From the moment you begin this book, you will want to read it aloud and get caught up in the rhythm of the language..."Mrs. Sump doesn't much like seein' the orphans restin' or havin' any fun, so she puts 'em to scrubbin' the floor with toothbrushes. Even the ittiest, bittiest orphan, little Sweetness. So one day, Sweetness hit the road." Children appreciate the humor in the sheriff's attempts to rescue Sweetness from the perils in the desert.The illustrations are an interesting blend of mediums.This book is just plain, good ole fun.

This is the best of the California Young Reader nominees in it's catagory this year. I thought it was a real hoot, and I am adding it to our school library. It is funny and has a good message about adoption. I really think the children are going to have fun with this one.

Saving Sweetness is a very entertaining read-aloud. Children love the characters and are delighted with the humor. Some childrens comments have been: "I like the way that Mrs. Sump starts to say something about the orphans and then changes her mind and says it in a nicer way." " I think its funny that the sheriff thinks he is saving sweetness." The Illustrations are an extremely integral part of the story. In fact, the pictures add a dimension by presenting an aditional point of view.

Jaki's thesis is an interesting one--that Christian monotheism is the only worldview that makes science--such as we have it--possible. However, it causes problems in two ways. The first is theological--that it would seem to suggest that this-worldly successes such as Western science (and subsidiary benefits like modern medicine, agriculture, etc.) are traceable to Christianity, and this view tends to contradict Paul's teaching in 1st Corinthians about the foolishness of the cross. The second problem is that most of the advances in science occurred in the years following the enlightenment and were concurrent with the decline of Christianity in the West. However, Jaki suggests that it is the philosophy behind modern science, which arose out of late medieval scholasticism, that is impossible without Christianity. If that were true, though, one would expect the decline of science along with the rise of postmodern unreason.

Admittedly, Jaki is a brilliant mind, but his style failed to convey his thinking in a very coherent way. The book often seemed tangential. The anecdotes (such as the story of a young German's letter to Darwin) were extremely interesting. But it seemed to detract from the flow of the book.

There is much nonsense afoot that would have one believe that religion, especially Christianity and the Catholic Church, has always been hostile to science and greatly innhibited its progress. This view is plainly contrary to the facts. Many of the greatest scientists were sponsored and paid by the Church. In fact, many were members of a clerical order.

Consider this. If one were to take a wall map and draw an outline of the areas of the world that have seen the most scientific progress over the past 1000 years, and then draw an outline of the area of what one might call Christendom, one will find that the two outlines match up very closely. This could certainly not be the case if Christianity was hostile to science. Rather, just the opposite is true. If one wants to understand how this is so, Jaki's work is a great place to start.

This book is about the history of science, particularly the origin of science as we know it. Written from a Christian perspective, Jaki argues that Jesus himself is ultimately the savior of science. Jaki's review of ancient cultures such as Greece, Eqypt, China, and India is fascinating, as he explains how theological errors were the key factor that inhibited the development of science that came about in the Christian world. Fascinating reading.

This past school year was my last, as I just retired after 28 years. My ED class read, listened on tape, and studied the book Holes. Of course, we went on a field trip to see the movie - awesome!. Stanley Yelnat's Survival Guide makes a very good companion for the book. I even ordered it knowing I was retiring - for 2 reasons. One because I wanted to read it for myself and the second reason was to give it to other teachers if I found it worthwhile. Two very lucky teachers with be getting Stanley Yelnat's Survival Guide. Buy!!

I *loved* the book Holes, I've read it over ten times, so I was a little unsure if this would be as good. Stanley Yelnats Survival Guide to Camp Green Lake is hilarious, just as good as the original, Holes.

This book is written "by" Stanley Yelnats, so it's really funny to read about what he thinks. He uses sarcasam to tell you what went on after he left, everything about how each camper (in his tent) got there, how to avoid the wildlife, and what not to say to the campers. There are also quizzes, which are hilarious, but the highlight of the book is definately the appendix-type thing in the back, which explains why each camper was there, and they're laugh-out loud funny.

I recommend this book if you liked the book or movie Holes, you won't be disappointed, the only thing is, dont read it in public, because you will laugh out loud!

Overall grade: A+

good short little book. i enjoyed it but you really need to read holes otherwise you won't like this book... go see the movie too 'cos it was AWESOME!!!

We're big fans of Stanley, so this book was a natural choice for us. The book is not as detailed as the stories on the television show, but the story is good nonetheless, and the facts on tigers are great. The only downside is the CD-ROM. I was hoping for something as cool and fun as the activities and games on the Playhouse Disney website. Unfortunately, the CD-ROM's contents were very basic and I suspect that my 5-year old would rather go online than boot up the CD-ROM after a while. Other than that, I definitely recommend the book - just don't get your hopes up for the CD-ROM.

Fun to read with your grandkids, and a good story whether or not they have pets, especially cats.

Got a kid who wants a pet? How about one who loves animals? If you are nodding "yes, please, help get my sweet litle boy/girl off my back" then TIGER TIME FOR STANLEY is the answer to your prayers.

Critter loving Stanley (also the hero in Griff's previous book, SHARK-MAD STANLEY) starts wondering if a tiger would make a better pet than his cat, Elsie. You read along as Stanley rates the pros and cons of tiger life (ex: they are more exciting than cats, but they'd need MORE than just canned food...)

As in SHARK-MAD STANLEY, Griff (aka Andrew Griffin) combines a whimsical story with real animal facts (did you know that tigers don't purr...?) The computer generated illustrations are marvelous. But best of all for my money, it comes with an interactive CD-ROM takes readers into Stanley's world, complete with games, tiger facts, a screen saver, and Stanley's notebook to name just a few. A wonderful series, especialy for young animal lovers.

I should begin by saying this is a very good book and I would have liked to have given it three and a half stars; but Rosen's willful omissions prevent me from rounding up. Cutting to the quick we can say that Rosen's interpretation of Nietzsche as here presented comes to this: Nietzsche's teaching is twofold and follows roughly esoteric and exoteric doctrines that are incompatible. The esoteric doctrine is that all truth and reality is Chaos and ultimately unknowable. There is no ontology or epistemology found in Nietzsche. The exoteric doctrine is of will to power and eternal return and attempts to create a quasi Platonic distinction between noble and base values by jettisoning the Christian morality that has overtaken Plato's exoteric teaching and championing a more aristocratic system of valuation. Rosen tells us these two aspects of Nietzsche's thought are contradictory and therefore leave us unable to follow Nietzsche one way or the other.

This is Rosen's attempt to cover his own Nietzscheanism (his own esoteric teaching) by shrouding the thought of Nietzsche in a self contradicting duality. We have reason to reach this conclusion because Rosen tells us that he accepts Nietzsche's critique of Western kultur but does not believe Nietzsche's rhetoric is appropiate for his task. In this Rosen is more or less (and a I am not sure which) in line with his mentor Leo Strauss. However, Rosen never attempts to explain to us why Nietzsche is at great pains to tell us he is not a skeptic or why the Ubermensch is talked about in book one of Zarathustra but not the rest of Zarathustra and does not return ever again in the rest of Nietzsche's work. Rather, the writings that follow Zarathustra refer to eternal recurrence and the most important lesson of Nietzsche's teaching, not the Ubermensch. I submit that Rosen--who is quite exceptional, as Nietzsche would say--does not simply fail to examine these aspects of Nietzsche thought because he does not recognize them. The truth of the matter is that Nietzsche's thought is one of naturalistic materialism (which Rosen tells us) that affirms that being is both chaos and order. (This, incidentally, prefigures contemporary scientific cosmological theories.) The doctrines of will to power and eternal return are "ontological" and put forward by Nietzsche as explanations of order that results from Chaos. Nietzsche's political philosophy is based on his naturalistic ontology, which does indeed correspond to Plato's political philosophy, with a great deal more "brutal frankness," as Rosen says. Is is Nietzsche's brutal frankness about dangerous truth that makes Rosen wary. Again, Rosen accepts the truth as Nietzsche tells it, but does not agree (like Plato) that it should be revealed. "With all its compelling beauty and profundity, Nietzsche's portrait is a distortion of the Platonic conception he attempted to assimilate" (249).

"Nietzsche, as the pale criminal, has nothing to lose: Either he will succeed in clearing the way for an epoch amenable to the happy few, or he will fail, and the inevitable epoch of the last men will institute itself, as would have been the case had he not launched his revolutionary campaign" (92). As Rosen knows, this is not exactly the order of events as Nietzsche described them. The epoch of the last men has arrived and will pre-date the philosophers of the future. In the preface to _The Mask of Enlightenment_ Rosen suggests that we read Laurence Lampert's book on Zarathustra, _Nietzsche's Teaching_, as a supplement to his. This is good advice. For Lampert explains the "way out of the labyrinth" that Rosen is content to leave un in.

This is the most intelligent commentary on Zarathustra yet written. Stanley Rosen's book is heedful of Nietzsche's warning that Zarathustra is a book for "every man and for no man." This work reveals the genuinely conservative nature of Nietzsche's thought.

Nietzsche is a man who was centuries ahead of his time. Buy this book

Lots of great old pictures. It covers all of Nevada so it is not very detailed on specific sites.

Lots of great pictures. Gave it 4 stars because information of ghost towns is not very detailed.

This is it. The Gold Standard. After 28 years, nothing else out there comes close, not even his own Illustrated Atlas of same.

Another great read from Brian Bain. Wonderfully offbeat settings and interesting characters are combined in cleverly crafted stories that tip the hat to the classics of detective fiction. The stories remain lean but still intrigue, with just the right scattering of clues for the reader; they are modern stories with a great old-fashioned feel. highly recommended!

"Quartet" contains four short stories, continuing the author's Dr. Stanley Highstreet mystery series that began with the well-written novel, "The Eighth Method." The stories are reminiscent of the lean, plot-driven detective novels of the '30's & '40's and display an appreciation for the traditional school of mystery writing. Intelligent mysteries for the reader to solve alongside Dr. Highstreet and P.I. Zetrower Hill. Brian Bain is a gifted storyteller, and has developed some memorable characters.

Many of us who survived English Lit learned to loathe the short story. Very few writers can tell a tale briefly. Mr. Bain is one of the few. The reader is satisfied at the end of every story/novella.

The clues are fair and the misdirection is classic Christie. These are light mysteries but there is an undertone that lets the reader know that in real life the author thoroughly disapproves of murder.

A most enjoyable read.

Stanley Rosen has developed quite a reputation for challenging philosophical orthodoxies. The latest, and to a certain extent currently reigning, orthodoxy is Heidegger's conception of the history of metaphysics or Platonism. Of course in Heidegger's history metaphysics reached its culmination with Nietzsche. Therefore Rosen thoroughly examines Heidegger's interpretation of both Plato and Nietzsche, with significant attention to Plato's immediate successor, Aristotle, and Nietzsche's own predecessor Kant.

Rosen argues that Heidegger mistakenly imputed Aristotle's ontology of being qua being to Plato. In a rich and detailed analysis Rosen shows how Heidegger surreptitiously conflates Aristotle's categories to Plato's Ideas, all of which is connected to Heidegger's "discovery" of the ontological difference of Being and beings. Incidentally, Rosen states that Heidegger's initial (pre _Being and Time_) interpretation of Plato is much closer to being correct than his later interpretation because there he leaves much of Platonic ontological ambiguity in tact. Rosen is a well known proponent of the dramatic school of interpretion of the Platonic dialogues.

Now, in order to give a full exegesis of Heidegger's history of metaphysics, Platonism, Rosen also thoroughly analyzes Heidegger's reading of Nietzsche. Much of Rosen's reading centers on Nietzsche's and Heidegger's analysis of Nietzsche's notion of nihilism. Rosen sides with Nietzsche's interpretation of nihilism against Heidegger and states "[m]y remarks...have had more than one purpose, but not the least of these is to support the contention that Heidegger's interpretation of Nietzschean nihilism is unsound. If Nietzsche, as a political thinker, forgot about the absence of Being, he was well advised to do so. As a matter of fact, the nihilism of the nineteenth century and by entension twentieth century had and has nothing to do with either the forgetting or the remembering of the absence of Being. It arose for the reasons given in detail by Nietzsche..." (288).

Rosen is extremely well versed in the history of philosophy and an unquestionable expert on Plato. _The Question of Being_ is, as others have pointed out, difficult. Rosen is not difficult in the way of Heidegger by creating neologisms but rather in the conceptual power and complexity of his thought. Doubtless Heideggerians would object to what they would see as the reductive aspects of Rosen's reading of Heidegger. Here we could respond with Rosen that excising some of Heidegger's obscurantism is necessary if we are to actually get anything out of Heidegger's "creative" language. If we can read Heidegger only on Heidegger's terms then constructive dialogue is not possible. I have given this book four rather than five stars because of Rosen's political reasons for giving a salutary intepretation of Nietzschean _physis_.

This book is vintage Rosen, which means any number of both good and bad things. Let's begin with the positive. Rosen is one of the most intelligent philosophy professors in America today. He is a maverick extremely well-grounded in the great works of the tradition, and a strong enough personality to cut his own path amidst the hundreds of slavish devotees of today's most fashionable philosophical currents. At times, he also displays a hilarious mastery of polemical writing techniques. Anyone reading his books is bound to end up with a renewed appreciation for the virtues of intellectual independence.

But the bad is here as well. As Nietzsche once wrote of the work of Ernst Renan, there often seems to be more ambition than love of truth in these pages. Rosen is a committed if somewhat unorthodox Platonist, and he spends an awful lot of time writing books about authors for whom he has no philosophical sympathy whatsoever, Heidegger among them. While the final product is a commentary far more interesting than those of Heidegger's rather bland followers, Rosen's goal is ultimately nothing more than to cut Heidegger down to size. The result of this ought to be a fine defense of an ancient thinker against the premature revolutionary claims of 20th century philosophy, but the arrogance of the author's tone is simply that of a competitive academic defending his turf. The book also suffers from some stylistic awkwardness-- taken alone, many of its metaphors are quite striking, but the overall effect of the prose is choppy, even nervous.

Rosen's works are among the most original philosophical writings being published today. Their petulant and often rambling style can be off-putting at first, but the patient reader will be amply repaid for her efforts.

While I agree with the previous reviewer's assessment of Rosen's originality it seems that there is a bit of confusion which I think should be clarified. This book is a careful, profoundly original discussion of Heidegger's misunderstanding of Plato and how it fundamentally colored the rest of his thinking. In order to clarify where Heidegger went wrong Rosen deems it necessary to embark on lengthy, difficult discussions of Plato, Aristotle, Kant, and Nietzsche. He also deems it necessary to take an occasional swipe at some of Heidegger's less-talented progeny as they are oblivious to the very difficulties their misreadings imply and their influence within the Academy is undeniable. Furthermore, in the case of Plato, it becomes necessary to "save" the dialogues from their many positivist admirers and interpreters. The tone of the book is not so much polemical as exegetical, and it is studded with Rosen's subtle humor. [N.B. This may be the source of the previous reviewer's accusations of "arrogance" ie. the self-confidence of the knower as opposed to the tentative gropings of the blind.]

Rosen's "platonism" is not the neo-platonism which has been handed down to us by Iamblichus, Albinus, and Plotinus but a substantially "deeper" platonism which does not assume that the dialogues were loaded with metaphysical dogma. To paraphrase Rosen, the history of "platonism" begins with Aristotle. From this standpoint the literary structure of the dialogues are as important as the allegedly "technical" discussions of "doctrines" which have been canonized in the secondary literature. Rosen's sympathies always lie with Plato but he is very careful to cite instances where he agrees with Heidegger, Nietzsche, or Kant. Indeed, his judicious and balanced discussions of these men lay bare the fundamental problems which each philosopher was attempting to confront and overcome. He does not, however, spare any of these men when their conclusions went awry. No sound writing should avoid this responsibility, though it can be done well or done poorly, depending upon the writer.

The book engages in a lengthy discussion of Heidegger's misinterpretation of "greek ontology" and in particular with regards to Plato. Rosen demonstrates the untenability of Heidegger's claims about a "general concept of being" animating greek philosophy. He also engages in an original reading of the central section of Plato's "Phaedo" as a way of contrasting Plato's slippery discussion with Heidegger's static, professorial interpretation. In effect we are led to realize that Heidegger read into Plato (and Aristotle) what he wanted to in order to make certain claims about them later on. Rosen also spends a bit of time on Heidegger's own political nihilism which he perceives as being fundamentally grounded in his philosophy. Along the way Rosen points out how Nietzsche's claims to having overcome Plato are really just less coherent instances of a quasi-platonic teaching and that Kant's transcendental ego is fundamentally flawed.

As the title of my review indicates, this book is not for the "uninitiated." It delves very deeply into areas of philosophy which most will find baffling. If, however, you want a challenging, profound discussion of philosophy and some of its most famous practitioners this book will reward many a careful reading. It will remind the reader that philosophy isn't the logic-chopping or ethical blather which we hear so often today, but is, has been, and always will be about what is the best life and how can we lead it.

Fans of the original series know of Richard Matheson's
stellar thirteen episodes, which include some of the finest in the series: "The Invaders", "Death Ship", "Nightmare at 20,000 Feet". And at long last, here they are in readable form.
Unfortunately, the two volumes offer little more than
the scripts themselves. Those familiar with the "TZ Companion"
by Zicree and the newly-released "TZ Scripts of Earl Hamner"
(with commentary by Tony Albarella) know of the in-depth commentary offered for nearly all the episodes.
Stanley Wiater does little more than repeat what has
been said elsewhere about Matheson's episodes. No
real analyses or significant insight precedes the
scripts themselves, thus making the book rather uninteresting
on the whole.

This book is exactly what it says. It is a collectin f stories by Richard Matheson that are used in the original Twilight zone. These are NOT a set of short stories. They are scripts that you can follow along with while watching the story on TV. If that is what you enjoy, then this book is exactly what you want. It delivers what you expect.

"The Twilight Zone" has long been acknowledged as a television classic. Not only can episodes still be seen on the SciFi Channel, but the show has also proven to be a durable video and DVD best seller.

The stories presented on the show are intelligent and have a timeless quality and charm about them that makes even repeated viewings seem new. One of the main reasons for this is the contributions of Richard Matheson. A noted sci-fi and horror novelist with several books turned into classic movies ("Incredible Shrinking Man", "I Am Legend", which became "The Last Man on Earth", and later "The Omega Man" with Charlton Heston, and "Whatever Dreams May Come"), Matheson was a master of the short story, a style perfect for the 30 minute "Twilight Zone" format. While the scripts cannot fully take the place of the televised story, reading them is like reading a short story, with the advantage that the reader is able to see how the story is constructed from scene to scene.

The scripts included in this volume are as follows: "The Last Flight", A World of Difference", "A World of His Own", "Nick of Time" (Who can forget the sight of William Shatner feeding penny after penny into the fortune telling machine with the Devil's head?), "The Invaders" (Agnes Moorehead versus tiny invaders from another world. It was the first episode I saw as a child and continues to scare me.), "Once Upon a Time", "Little Girl Lost", and "Young Man's Fancy".

For those who loved the series or just for those who love a good script.

Fans of the original series know of Richard Matheson's
stellar thirteen episodes, which include some of the finest in the series: "The Invaders", "Death Ship", "Nightmare at 20,000 Feet". And at long last, here they are in readable form.
Unfortunately, the two volumes offer little more than
the scripts themselves. Those familiar with the "TZ Companion"
by Zicree and the newly-released "TZ Scripts of Earl Hamner"
(with commentary by Tony Albarella) know of the in-depth commentary offered for nearly all the episodes.
Stanley Wiater does little more than repeat what has
been said elsewhere about Matheson's episodes. No
real analyses or significant insight precedes the
scripts themselves, thus making the book rather uninteresting
on the whole.

At my camp, we recently performed a play in two acts using "Mute" from this collection, and "Nick of Time" from the other. These are easy to follow scripts, and are great bed reading.

This sceond volume of Richard Matheson's classic scripts for "The Twilight Zone," covers his work for the 1963-64 seasons. Scripts included in this volume are as follows:
"Mute"
"Death Ship"
"Steel" (Great performance by Lee Marvin)
"Nightmare at 20,000 Feet" (The classic with William Shatner. Much better than its remake in "Twilight Zone: The Movie")
"Night Call"
"Spur of the Moment"

Like the first volume, worth your money and time.