Textbooks do not make light reading. Everyday Morality: An Introduction to Applied Ethics Fourth Edition

 I didn't get rid of many of the books assigned to me in college, because I am addicted to books. So you would think I would recognize a textbook, and connect it with one of the classes I took. But I have no idea how I got Everyday Morality: An Introduction to Applied Ethics Fourth Edition by Mike W. Martin. I have a couple ideas. What I guess happened is that I acquired it from a retired priest. My college was an old seminary, and they would put up retired priests in the dorms, and if they wanted to get rid of books they would leave them in the hall. There was no way I could resist. But whoever I got it from studied from it. There are lots of little notes in it, written in cursive in red ink, and relevant passages underlined. It is just a shame that I can't read any of it. Their handwriting is really scrunched together and small, and I never was any good at reading cursive. It is a shame, I would have liked to know, it might have made some sections a bit more interesting.

Everyday Morality: An Introduction to Applied Ethics Fourth Edition by Mike W. Martin is a textbook, down to its discussion questions. Now, I will admit that I skipped the discussion questions. In my defense, have you ever sat down and read a textbook like you would a normal book? It is strange, especially a philosophy textbook. Philosophy textbooks I remember, and youtube videos about philosophy as well, present ideas, but don't really engage with them. Sections of this book suffered especially hard from this most notably the beginning. The focus is on exposing an idea to you, not on really grappling with them. The recommended reading section is for that. There is something to be said for something like that. However when you are sitting down to read a book for entertainment that is not really what you want.

I like the colors on this cover. Nothing flashy, just some good colors together.

It is also not like you would read this for fun. There are entertaining philosophy books. Starship Troopers is basically a work of political philosophy given broader appeal by having dudes in power armor fight giant bugs. However Everyday Morality: An Introduction to Applied Ethics Fourth Edition by Mike W. Martin is not entertaining. Most of the earlier chapters are a pretty bland as Martin parades a variety of authors and their thoughts before the reader and it is still very general. The later chapters, when it focuses on specific issues like euthanasia, gambling and abortion, are much more interesting. The specific is more engaging. That is a problem I feel with a lot of generalist philosophy, the question of how do you apply them. In addition, how a person feels about a specific should, if they are consistent, tell you how they will feel about related issues. 

Would I read this book again cover to cover? No. It is a text book. I might pull it out for reference, but not read it for fun. Or, to phrase it a different way, I would use this book in a way closer to its intended purpose, it seems good for that. 

Look some dice, aren't they nice.

On to the next book, and please, let it not be a textbook. For the first dice I rolled a 3 and the follow up was a 28. and I got lucky, not a textbook and not a nonfiction either. We venture again into fiction.

Tie in fiction! 

For next time I will be reading I, Jedi by Michael A. Stackpole. I am pretty excited about this. I have a lot of fond memories of the old Star Wars Expanded Universe, and Michael Stackpole did a great job with the X-Wing series. I have read the book before as well, but only once, a long time ago, in a house actually not too far away. 

The opening chapter of 21 different books: Makers of Modern Strategy edited by Edward Mead Earle

 Makers of Modern Strategy: Military Thought from Machiavelli to Hitler is a collaboration of some 20 writers attempting to detail the evolution of military thought from the 16th century to 1943. That very specific year makes it an interesting book, as it came out just before the final stages of the Second World War. My copy was printed in 1972, and I find it very interesting that it was not updated in almost 20 years between its original copy write date and its republication. This book came from my West Point collection, which I talked about in the first post I ever did, which brings up some questions because the implication is that this was required reading in a West Point class, even though it had not been updated since before the advent of the nuclear age. Surely someone has done some worthy thinking since then, something that a West Point cadet would need to know about.

These are some very 70's colors

What is in the book is interesting but dense. A well-spiced jerky, rather than a tender steak. Each chapter covers either a single thinker or, more and more as time relentlessly advances, multiple different related thinkers. Those chapters are some real tough meat. A meat I am not certain I properly digested if I am going to be honest. Textbooks are meant to be studied with pen and paper for notes on hand, not read in snippets while on break from work, or an hour or two on a lazy Sunday morning if you are really going to get something out of it, especially when they are this dense. 

That density is put to good use though. I am passingly familiar with some of these thinkers, and if the whole book is about as good it is fairly good coverage, right up to the time of writing. They try to present an understanding of Japanese, German and Soviet military thought as of 1943 and they seem off the mark, but to the book's credit, there is an acknowledgment that full knowledge may be many years and declassification in the future. Learning about how wars are thought about is very important. How you think about war guides how you prepare for it, and how you fight it, and I believe that many here in America don't think about war that deeply. This is a little strange when you consider we are enjoying the first peace in 20 years. One would think that fighting for so long would make us much more interested in winning wars but no. It is much more superficial, and people seem too focused on the tactical rather than strategic dimension. How do you win a fight, rather than you do you win a war. That is not a good way to win wars. 

So would I recommend Makers of Modern Strategy: Military Thought from Machiavelli to Hitler? Recommending older scholarly works is really difficult. In my experience, the newer stuff tends to be better as it can expand and respond to the older works. Also, readability is more widely recognized as being important. Therefore, I would recommend something like this book, but not this book.

Now to my next read. Hopefully, a little less dense. The first roll is a two, which gets me a shelf of 31 books. The second roll is a two and a 9 for book number 10.

Looks like I felt like rolling 2s.

Book number 10 is another textbook, with a very different subject. Everyday Morality: An Introduction to Applied Ethics by Mike W. Martin. We turn from war to such delightful subjects as murder, and drug abuse. I hope you will join me next time.

A much more ascetically pleasing cover, but modern books seem less well made.