A well written book on the whole especially for beginners like me. Unfortunately, the book does lack mathematical examples.

Microeconomics is the field of play where Rubenfield slays the dragon. But in this case the dragon is microeconomics. And Rubinfield doesnt use a sword or even a crude bomb. He uses words to dismantle microecomics in a simple easy to uses book. I say, take a bow Rubinfeld, your works will live forever in the halls of Economics. Same to you Pindick. Pindick has easily shown how supply and demand weld together to show market price. Basically, this Pindick man is a genius. I cant recommend this book enough.

I've used this book in an intermediate micro course at Berkeley, and I have to say that this is one of the best written economics books I've read. One of its greatest advantages is the clarity of explanation and abundance of visual aid such as graphs and tables throughout the book to support the material. The graphs get a bit complicated towards the last chapters, but that's only because the material that needs to be illustrated through those graphs gets complicated as well.

Second, even though I've had extensive economics background, the book could be suitable for beginners. The first two chapters give a concise overview of a basic Econ 1 course, explaining the basics of supply and demand, market structure, etc. - everything a person with little economics background needs to know to be able to understand this book. However, if you find this book to simple for you, keep in mind that Prentice Hall publishes it as "Intermediate Economics" - for use in 2nd or 3rd year in an undergraduate economics program.

Unlike many other econ textbooks I've encountered, this book is neither math-heavy nor theory-heavy - it has a good balance of theoretical information coupled with enough mathematical examples to get the message across. However, many students (and some reviewers on this website) find that there aren't enough examples and exercises (with answers) in the book - for that I'd HIGHLY recommend getting the Student Study Guide. It quickly summarizes each chapter (good for emergency test/quiz studying) and provides plenty of sample problems as it summarizes the concepts. It also includes a quick chapter quiz and gives the solutions to all problems found in the Study Guide.

Also unlike most outdated econ textbooks today, this one includes excellent chapters on Game Theory and pricing strategies. I've heard from a few business majors here at Berkeley that they're encouraged to read those two chapters as good examples of how these concepts apply to business and economics. The book features many "Sample Boxes" - small paragraphs on how the current topic of discussion has been applied in the real world. This helps understand that economics is a real science (in a sense that it can produce theories that are testable in the real world) and has some useful applications.

Overall, this is a very good economics textbook for intermediate microeconomics. The book alone deserves 4 stars, but coupled with the study guide, it's definitely a 5.

I find Barbour's book deeply offensive on several counts. First and foremost is the assumption underlying his entire project that somewhow science provides a kind of massive analogy for metaphysical speculation (see page 180). It is as if one has to forget the Kant ever lived. And this isn't just a small analogy here and there that Barbour is attempting. It is supremely monolithic. His basic working premise within his larger assumption -- of science driving our knowledge of God -- is that there is some kind of "dynamic and interconected" reality in the cosmos (ibid.). Changing, but still there (remember Kant?)in some kind of "intial aim" and "coherence." Of course Barbour is hanging his hopes on the eventuality of that greatest of all the secular desiderata -- a unified field theory. And what will that look like. Kind of like Anselm's God that is even greater than that which we CANNOT conceive?
But forget Kant, he is too difficult, too old, too dead. Let's talk Pomo. This is after all "ontic-theology" writ large across the entire cosmosmology. And you thought "phallo-logocentricism" died along with the dinsosaurs? Well wake up all you Branch Derrideans, you slumbering skeptics! Here comes Barbour! With yet another remake of Whitehead-does-God. How many categories do you we need? 138 at my last counting! (Only 7 in Process and Reality -- you better keep reading!) Boys and girls, do we got boxes for you! But we can now rest assured, God is not dead. On the contrary, he has been fully cataloged, compartmentalized, duly noted, and filed away, perhaps, for further use. Barbour has managed to de-transcedentalize the transcendal signifier in ways that Caputo, Taylor and Vattim could never even of imagined.
But I am not even sure if Barbour's God was ever transcendental. "It" surely was never omnipotent (page 326). And if God is not ominpotent then what of "transcendence"? What exactly might "God" be other than just another sytematically ambiguous signifier? -- not even a "transcendental" one! (Mixing my Wittgenstein and Derrida here -- but don't worry, Barbour has apparently read neither).
This "God" of Barbour's, like all of Process theology, is a God stripped of the history of the Christian Church. It is a new God, a better God, a one-size-fits-all. This is that weird kind of old liberal theology which will not die its final death, because it is kept alive on the artificail life support of that one strain of ossified university, seminary and divinity School style of theology. Stripped of the stories of Jesus, of the martyrs, of the councils, the great debates, the wars and the saints, we have a theology with out "theos," an "ology" with no subject matter but the metaphysical speculation of an obsolete professional class.
And ethics? Is there any sense of ethical resposibiltiy or obligation in this sytstem without a heart and without a face? There is an "interrelatedness" in this "continued journey toward greater harmony and enrichment" certainly (page 326). And is that supposed to be meaningful? The furthest Barbour can drag himself towards the ethical, is too quote that other dinosaur John Hick and say that the world is "an appropriate place for moral action" (page 302). Oh boy! But "process thought goes further" says Barbour (the excitment is almost unbearable). Because process theology knows that "evoulution is a long, slow, step-by-step process." Wow! Inspired for moral action and duty yet? I would say that is about as exciting as Walter Rauschenbusch, Hebert Spencer, and the rest of the social gospelers and evolutionists of over a hundred years ago.
If your idea of God is an amoral "process" stripped of all historicity and neatly compartmentalized for any liberal view, this is the book for you. Obviously, the only requirement for you to join the club, is that you must view all conservative Christians as "literalists," "absolutists," and equivialant to "nazis" (pages 82-85). Well, that should just about take care of half of all the practicing Christians in America. No need to "dialogue" with them! Kind of makes you wonder who the book was written to in the first place? (Maybe that tiny set of liberal "process" academicians of a dinosaur-persuasion?)

Barbour's book is interesting and, I think, worth a careful read. The first part of the book, which focuses on the historical dialogue between science and religion, is particularly good. His treatment of modern scientific thought and some of the controversies therein is worthwhile, as well. The author emphasizes the interrelatedness of science and religion and the respective ways in which they create knowledge. It is pretty clear that Barbour writes from a liberal, pluralist Christian perspective. Most of his examples and expertise seem to focus on the Christian tradition but he does talk about Buddhism a bit. The position that is perhaps least represented is that of the conservative, Bible believer. This book is best read as a summary of various philosophies as Barbour's theology is flawed.

Barbour is known for his expertise involving the connection between science and religion. As a student of science/theology this is the best treatise i've seen on this subject. It will serve very nicely as a textbook and for personal reading.It should be part of every library. It will definitely go down as a classic.

Even when two writers write well, collaboration is an itchy thing. Unless the pair is deliberately writing two different voices, they must carefully mesh their styles and dialog into a seamless narrative designed to maintain the illusion that the book you are holding is a cohesive and unified whole. When done well, it can be a beautiful thing; two voices telling the same tale, adding idea to idea and raising the entire project to a sublime place.

If the writers are unqualified hacks, however, the mess resembles the result of a Creative Writing 101 final after the TA trips while carrying the manuscripts.

Can you guess into which category "Shadows Bend" falls?

Unqualified ha...I mean, writers David Barbour and Richard Raleigh have imagined a world in which two famous pulp writers meet in order to drop a coin into the jukebox from Hell in order to prevent the end of the world as we know it. "Oh," you think. "It's going to be that kind of novel."

Though HP Lovecraft and "Conan" creator Robert E. Howard never met, Barbour and Raleigh ask us to imagine that they did. Also, that Cthulhu and the rest of the Old Ones are real and trying to rend the fabric of time and space in order to occupy our universe. Also, that any godlike being would think our universe was worth occupying, but that's another matter completely.

It's an interesting premise, interesting enough to get me to plunk down my money and take my chance. But the result is something less than promised.

Lovecraft and Howard set off on a nostalgia tour down Route 66 in order to destroy "the artifact" that would allow the Old Ones into our parking space. Along the way they meet Glory, a college-educated former prostitute who has read the works of Lovecraft and Howard, as well as that of Clarke Ashton, who makes a brief appearance later, who joins them in their travels. Terrible things happen. They save the universe. Blah blah blah.

My quibbles with this novel are large, broad ones. Well, I have small, subtle ones, but I won't bore you with them unless you write and ask for them. First, it appears that Raleigh and Barbour did not even read one another's work as they wrote. In some chapters Robert Howard, a Texan, is portrayed as a fellow with a decent command of English. In others, he nearly eats the scenery by aw-shucksin' his way through his dialog like a cartoon cowboy. Second, do I really need to point out how damned unlikely it is that a woman in the late thirties would be educated in medieval literature, read pulp fiction and work as a prostitute? Third, Lovecraft is written as though he were Oscar Wilde or Quentin Crisp. Fourth, why didn't someone tell Barbour and Raleigh that Southwestern Indians aren't the cool mystical minority they once were? Fifth, well, the ending is so lame you won't believe it. I would assume that the reason a writer would want to include historical characters in a modern novel is because he has something to say about that person, or that person is just the right character on which to hang the plot. In this novel, Barbour and Raleigh might just as well have written about *me*. *I* can slip a coin into a slot, too. And I bet I would have picked the right one the first time out.

If you're a Lovecraft or Howard fan, you might want to read this, but my guess is that it would be just too painful to see these two men massacred in print like this. If you read only one book using Lovecraft and Howard as characters this year, um, on second thought, read something else.

This book was a severe disappointment. The writers have no grasp of characterization: HPL is portrayed as a mincing wimp, REH as a thuggish nitwitted goon. The dialogue is excruciatingly bad throughout. The plot (what there is of it) is ludicrous, especially since it contradicts itself. Basically, Our Heroes team up with the Happy Hooker to thwart some shoggoths (currently masquerading as a dust-free black sedan) to stop some extradimensional invaders who can't make up their mind whether they want a heavy, carcinogenic, chameleon-like McGuffin put into a cave or not. REH's father is portrayed as a cross between Hannibal Lector and Herbert West, and he's left to perform the ULTIMATE primal scene (as Freud called it) in Bobby's dreams, while the authors put an unpleasantly sexist slant on HPL's well-known dislike of fish. Add a truly imbecilic scene in which HPL and REH exchange potty jokes and you've got the whole picture. This was so out of character that I wanted to throw the stupid book out of the window.

I'm an old fan of pulp fiction, and the works of Lovecraft, Howard, Smith, et al. I found out about this book through an excellent review in Realms of Fantasy mag. by Gahan Wilson. Now, Wilson is no slouch, so when he likes a book, I know it's worth reading. Once again, he led me straight to a great read. The readers below seemed to have read a different book than me, or Mr. Wilson. It's a terrific, literate, haunting read, and does fascinating things with the main characters. I'll read this one again, and recommend it to friends. Bravo to the authors.

although this is a great price and has big print and lots of puzzles, its not the easiest crossword puzzle. I ordered this for my 9 yr old son and he really has a hard time with it. I also am unable to figure out what some words are. Unless you are totally committed to reading the bible alot of crosswords will seem foreign. Good value for the money.

nm nm ninunzbt

An execellent resource for any genealogist who might be searching for ancestors from the town of Hartford, Connecticut. The book has an alphabetical listing by surname of the early settlers from Hartford, as well as a comprehensive Index which makes up for the occasional misplaced name. The book details dates of birth, marriage and death of several hundred individuals, as well as information on the names and dates of birth of children. A useful addition to the library of amateur and professional researchers alike.

Jim Elliot is an ok book about a missionary. He goes to Peru to visit a group of Native Americans to teach them about God, and also to translate the bible.

This is a dense and demanding read and, unless you have a basic comprehension of the deeper issues of both science and Christianity, you will be zooming around in Twilight Zone.

In Barbour's book quantum physics meets process theology, thrashes around and out comes... hum, well, I'm not actually sure. I got a bit lost in post-Darwinian evolution, genetics, neuroscience, astronomy, thermodynamics and relativity. I almost had it when Barbour threw in a dose of genetic engineering and global environmental issues. I felt like I was back at Cal State in a 400 level class as a freshman. Get the drift? "Genetic Drift"?

It is best to give you an example of his writing from a portion of his opening statement, Chapter 4;
"I hope to show that it is consistent with neuroscience, computer science and a theological view of human nature to understand a person as a multilevel, psychosomatic unity.... In the first three sections (of this chapter) I look at neuroscience, theology and research on artificial intelligence. I then examine some philosophical interpretations of consciousness. Finally I suggest that process philosophy (Albert Whitehead) can provide a conceptual framework for integrating these varied prospective on human nature."

When you consider his astute, erudite writing, and that he is tackling some of the thorniest issues confronting contemporary science and theology today, you have a slow and demanding read.
Dr. Barbour seldom uses stories or examples, but, when he does, they are like rain on parched earth. Relished.

Conditionally Recommended for any science or theology student or professional.

The Grand Hotel is an anthology based around a single setting: a hotel in London, where the various characters either work or are guests. It's an interesting concept, and one which should, in theory, make the stories appear less as unconnected vignettes and more as 'chapters' in one longer story. But in practice, The Grand Hotel didn't turn out that way. It's something which could have been achieved quite easily, had the authors been given a plot thread which would weave throughout the individual stories and be resolved in the final one. As it was, the stories were very much stand-alone, with only brief references to common characters.

Carla Kelly's The Background Man is probably the best of the bunch, which is hardly surprising. Charles Mortimer, the assistant manager, is rarely noticed, because of his ability to blend into the background. However, substituting for his superior, he comes to the notice of Miss Carrington, a somewhat unusual guest. He falls in love with her immediately, and barely dares to hope that she will return his feelings. She does... but she's hiding a secret from him. Will this destroy any chance for them? My problem with The Background Man was mainly that it was too short, a common problem with anthology stories. The relationship really didn't have enough time to develop, and I wanted to see more of Charles and Millie together.

In Elisabeth Fairchild's Love Will Find A Way, Lieutenant James Forrester is about to meet, for the first time, the widow of his late commanding officer. Yet he feels as if he's known Annabelle Grant all his life. (Incidentally, Annabelle is a widow. Why does Fairchild refer to her as 'Miss'?). James, we see, had to read all her letters to Archie, her late husbamd, and once Archie was too ill to respond on his own, James wrote to her. He fell in love with her from her letters. Now, he has a few days only to get to know her and persuade her to consider marrying him. This is an interesting idea, and a nice, gentle love story - but again rushed by the pressures of coming in at under 65 pages.

Anne Barbour's The Castaway is the most disappointing, given Barbour's undoubted talent. A woman called Martha Finch arrives at the hotel to keep an appointment with Lord Branford, acting on behalf of the Marquess of Canby, the man whose granddaughter she claims to be. The reader is shown very soon that Martha is lying about her claim, and Barbour does not give her particularly sympathetic motives. I was hoping throughout that she would be exposed and that Branford, the hero, would reject her. Her lie is, of course, found out, but a far too convenient solution then emerges. This is one heroine I did *not* want to see end up with the hero.

Next, we have Barbara Metzger's The Management Requests. Captain Arthur Hunter (who should, in fact, be Captain Viscount Huntingdon, if Metzger paid proper attention to protocol) needs a room on the ground floor because of an injury. None is available, so he persuades the manager to let him have the room behind the reception desk. Because of this, a guest - Hope Thurstfield - mistakes him for the manager, a misapprehension Arthur chooses not to correct. (Why?) The secondary characters in this vignette almost drove me crazy, and I didn't especially care for Hope. Another miss.

And finally, we have Allison Lane's Promises to Keep. Maggie Adams has arrived from America to try to make peace with her father's family, from whom he was estranged after eloping with her mother. She bumps into a Marcus Widner at the hotel, who just happens to be related to her mother's family and who offers to help her in her quest - but who warns her off making immediate contact with her father's family. Lane lives up to her usual standards here by inventing the usual crop of one-dimensional villains, completely unbelievable in their audacity and villainry. I liked Marcus, but that's about all I can say for this story.

All in all, not worth the new purchase price, unless you're desperate to complete a Carla Kelly collection. My copy is going to the next charity shop collection.

The only reason it rated as high as 3 stars is due to Carla Kelly's short story. It was fabulous. She has a gift for opening a window to the lives of ordinary people - proving that ordinary romance can be the most magical of all. However, the rest of the stories were sadly flat and shallow by comparison. Still it's worth buying just for the Kelly story.

Although I'm not terribly found of anthologies because the brevity of the format inevitably results in shallow, partially-drawn characters, I found myself enjoying this one more than most. Why? Mostly because it included the romances of some ordinary people, not just those who are rich and titled. Also because it was (for the most part) the heroes who fell in love first and "loved from afar," instead of the women. And because some of the characters and events were intertwined in other stories and gave the impression of a single book instead of an anthology by five different authors. I'd like to see more anthologies like this one!

I excitedly ordered this book in anticipation of a home exchange vacation. I was disappointed to find that it contained only what I perceived to be obvious, self-explanatory information.

I rarely consider a book purchase a waste of money, although I definitely did so in this case.

While home exchange sounds like a great idea, this book gives very little practical information on how to arrange it. If the information is buried within the numerous, rambling accounts by previous home exchangers, I missed it - probably because I was too bored and irritated to read every word of their very personal and detailed accounts of their vacations. Good grief, I just wanted to know the legal protections, if any, tips on finding suitable matches, etc.

I believe this author has enough expertise to craft a quality book on the subject of home exchange.

I got the book before my 1st home exchange (which was GREAT!). I found it to be very shallow. Lots of little stories, but little useful info. Sorry, but not recommended.