such as immigration, affirmative action, and many other gov't issues) that would benefit from a more rigorous economic approach.

Good entertainment value, with about 80% of essays really interesting and the rest fillers.

Despite the Beckers' clear and obvious conservative bias, this is a pretty good book and well worth reading for anyone who wants to learn more about economics. For less slanted books, I would recommend "The Armchair Economist" and "Naked Economics."

A real big waste of money.
On the cover of the book says Free Stuff, as soon as I got this book I looked inside. Most of the stuff you get cost a dollar or two, there's maybe two things out of the whole book that are free and there not even good.
They shouldn't have named this book Free Stuff at all.

There are a lot of nice items to send away for. My Mom and Dad both get ideas and things for us to do from the book. The craft kits in the book, some of which want a dollar or two for postage are nice.

As a clinical herbalist myself, I am excited to find a book that both honors my avoction and the old religion. This book was first introduced to me at Herb school and I longed for a copy to gift my grandchildren with. I now have a grandson and I am ordering a copy for myself as well. I teach herbal day camp and this will be a loving addition to my teaching. the story is instructional as well as fun for adults and children alike. The plants also are ecstatic with the book, (I read it to them!) I highly recommend this to all earth loving plant loving peoples

a great book, my children enjoyed it, I enjoyed it, offers the fairy tale magic and the wholesome herbal knowledge - lovely illustration too

I purchased this book because I thought it was a revised and expanded edition of the Joy of Cooking book I already have and enjoy. The REVISED and EXPANDED words on the cover lead me to believe I was purchasing even more and different recipes than the original, but it is the exact book! I also purchased the other one stating the same misleading words in bold print on the cover. I am very disappointed and cannot return them because I didnt make this discovery within the 30 day limit. I believe it should be clearly stated that these are merely paperback editions of the hard back Joy of Cooking which I have purchased several copies as gifts for family and friends as it is a wonderful cookbook.

The Joy of Cooking has made cooking a truly satisfying experience for me. But it's much more than a recipe book for great food. If you ever wanted to know how to choose fresh fish at the market, or how to use foil when baking or any of the hundreds of questions you have when cooking but have no one to ask, you'll find many answers here.This book is a treasure trove for cooks or would be cooks. It encourages you to choose the best ingredients, the freshest herbs when cooking for your family. The dishes are simply delicious with a high nutritive content. This book is simply a must buy

In my whole life, (quite long), I have bought a lot of books. I have also bought a lot of magic books. I have never returned a book to a store and asked for my money back - until I bought this one. Not only is it a bad book, but it is actually distasteful. It is very reminiscent of his performance which I saw on a TV talk show - his only object seems to be to denigrate magicians, which he did by performing magic very badly. Even Valentino was more entertaining than this man and his book. Avoid it.

I was startled by this book. IT IS GREAT. By far, the best magic book I have ever read. I am now searching for another copy to give as a gift.

It isn't really fair for me to rate these, since they weren't at all what I expected. There are no pictures, except for a pen and ink type depiction of the subject himself. The cards are about 3 x 5 inches and are basically in typical trivia card format (question on one side, answer on the other). If you or your family are REALLY into Shakespeare, these might be for you. If you are not, but would like to learn more about him, these again would be for you. If you have only a little interest about the author and his life, skip them

This tract does provide interesting factual details about one of the 20th century's most feared terrorist cells. But it is a relic of its time--blatant propaganda meant to combat the public sympathy these terrorists' sacrifices had elicited. Even someone wholly against violence, as I am, will empathize with the bravery and idealism of those who risk extermination in support of a cause. Becker has no such empathy, and is obviously so choked with loathing for her subjects that she cannot render them as vivid human beings.

Becker's constant sarcasm, and her cynicism about the motives of anyone whose politics she disagrees with, are unbecoming of a journalist. And I was disappointed by her tendency to toe the official line--depicting these violent activists as common criminals, and downplaying their suffering and the social confusion that made their youthful extremism explicable. Something powerful and relevant could have been gained here, especially given the feminism of the Red Army Faction and the social anomie that spawned it. The principals themselves were interesting enough to merit a more balanced treatment than this. And the grand-standing references to Hitler are incredibly shallow and racist.

All in all, an informative, thorough, but sadly biased record. I only hope it saved some lives.

This book should be returned to print. Ms. Becker's book is very well documented and is aided greatly by the fact that she doesn't buy into any romantic notions of the RAF's bravery, commitment, or moral sensitivity. She does point out that the early student protests in Germany had just cause and she does take the Berlin police to task for shooting Benno Ohnesorg and for exonerating the policeman responsible ("It was a whitewash.").

A previous reviewer writes: "Even someone wholly against violence, as I am, will empathize with the bravery and idealism of those who risk extermination in support of a cause." Would he (or she)make the same observation about Timothy McVeigh? Or the members of the Manson Family? The only difference between McVeigh and the Unabomber is political philosophy. What is brave about planting a bomb in a car or a building where innocent people can get killed? Did any of these groups or people ever once directly engage soldiers or even the police?

At one point in the notes at the back of this book, Ms. Becker makes an observation that defines these groups and fashionable leftism in a nutshell: "...postwar middle class children in the prosperous societies which alone can afford these 'hip' politics were educated to believe in compassion as a sentiment rather than justice as a principle."

Some of the writing is a little sloppy and one does occasionally wish Ms. Becker would keep her opinions a little more in the background--she was, perhaps, reacting to the hip cachet that groups like the RAF had (and still have) among the affluent left intelligentsia.

Try to pick up the 1978 edition, which has some up-to-date info about later RAF actions and the suicides of the leaders. Read this book and your ideas about what's going on in places like Seattle and Genoa will change a little.

In this extraordinarily well-researched and highly readable study, the author traces the rise of terrorism in West Germany in the late 1960s, finding its roots in the New Left student protest movement. She shows how a small group of affluent, educated, young men and women, starting off as 'pacifists' - for unilateral Western nuclear disarmament, and against American intervention in Vietnam - went on after the protest movement itself had subsided to use extreme violence against their neighbors, laying bombs in public places to kill and maim indiscriminately. The Rote Armee Fraktion, otherwise known as the Baader-Meinhof gang, declared itself to be Communist. At the same time other terrorist groups, similarly constituted, acted in the name of Anarchism. But whatever the pretext, none had a visible or discoverable cause of its own to struggle for, and the author rightly looks for explanation in the heads of the young mass-murderers themselves. She finds it in their desire to distinguish themselves from their parents' generation. Yet with their fanaticism and destructiveness, anti-Semitism, ruthlessness, cruel and murderous methods, and their hatred of Western democracy, these epigoni resemble their Nazi forebears more than they differ from them.

'Hitler's Children' is by far the best book yet written on the 1968 New Left rebellion and its aftermath in Europe. Jillian Becker is an English novelist and fact-book writer. She sets out the facts in a cool and witty style, and for the most part lets them speak for themselves. To call her book 'self-serving' as one reader-critic does, cannot be justified. She clearly had no interest in the people and events she describes other than as an investigative writer. In London recently I bought the third editon, published by Pickwick Books, which provides a publishing history. Although first commissioned by J.B.Lippincott Company, New York - and subsequently translated into many European languages and Japanese - the later English-language editions have not been published in the United States; but as they cover more ground, and bring the story to its actual conclusion by dealing with the next generation of West German terrorists, they are to be recommended above the first edition.

Actually, this book is amusing and might make a fun gag gift for a golfer, but as a guide to the rules and subtleties of golfs gambling games, it is of little use. My copy goes in my pal's Xmas stocking.

A cute novelty item, but not really useful. Johnston's book "The Complete Book of Golf Games" is much better.

I was hoping to get more information than this book provides. I have found all the same information on the internet, if not more, than is contained in these pages. In fact, most of the book highlights the history of betting and some of golf's more renown gamblers. the actual betting games section of the book is pretty small.

The best part of the book is that it comes with "Don't Choke" ball markers that are great to mark an opponents ball with.

As a stocking stuffer the book is fine, as an end all and be all to golf side betting, it doesn't cut it.

The guy who wrote this book likes to drop names such as Andre Kole (world-famous prop builder) and David Copperfield (not the Dickens' one) as "friends and consultants". He also states he worked on stage with live cougars, that once his audience doubled in laughters as he blotched a levitation number, and that his son likes to illustrate - thus he did the illustrations for this book.

Well, guess what. I am only prepared to believe the latter two.

This book is a hodge-podge of "exposures" in any and every branch of illusionism: you get stuff like "snuff a candle 'hidden' behind a bottle" right to "how to make the Space Shuttle disappear". And you know what? In many many cases he doesn't get it right.

The explanations usually go like: "Then of course in the specially designed crate you have an invisible wireless two-way communication device, and an undetectable set of scuba diving gear...". Come on! Maybe I'm not the best expert in the field, but it doesn't take much to understand that in the real world things just don't work this way!
Actually, I'm amazed that he didn't try to sell the "Copperfield flies on hidden supermagnets" theory, as it ranks in the same cookiness range.

He does in fact get right the usual small tricks your uncle Ben used to do at the dining table - simply because they're printed and spelled oud everywhere already.

Bottom line: get some serious "how to" book instead of this, and please someone tell Kole, Sigfried & Roy and Copperfield that this guy is badmouthing them.

This book disrespects magic by focusing on exposure. It reveals tricks in a way that destroys the illusion for the audience. It does not explain how to present the magic effectively, being designed to sell books more than promote the art. This book is useless for magicians and disillusioning for the audience. Before you buy this book, ask yourself, "Do I want to have the feeling of wonder I have for magic removed by crass explanations?" If you want to learn about magic there are much better places than this.

Expose? I would say not, educational, for sure!

Worth the money, sure, why not.