The History Book Club discussion
This topic is about
On Politics
PHILOSOPHY AND POLITICS
>
WE ARE OPEN - WEEK 6 and 7 - ON POLITICS - CHAPTER THREE - Aristotle: Politics is Not Philosophy - (September 7, 2015 - September 20, 2015) - No Spoilers, please
Mod
message 3:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited Sep 07, 2015 07:14AM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mod
, we are reading Chapter 3: Aristotle: Politics is Not Philosophy - page 71.
The sixth and seventh week's segments reading assignment are:
WEEK SIX AND WEEK SEVEN: September 7, 2015 - September 20, 2015
Chapter 3: Aristotle: Politics is Not Philosophy - page 71
Chapter Overview and Summary
Chapter 3: Aristotle: Politics is Not Philosophy - page 71
These weeks will be discussing Aristotle and how politics is not philosophy.
Mod
However if we discuss folks outside the scope of the book or another book is cited which is not the book and author discussed then we do have to do that citation according to our citation rules. That makes it easier to not disrupt the discussion.
Teleology is an interesting idea to wrap your head around -- understanding something by what it's going to be rather than what it is (if I have that right [p. 75]). The notion that things, like political systems, are natural versus unnatural lays out some curious groundwork for later discussion. To us (well, me, how presumptuous to assume otherwise), it's an odd idea, but for Aristotle it's one of his building blocks of understanding the universe. Some people are better than others, and/or more suited to certain activities "by nature".
I think a discussion on the idea of Justice in Plato and Aristotle's viewpoint would be interesting. Unfortunately, I am not sure I completely understand the differences between them. Plato on page 53: justice is a quality in rulers, they should be concerned with the welfare of their subjects rather than themselves; justice promotes the interest of the weaker, not the stronger. Pages 78- 79 gives us Aristotle's view of Justice: "Human life, says Aristotle, goes well when we achieve happiness, but only happiness of a certain sort, namely, happiness approved by reason. Only then are we exercising the capacities that nature intends us to exercise, and “living well.”
I was just watching a recap of last week's events on C-SPAN. The focus was chatter on the steps of the Supreme Court about same-sex marriage. It sounds as though there was discussion in the court, referring back to Plato and Aristotle, about what marriage is -- as well as some justices asking whether the authority for such a decision is the nine of them or the will of the populace. That last comment sounds a bit like buck-passing, but it seems to crystallize a big distinction in our readings: Should our learned wise ones reflect and decide what should be done based on legal precedents and existing frameworks, or should all citizen's opinions weigh equally in the decision?
And a key related question is probably "when?" When should the decision be made by the Supreme Court rather than the ballot box?
Great comment Jim, The question the Supreme Court has to ask is whether it is a state issue or a Federal issue. I have the feeling that with (I think 36 states for Gay marriage), more will follow, if the Justices decide it should be a state issue. Yes, it will be interesting to see what they say. Didn't California have a referendum some years back about this issue? I don't remember all the facts. So it seems to be a mix of ballot box and lawmaker's decision.
How do I find the remaining discussions on this book? This book club is very confusing.
Mod
The discussions for this folder are weekly threads for weekly discussions and they will continue with the new syllabus and dates. Welcome and I am delighted that you joined the Readathon - we were very glad to have you.
Ok - no problem Bentley. Understand completely. I downsized and moved to a new house a couple of months ago, and am just now beginning to try to pick some of my reading threads back up. So if I want to catch up on this, I can read up to Chapter 3 and be caught up?
Mod
message 13:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited Sep 07, 2015 07:15AM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mod
message 14:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited Sep 07, 2015 11:44AM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mod
I have posted a mini biography of Aristotle on the main page.
In the glossary in this folder - there is a write-up of Aristotle - check out post 115 in the glossary.
Learn more about the life of Greek philosopher Aristotle, whose work profoundly influenced the modern scientific method, in this mini biography.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umHDO...
Also read the summary, etc on this link:
http://www.biography.com/people/arist...
Some notes and a transcript of the highlights:
Aristotle is one of the three most important philosophers along with Plato and Socrates. Socrates was the elder and teacher of Plato. Socrates did not write any books. Plato wrote 36 - all dialogues. Plato was the teacher of Aristotle.
Plato began a school called the Academy in Athens. Aristotle was a student at Plato's school. Plato's curriculum focused on mathematics.
After Plato's death - Aristotle decided to set up a rival school in Athens called The Lycaeum. Aristotle's school was centered on scientific observation and research.
Aristotle also wrote a lot - he wrote over 200 treatises on a variety of topics.
Collectively, Aristotle's work lays the foundation for what we today consider a liberal arts education.
Aristotle invented the idea of the study of logic and was the first systematic investigator of biology.
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle - the three of them laid the foundation for Western philosophy and Western civilization.
Source: Youtube video on Aristotle from Bio
message 15:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited Sep 07, 2015 12:06PM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mod
I. Aristotle's most important work was in the realm of metaphysics and namely the structure of reality.
A. Aristotle's Birth and Early Life
1. Aristotle was born around 384 BC in Stagira - a small town in Northern Greece. His father Nicomachus, was the court physician to the Macedonian king - King Amyntas II.
2. In his boyhood, Aristotle first studied medicine before going to Athens at age 17 to study at Plato's Academy.
3. Aristotle was one of Plato's prize students. Aristotle formed a different point of view than Plato. Plato would simply believe what existed without trying to explain it - and without trying to find a deeper meaning. In contrast, Aristotle would question everything that was presented to him to the point that he was able to discern very minute details and be able to understand what each one of them represented, but also how they all fit together into forming a larger system.
B. Aristotle after Plato's Death
1. After Plato's death in 347 BC - Aristotle left Athens to live in Mysia - part of modern Turkey where he married and had a daughter.
2. Aristotle returned to live in Macedonia in 338 BC when King Philip II asked him to tutor his son Alexander the Great.
3. It was a great honor for Aristotle to be chosen as the tutor for Alexander the Great when Alexander was only 13 years old.
4. When Alexander the Great assumed his father's throne at age 21 - Aristotle returned to Athens and started his own academy called the Lycaeum.
C. Aristotle - after Alexander the Great's death
1. After Alexander the Great died in 323 BC, the pro Macedonian government in Athens was overthrown. The resulting anti-Macedonian public resentment forced Aristotle to leave Athens for his own safety. Aristotle went to his mother's town of Chalcis on the island of Euboea. There we do not know what he did. Aristotle only lived another year.
2. At age 62, Aristotle died in Chalsis in 322 BC.
D. Aristotle - lasting effect
1. The most important impact that Aristotle has on our society today is that he has left his legacy of "organized thought".
2. Aristotle stays with us every time we make up a list.
3. Aristotle came up with the idea of Empiricism - this is the idea - to understand the universe - you need to observe it and immerse in it and try to look at it in every detail. Of course, this is the basis of the modern scientific method - that all scientists use today.
Source: Youtube on Aristotle from Bio
Mod
Mod
https://www.goodreads.com/videos/8990...
Source: Youtube
Mod
Take a look when you get chance.
Regarding Aristotle in this film:
"As the fourth century B.C. ends, Aristotle follows Plato in pointing to the value of the theoretical and celebrating the life of study, that the philosophers and scholars enjoy - the meditation upon eternal things."
Bentley wrote: "...D. Aristotle - lasting effect1. The most important impact that Aristotle has on our society today is that he has left his legacy of "organized thought".
2. Aristotle stays with us every time we make up a list.
3. Aristotle came up with the idea of Empiricism - this is the idea - to understand the universe - you need to observe it and immerse in it and try to look at it in every detail. Of course, this is the basis of the modern scientific method - that all scientists use today."
Organized thought and Empiricism.
What a mind-boggling influence on humanity. We may all be in a dream, or The Matrix, as some other perspectives suggest, but empiricism certainly seems to have moved us impressively down the track.
"If you want to know how many legs a spider has, you count them." (Roger Bacon...I think)
"...he [Aristotle] finds the Greeks uniquely suited by nature, climate, and economy to practice politics." (p.88) When one looks at the context of this quote it seems that Aristotle would thought that only the Greeks were then suited to rule. Are we all destined to look at our own nation, race, people group, etc. with this sort of superior attitude?
Or...am I misreading his attitude/belief here?
Mod
I do not think he is talking about nationalism but to be ever on the look out for power corruption or power corrupting. And to make sure that your government and leaders know who they are working for.
Mod
a) Socrates said, "Better listen to your conscience, listen to the inner voice that tells you what is truly right, and if you don't know, keep asking questions of yourself and others until you find out."
How would the above be useful to us today?
b) Socrates and the Sophists asked: "Is your first duty to civil law or to your conscience?
c) "If public and private duty clash - what are you supposed to do?"
d) "Which is more important - the individual or the state?"
Michael wrote: ""...he [Aristotle] finds the Greeks uniquely suited by nature, climate, and economy to practice politics." (p.88) When one looks at the context of this quote it seems that Aristotle would thought ..."It sounds like a prejudice, but I wonder if there really are limits on when politics can be practiced. In some instances, are resources so rare that spending all of one's waking hours trying to find food is almost universal, and violent bullies are the only sort of "politics" that exist. Does there have to be a certain amount of wealth and time for other options to be feasible?
Bentley wrote: "Socrates said, "Better listen to your conscience, listen to the inner voice that tells you what is truly right, and if you don't know, keep asking questions of yourself and others until you find out.""I'm inclined to think we have to build on individual conscience, and collectively come to a best world for all of us, but when do limits become reasonable? We have criminal codes that limit what some people want to do. Certain beliefs are categorized as treason. We celebrate or condemn civil disobedience depending on our own views.
Is there a logical line for when disobeying the law is the right thing to do? When they match a "higher law" (Human rights, religious doctrine...)?
Mod
I guess your basic human needs have to be satisfied first. You have to have water and food.
message 26:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited Sep 19, 2015 06:53AM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mod
I do not know - I guess the holocaust comes to mind when disobeying what the government was doing was the right thing to do. Can you think of others. The Crusades/Crusaders do not have high reviews (in fact none of the religious fanatics do? The Save the Whale foundation feels that it has the right to do what it does.
There seem to be many instances in history when those going against the grain and disobeying government are viewed as heroes. Spartacus. American Revolution. Rosa Parks. I like to think there truly is a higher good at times, that some laws are illegitimate. I like to hope it's more than just viewing from a perspective that's currently in fashion.In the early portion of Ryan's book, there seems a consensus among philosophers that benevolent monarchy is far and away the best form of government. That makes me wince from today's perspective.
The essentials of life do have to be covered in order for us to be able to devote time to those things that we are truly passionate about. Most philosophers had to have wealth or a benefactor that allowed them to spend time thinking through the issues and writing. I was thinking this morning of the issues our founding fathers struggled with; establishing the federal goverment; writing the constitution; developing ways for the people to have a voice. Today I feel like the people we have in leadership are "fiddling while Rome burns." Most of them are independently wealthy and so should be able to serve because they are passionate about the nation. Yet we pay large salaries out of tax dollars while they simply do what they want to do or what furthers them politically. It is hard to see quality leadership or even thinking in our elected offices. I believe most of our really quality people are in the private sector and do not have a voice; or do not feel that they can actually impact the political arena.
How do we get the passion back? I think that is really what Aristotle is talking about? More than a ruling elite I think he wanted to see people that were passionate about the political arena and had the freedom to bring influence in office.
I agree with Jim a benevolent monarchy makes me cringe but could it be much worse then what we are experiencing right now in not just US Government but many governments across the globe. I am not sure that "We the people..." has much sway anymore.
I am beginning to rant so will stop.
Jim wrote: "There seem to be many instances in history when those going against the grain and disobeying government are viewed as heroes. Spartacus. American Revolution. Rosa Parks. I like to think there tr..."I agree. I have the feeling that the philosophers felt that our form of democracy might have been too chaotic for them.
Mod
Yes all very true. Selma comes to mind - Martin Luther King, etc.
message 31:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited Sep 19, 2015 08:08AM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mod
You know the founding fathers were an elite group who also thought that they knew best when selecting a president so the acorn did not fall too far from the tree - and all of them studied the Greeks and Philosophy.
And I want to add that much of what the philosophers advocated was sound judgement about asking questions and not depending upon others to do it for you.
message 32:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited Sep 19, 2015 08:12AM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mod
I agree Michael and all of the non essential laws that erode people's freedoms while they cannot agree on one tough question in terms of how to move the ball forward. Yes I agree - many have just lost the passion that they can matter and just leave civic responsibility as a thing of the past - got to take my kids to soccer and my girls to dance class and have the family over for the barbeque on the 4th of July.
I wonder how many really understand why they have off on 4th of July if it isn't for the family barbeque.
Mod
Or no discipline.
Some concerns, at least in the past, about democracy seem to have been that a smooth-talking self-interested demagogue could sweet-talk a dull-witted mob into voting for her or him. How informed do voters need to be? How important is education to democracy? There's a Canadian federal election coming up October 19. At a leaders debate earlier this week, it was striking how much of what was said was repeating well-rehearsed catchy talking points rather than answering questions. Those phrases are presumably what stick in our heads and win elections, but they seem to often mask the real issues and stakes. They're "dumbed down."
There are at least (compared to many past elections) some fairly sharp distinctions in values between candidates this time around, so we can vote based on those, and our perceptions of competence.
Mod
I think we saw that in the last Republican debate here when they tried to get in their quips and prepared comments and talking points. Folks clap - it is beyond me why folks can't look under the hood and see what is missing in these folks.
Perceptions of competence is such a subjective ideal. It would be nice to have candidates who have demonstrated confidence and are folks we can look up to as a role model not another distraction. I think that is what Plato was saying.
In another discussion, I believe it was the Landslide discussion...
by
Jonathan DarmanWe talked about the need for certain levels of experience, training and competence in the upper levels of government. Yet, I cannot help wondering what would happen if a grass roots candidate ran. Someone for whom the salary package of the Presidency would be the most they ever made, someone who would look for the best and brightest in each field to serve in cabinet and advisory positions and someone not tied to specifc party or lobby interests. What would this look like? I know it is a pipe-dream and unlikely to ever happen but what if?
Could this be a way for the type of person Aristotle is talking about to get into office?
After all if that salary is more than the person ever made they should be more than free to concentrate on the needs of the nation as their essential needs would be more than met.
I know it is a dream but in the dark of night I cannot help thinking that the clock is ticking on the American experiment.
Mod
I think you are on to something regarding what Aristotle or Plato might have thought. But the problem with these offices of power is that power corrupts.
I am hoping that this is not the case and I do look around and see other democratic countries that are also in a quagmire. Who really is doing well?
message 38:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited Sep 19, 2015 06:09PM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mod
What were your thoughts on the following quotes from the author (regarding Aristotle's ideas):
1. "A piece of advice that strikes oddly on the modern ear is that well-bred young people ought to learn to play a musical instrument but not with such skill that they might be mistaken for professional musicians."
2. "Nonetheless, Aristotle's enthusiasm for the preservation of social distinction and his emphasis on the social position of the "high souled" man remind us that even in his favored politeia, with as many respectable and steady men of the middle class admitted to political participation as is possible, Aristotle hankered after the rule of true, that is, natural aristocrats. If that attitude is not unknown two and a half millennia later, his unconcern with those left out of this vision of the world - women, ordinary working people, foreigners, slaves - is happily rather less common. But we shall not see much sympathy for ordinary lives and ordinary happiness for many centuries yet, certainly in the work of Cicero."
In a democracy, people get the government they vote for. That's it's greatest weakness.It's greatest strength is that for some inexplicable reason the collective "wisdom" of the masses, if it doesn't get it right, at least generally doesn't screw things up too badly come election season.
As Aristotle noted in his Politics, there is no such thing as good government. All forms of government that men use to govern their affairs have fundamental weaknesses. That means the best solution is a hybrid - going from memory - Aristotle favored democracy and some form of republican, which should sound familiar to a C student who paid attention in sixth grade civics.
But as Ari noted, it's not a perfect solution. Ultimately, as we struggle to govern ourselves, we are left to muddle through.
It's a shame that can't be taught in our schools at an early age. If even just a little stuck with folks, they might be better able to align their expectations with the reality of the art of the possible.
by Aristotle
Bently - to address the question you raise, the digital media especially accommodates the mob mentality in the electorate for the simple reason that every fool with a keyboard connected to the network has a captive audience to which s/he can broadcast his message.S/he becomes an instant expert.
There is less of the tempering by wiser heads.
message 41:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited Sep 19, 2015 07:12PM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mod
It's greatest strength is that for some inexplicable reason the collective "wisdom" of the masses, if it doe..."
I think the classics have somehow been relegated to the stacks in the libraries and I am not sure are being discussed - and civics classes - you just dated yourself Martin - most young people on the site would say what are those?
message 42:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited Sep 19, 2015 07:12PM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mod
That is probably true - as moderators we deal with that everyday. Are the wiser heads in the majority in this country - or has the 24x7 entertainment news coverage created a bunch of texting robots who are tethered to their technology - just creating sound bytes and not taking the time to think - never mind big and deep thoughts. No time to develop a solution versus grab the most crazed one that happens to be getting the most tweets or on the internet.
I am wondering what we are fostering and whether as a society we are becoming smarter with all of the technology - or more out of touch with community and those things that civics classes discussed.
Are we really discussing the details of issues or are we sending the message to our politicians that inertia is fine. We certainly are not discussing the topics and questions raised by Socrates, Plato, or Aristotle in our high schools. We are in some of our colleges and these classics and great thinkers are part of most Ivy League core curriculums. But what about most other colleges do we even discuss these great thinkers then if we are not majoring in philosophy. I wonder. Please feel free to jump in and discuss your own experiences.
Also please feel free to disagree if your thoughts and experiences are different.
Bentley wrote: "I like your what ifs Michael but most of the folks running feel "entitled" to run and it takes a lot of money to do so in this country and not likely to get better thanks to the Supreme Court. "
That it takes enormous sums of money to mount a successful campaign certainly seems to skew the playing field. A person of modest means with outstanding ideas has to impress a wealthy backer, a corporation, or 8 million fans to run the whole course and get their message out. Perhaps social media will make it easier to be heard without the benefit of millions of dollars, though I suppose the better funded candidates will still have the slicker videos, the speeches screened by focus groups, and so on.
Bentley wrote: "has the 24x7 entertainment news coverage created a bunch of texting robots who are tethered to their technology - just creating sound bytes and not taking the time to think - never mind big and deep thoughts. No time to develop a solution versus grab the most crazed one that happens to be getting the most tweets or on the internet"This is a reason I get concerned when mandatory voting is suggested (I believe it's currently in place in Australia?) Do we really need decisions diluted by people who are not only uninformed, but may be resentful of being forced to take part in the process?
Martin wrote: "every fool with a keyboard connected to the network has a captive audience to which s/he can broadcast his message.S/he becomes an instant expert."
I initially liked the arrival of comments sections following online news stories at national media websites. That wore off quickly. It now often discourages me. In the case of political stories, comments so often look like they're written by political party underlings trying to spin the story.
Boy, howdy. And every one of those fools typing faster than they can think has a vote. Hopefully, they're not exercising it, although the ascent of Trump, Cain and others who have been flavor of the day may be an indication to the contrary.
With all due respect, I am not so certain that there was a golden age of political discourse in this country, or anywhere else, that featured a politically enlightened populace that led the way to nirvana.Remember what Aristotle concluded: the best form of government is a hybrid that allows men to muddle through governing their affairs. There is no good government in the sense of a political expression that is without significant downside.
What I think is different now is that what I advocated in my youth has come to pass. While a sophomore in college, I wrote an essay during a political science final exam arguing for direct involvement in governing decisions. Push button democracy. Voting, push a button in the comfort of your home for the candidate of your choice, and so on voting directly for governing decisions.
I got a D on the exam.
We're not that far away from having however many buttons are on your keyboard - or pointing a finger at a touch screen - and I have to give the idea an F, so far.
But, then I think: "Hey, wait a minute. We're all still here. Our lives are pretty much as they ever were. We struggle to put food on the table, seek shelter from the storm, and argue about the path forward."
Essentially, we haven't advance too far from our days as hunter/gatherers. Or, maybe we've just come full circle.
Everyone in the clan has a voice. (We even argue about the same things, such as abortion. A not widely circulated fact is that abortions date back to prehistoric man who aborted fetuses as they followed the herds if the hunting portended a lean season. See Cannibals and Kings.)
The advancement of the city state and nation state with its more stratified social structures is melting away as those distinctions are blurred. Countries' boundaries are blurred (see the migration from the Middle East to Europe as populations seek food, shelter, and better [job] hunting).
So, maybe it's not the end of anything so much as we're going in circles. ; )
by
Marvin Harris
message 48:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited Sep 20, 2015 06:35AM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mod
Jim it would be nice to believe that - but if folks are not really looking for a man or woman or substance - then they will be easily swayed by what money can buy - slicker ads but we can always hope
Mod
Yes you have to wonder what you would have voted into office.
Mod
S/he becomes an instant expert."
I initially liked the arrival o..."
Well they probably are.
The History Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
Alexander: The Ambiguity of Greatness (other topics)The Federalist Papers (other topics)
Cannibals and Kings: Origins of Cultures (other topics)
Politics (other topics)
Landslide: LBJ and Ronald Reagan at the Dawn of a New America (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Guy Maclean Rogers (other topics)Alexander Hamilton (other topics)
Marvin Harris (other topics)
Aristotle (other topics)
Jonathan Darman (other topics)
More...
Welcome to our relaxed discussion and read of Alan Ryan's book - On Politics: A History of Political Thought from Herodotus to the Present.
For the weeks of September 7, 2015 - September 20, 2015, we are reading Chapter 3: Aristotle: Politics is Not Philosophy - On Politics: A History of Political Thought from Herodotus to the Present by Alan Ryan.
The sixth and seventh week's reading assignment is:
WEEK SIX AND WEEK SEVEN: September 7, 2015 - September 20, 2015
Chapter 3: Aristotle: Politics is Not Philosophy - page 71
We will open up a thread for each bi-monthly assignment.. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers. We will also open up supplemental threads as we did for other spotlighted books.
This book was kicked off on March 16th
We look forward to your participation. Amazon, Barnes and Noble and other noted on line booksellers do have copies of the book and shipment can be expedited. The book can also be obtained easily at your local library, local bookstore or on your Kindle.
There is no rush and we are thrilled to have you join us. It is never too late to get started and/or to post.
Bentley will be leading this discussion and back-up will be Assisting Moderators in Training Teri and Jose.
Welcome,
~Bentley
TO ALWAYS SEE ALL WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL
REMEMBER NO SPOILERS ON THE WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREADS - ON EACH WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREAD - WE ONLY DISCUSS THE PAGES ASSIGNED OR THE PAGES WHICH WERE COVERED IN PREVIOUS WEEKS. IF YOU GO AHEAD OR WANT TO ENGAGE IN MORE EXPANSIVE DISCUSSION - POST THOSE COMMENTS IN ONE OF THE SPOILER THREADS. THESE CHAPTERS HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION SO WHEN IN DOUBT CHECK WITH THE CHAPTER OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY TO RECALL WHETHER YOUR COMMENTS ARE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFIC. EXAMPLES OF SPOILER THREADS ARE THE GLOSSARY, THE BIBLIOGRAPHY, THE INTRODUCTION AND THE BOOK AS A WHOLE THREADS.
Notes:
It is always a tremendous help when you quote specifically from the book itself and reference the chapter and page numbers when responding. The text itself helps folks know what you are referencing and makes things clear.
Citations:
If an author or book is mentioned other than the book and author being discussed, citations must be included according to our guidelines. Also, when citing other sources, please provide credit where credit is due and/or the link. There is no need to re-cite the author and the book we are discussing however.
If you need help - here is a thread called the Mechanics of the Board which will show you how:
http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/2...
Introduction Thread:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Table of Contents and Syllabus
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Glossary
Remember there is a glossary thread where ancillary information is placed by the moderator. This is also a thread where additional information can be placed by the group members regarding the subject matter being discussed.
Here is the link:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Bibliography
There is a Bibliography where books cited in the text are posted with proper citations and reviews. We also post the books that the author used in his research or in his notes. Please also feel free to add to the Bibliography thread any related books, etc with proper citations. No self promotion, please.
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Book as a Whole and Final Thoughts - SPOILER THREAD
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Directions on how to participate in book discussions and how to follow the t's and c's - look at directives given for the discussion Landslide - What Do I Do Next?
I will modify these directives as we go along but for now utilize the information here.
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...