Getting started with political philosophy

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me
Post Reply
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Fooloso4 »

Georgeanna:
I'm not sure about the worth of a democracy any more.
What is the alternative?

Churchill is credited with saying:
Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.
Democracy can move in the direction of populism and its own downfall, the demagogue, or in the direction of self governance. The “will of the people” can mean, at one end, ‘we’ as opposed to ‘them’, with ‘we’ being led by “a man of the people”. “We” becomes “him”, the strongman. At the other end, “we” means each and everyone one of us as an autonomous, self-governing, self-regulating entity. One capable of being a law unto him or her self.

The move toward the first pole is not simply an ideal, it is possible and indeed, an actuality. The move toward individual self-governance is an ideal that is not likely to become a reality, at least not in the foreseeable future. It is something to strive for. It is the reason why democracies moving toward self-governance favor public education and freedom of speech, and why, those moving in the opposite direction favor private education and suppression of free speech. Those who favor “the people” in an exclusionary sense, which may be so narrowly defined as to mean “me”, favor the dismantling of government as interference in personal freedom. Those who favor self-governance, however, favor a strong government, for good government promotes both the public as well as private good, with the goal of making us good citizens capable of self-governance in both the private and public sense of the term.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Steve3007 »

Fooloso4 wrote: I think the apparent contradiction may have something to do with what the expertise is in; a rejection of political and sociological expertise in favor of technological fixes. A form of political science versus political philosophy. In this sense the solutions might be seen as black and white. Smith points out that the questions of political philosophy have no answer, but math and science (or at least a crude notion of science) does yield the right answer.“Real” expertise as opposed to so called “experts”. The Right has made ‘expert’ into a term of derision, applicable to those who are out of touch - the “elite” who run things for their own benefit, with their foot on the neck of the people.
Yes. There is a perception, at least, that "hard science" deals with objective indisputable facts in which, once the facts are fully known, opinion is irrelevant. Whereas politics (it is assumed) can never be entirely boiled down to factual information but will always contain subjective opinion. I suppose the extent to which this is true is a whole other subject, possibly digressing into discussions about such things as free will versus determinism.
Perhaps the young feel disenfranchised from the voting process believing the “system is rigged” or does not offer real choice. Older voters, however, having grown up believing in the power of the vote and being in the habit of voting believe that they have the opportunity to vote the right person into office.
It's interesting to try to think whether this kind of cynicism about politics really has grown in recent years. Anecdotally, it does seem to be the case. It does seem to go along with a general loss of trust in authority figures, from doctors and teachers, to politicians to gods!
User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by ThomasHobbes »

Steve3007 wrote: August 18th, 2018, 7:27 am
Fooloso4 wrote: Perhaps the young feel disenfranchised from the voting process believing the “system is rigged” or does not offer real choice. Older voters, however, having grown up believing in the power of the vote and being in the habit of voting believe that they have the opportunity to vote the right person into office.
It's interesting to try to think whether this kind of cynicism about politics really has grown in recent years. Anecdotally, it does seem to be the case. It does seem to go along with a general loss of trust in authority figures, from doctors and teachers, to politicians to gods!
Consider the changes over just 100-200 years.
From a feudal system sustained with slavery to what we have today.
That is vote based political change.
Information is required to vote effectively.
There is still much to do, and we are still under the yoke of a media system in the hands of a tiny minority of super-rich who seeking to hold on to power feed the people with myths of freedom, whilst attacking political changes that would further enfranchise ordinary people.
That media system is under challenge at this very moment, and how we respond to attempts to control the internet will determine to what degree more progress will emerge.

Beware of negative publicity and attempts to shut down free speech in Social media.
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

What is becoming clear is that the texts from the Western tradition provide a core or a base from which to consider modern problems; and as a way to think of the self within society. The interactions are multiple. Given that political philosophy has clear links with morality and human wellbeing, I have been looking for something more...

So, there is this - which I haven't had time to explore, but intend a peek in. Perhaps it would be an idea to compare what is said about Hobbes...

Philosophy and the Science of Human Nature
https://oyc.yale.edu/philosophy/phil-181

Professor Tamar Gendler's professional philosophical work lies at the intersection of philosophy and psychology. The course:
'pairs central texts from Western Philosophical tradition ( Plato, Aristotle, Epictetus, Hobbes, Kant, Mill, Rawls and Nozick ) with current understandings in cognitive science and related fields'.

Three main areas are covered:

1. Happiness and Flourishing
2. Morality and Justice
3. Political Legitimacy and Social Structures

Too much information ? Yes, I know...
Just putting it out there. Part 3 would seem most relevant as a supplement to this course.
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

chewybrian wrote: August 17th, 2018, 6:26 am
Georgeanna wrote: August 16th, 2018, 1:04 pm Since political philosophy is a part of philosophy, the same kind of question can be asked: Why study philosophy ? How does it help in decision-making ? Would it help in deciding what kind of food to eat, where to bank, how to spend your money ?
Because existence precedes essence. We have to develop the foundations of a free will before we have the informed free will to decide what type of person we wish to be. At this point, we have already become a different type of person. The true philosopher is one who examines himself as he would judge others, and finds some very unpleasant truths, then resolves to work to rebuild himself into what he thinks he should be.

Our political views have the same need to be examined deeply as other moral views outside politics. We need to start at the base of the pyramid and check all the beliefs we hold to see if we would choose to believe them as if they were presented to us for the first time today. We must judge them all harshly and critically to see if they are consistent with the type of person we now wish to become.

Yet, the work is never done. For, having made this examination and verified what we hold to be true to be consistent with the person we decided to become, we must realize the weak position from which we made that decision, and refine it yet again, performing the examination of our new beliefs in the same manner. This self-examination can never stop, but perhaps if you are doing it right, you can slowly evolve into a better person.

Ultimately, these studies of the self might change your seemingly mundane choices of where to eat or bank, because these can have small but important effects on the shape of the world we collectively create. Certainly such a self-examination can have an impact on the arguably more important choice of how you vote. To make a REALLY informed choice at the polls, you'd want to understand what a just society would look like, and what ideals we might be striving for, so you could see if a particular vote might be consistent with such ideals. To not study political philosophy is to drive by turning toward whatever catches your eye. To study it is to pull out the road map and decide on a destination, and turn when the turn would lead in the right direction.
Hello chewybrian - there are so many issues within this one post and all stated with passion and a degree of certainty. I agree with the essence of trying to know yourself, your attitudes and views better by self-reflection and awareness of where and how your mental processes have evolved.

I don't think that it is vital to study political philosophy to know where to go or how to get there. Or indeed how to vote.
Many people in society have no need at all for formal courses and manage perfectly well to progress their lives and care for others.
What is important, I think, is for critical thinking - not just to read a newspaper or even a lecture transcript and think you understand at first scan.
Close reading of text and self narrative is not easy. Neither is assessment of the truth of what is told or what we tell ourselves.
I think all this fascinating...and I wish that my earlier education had included study of human nature and interaction with the world around us. Rather than readings from the Bible and daily prayer practices - how about daily thinking practices, such as the Stoics - like Marcus Aurelius...

Thanks for your views.
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

OYC Introduction to Philosophy by Steven Smith

Lecture 2: The focus remains on the Apology as a symbol for the violation of free expression, with Socrates justifying his way of life as a philosopher and defending the utility of philosophy for political life.

https://oyc.yale.edu/political-science/ ... /lecture-2

I don't intend to provide a summary for the forum this time round. I think if anyone is sufficiently interested it would be of greater value to work through the material first with their own summary written at end.

Using the lecture chapters as reference points is helpful during any discussion. Although I note I didn't follow own advice earlier...

Chewybrian and Fooloso4 were developing an interesting discussion in the Lounge Chat - I hope that this kind of interaction can continue here.
Thanks.
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by chewybrian »

Georgeanna wrote: August 19th, 2018, 6:49 am Hello chewybrian - there are so many issues within this one post and all stated with passion and a degree of certainty. I agree with the essence of trying to know yourself, your attitudes and views better by self-reflection and awareness of where and how your mental processes have evolved.

I don't think that it is vital to study political philosophy to know where to go or how to get there. Or indeed how to vote.
Many people in society have no need at all for formal courses and manage perfectly well to progress their lives and care for others.
What is important, I think, is for critical thinking - not just to read a newspaper or even a lecture transcript and think you understand at first scan.
Close reading of text and self narrative is not easy. Neither is assessment of the truth of what is told or what we tell ourselves.
I think all this fascinating...and I wish that my earlier education had included study of human nature and interaction with the world around us. Rather than readings from the Bible and daily prayer practices - how about daily thinking practices, such as the Stoics - like Marcus Aurelius...

Thanks for your views.
You cause me to wonder how different life might have been if I had been taught how to better interpret my environment at a young age, or if such teachings took priority in our education system, how would this change our society?

I'm guessing philosophy got squeezed out of our curriculum because there was both overlap and conflict with religious ideas, and because it did not have a direct line to producing profit. Imagine if there was just one class each semester through grade school and high school focused on self-improvement: anger management, cognitive behavioral therapy, stoicism, cynicism, existentialism...
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

Lecture 2 Chapter 1 Introduction: Plato, Apology.

So, if you are reading this, how are you reading it ? And I don't mean by candlelight or standing on your head. Although that might help.

The Apology is where Socrates explains and justifies himself as he is put on trial for corrupting the youth and for impiety towards the Gods. Also it seems that on trial is the very idea of philosophy - the tension between it and the city, to political power. Is that really the case?

Smith suggests that the basic question of the Apology is
: how compatible is freedom of mind with political life ?

The Apology has been seen as a symbol for the violation of freedom of expression. However, Smith asks: is this the reading that Plato intended ?
He refers to a previous teacher who had this reprimand :

" You read Plato your way, I'll read him his way."

So what am I supposed to learn from that ?
What was Plato's way ?
And why can't there be any other interpretation ?

Answers on a postcard, please.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Fooloso4 »

Georgeanna:
Answers on a postcard, please.
Just a quick postcard to say that I have been working on the second lecture and what I will be posting will not fit on a postcard.

My answers to your questions might though.
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

Fooloso4 wrote: August 20th, 2018, 4:33 pm Georgeanna:
Answers on a postcard, please.
Just a quick postcard to say that I have been working on the second lecture and what I will be posting will not fit on a postcard.

My answers to your questions might though.
Excellent :)
I was feeling lonely...
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Fooloso4 »

First, your questions.

Georgeanna:
So, if you are reading this, how are you reading it ?
I am familiar with the Platonic texts and the way Smith reads them, and I am in general agreement. So, I read the lectures with an eye to what I can contribute to the discussion here.
Is that really the case?
Because of the victories of philosophy the tensions may not be so obvious.
how compatible is freedom of mind with political life ?
I do not think that there are many who understand what the freedom of mind is. Most take it to be the freedom to accept whatever opinion they want or to to escape the world in idle metaphysical speculation.
However, Smith asks: is this the reading that Plato intended ?
I address this below.
He refers to a previous teacher who had this reprimand :

" You read Plato your way, I'll read him his way."
I suspect that this may have been said in exasperation by someone who could not provide an adequate defense of their reading of Plato. I don’t think this is how Smith thinks Plato should be read.
What was Plato's way ?
The way of many philosophers, to hide. To present a salutary public teaching and a private skeptical teaching. I touch on this below but cut much of what I originally was going to say in order to stay on topic.
And why can't there be any other interpretation ?
There can and must. More below.


Lecture 2: The focus remains on the Apology as a symbol for the violation of free expression, with Socrates justifying his way of life as a philosopher and defending the utility of philosophy for political life.

I think the fundamental question here is not free speech but the relationship between the philosopher and the city:
And, secondly, the Apology demonstrates also the vulnerability of political philosophy in its relation to the city, in its relation to political power. The Apology puts on trial not merely a particular individual, Socrates, but puts on trial the very idea of philosophy. From its very beginnings, philosophy and the city, philosophy and political life, have stood in a sort of tension with one another. (Lecture 2, Chapter 1 - L2, C1)
So, it is not simply a matter of freedom of speech but:
the necessary and inevitable conflict, between the freedom of the mind and the requirements of political life. (C1)
This, however, should not be understood simply as a matter of individualism:
Socrates’s defense speech, like every platonic dialogue, is ultimately a dialogue about education. Who has the right to teach, who has the right to educate? (C1)
This is a question that we still face in the issue of private versus public education.

Smith claims:
It is the question of really who governs or maybe put another way, who should govern, who ought to govern. (C1)
Although Plato eschewed political life there is a sense in which he is the most political of men in that he has ruled the minds of men for millenia. I do not mean by this the minds of philosophers but the minds of the public, and this, via Christianity. Nietzsche knowingly called Christianity Platonism for the masses.

Alongside the question of how to rule is the question of how to educate. Plato’s answer in the Republic is very interesting but getting into details will take us too far off track at this point. I will only say at this point that his answer is not a public education in philosophy. It is, rather, a public or exoteric education with the appearance of being esoteric, an image of truth accessible to those who escape the cave and gain knowledge in the light of the good. In line with the theme of the Republic and against the background of the Apology , the goal is not to make men wise but to make them just (see the end of C1, beginning of C2). But having heard the story of transcending the cave of opinion they are now of the opinion that they are wise.

There is another tension that comes to the fore - the “old quarrel” between philosophy and poetry, with the accusations the comic poet or playwright Aristophanes brought against Socrates. Smith puts in the form of the question:
… who is best equipped to educate future generations of citizens and civic leaders. Are the philosophers or are the poets, you might say, the true legislators for mankind …
He continues:
The virtues endorsed by the poetic tradition of which Aristophanes is the great representative here, the great inheritor and representative, the virtues of this tradition were the virtues of a warrior culture, of war-like peoples and men at war. These were the qualities that had guided the Greeks for centuries and contributed to their rise to power.


In addition:
The poets are oracular … By contrast, you could say, the method of Socrates is not oracular. It is not story telling; it is conversational, it is argumentative, if you want to use the word he applies to it, it is dialectical. (C3)
But Socrates does tell stories too. In chapter 5 we find two of them - his questioning the oracle at Delphi and his “turn” from examination of the natural world to the human and political things. But these are stories of human things. His diamonia, however, is not so easy to categorize.

Plato certainly was a story-teller and made use of myths. Smith may have more to say about this in the lecture about the Republic. I touch on it with regard to the Phaedo below.

Socrates is presented as exhibiting kind of a corrosive skepticism which is at the core of Aristophanes’ charge against him. (C4)
Did Aristophanes’ misrepresent Socrates? Is Socratic skepticism corrosive? It can be, and this helps explain why Socrates is said to have spoken differently to different people. And why, since Plato could not choose his readers, what he seems to be saying is often quite different than what he appears to be saying upon closer examination. Aristophanes held to the acceptance of traditional beliefs. If skepticism undermines tradition what will replace it? Again, we return to the question of education. The last dialogue of Socrates’ life, the Phaedo, asks about the fate of the soul. Socrates presents a variety of stories, but even though some of his followers accept one version or another, some see that none of them stands up to scrutiny. This can lead to what he calls “misologic”, hatred and distrust of logical argument, and those at greatest risk are those who had been the greatest lovers of philosophy, those whose expectations were that philosophy will yield the answers to their questions. It is in answer to the question of what will replace tradition that Plato offers in the Republic a public, salutary teaching about the philosopher who comes to know the truth itself, free of opinion, existing unchanged and unmixed. But this is, although certainly not identified as such, what he calls in the Republic, a noble lie.
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

Previously I asked:
" Also it seems that on trial is the very idea of philosophy - the tension between it and the city, to political power. Is that really the case?"

To which came the reply:

" Because of the victories of philosophy the tensions may not be so obvious."

I am not convinced that the idea of philosophy itself was put on trial, or that Socrates is some kind of Saviour figure.

"Socrates has been described as a martyr for freedom of speech and he has been somewhat extravagantly compared at various times to Jesus.." ( 2.1 )

"...is it the court of Athen...is it the people...or is it Socrates the philosopher-king who should be vested with ultimate political authority ?"
.....

Fooloso4 : "Although Plato eschewed political life there is a sense in which he is the most political of men in that he has ruled the minds of men for millenia. I do not mean by this the minds of philosophers but the minds of the public, and this, via Christianity."

This ruling of the minds of men for millennia. Of the public ?
What type of men? Do you think not philosophers because their minds can't be ruled ? I think that they can be stuck in just as much a dead dogma as any religious follower. But not if they are 'true' philosophers, right?
They would have an open, searching mind, right ?

And just like a loving, rebellious Jesus - why for millennia? What is it that moves certain types of human to fixate on a male victim of power, who then stands as some kind of superman to be idolized?

Is it not the case that this story has been spun by men for the benefit of men ? There are no, absolutely no references in this story to females. For the most part, they are background figures in all of mankind's history.

I can't help thinking that this study of political philosophy is simply the continual retelling of ancient myths.
The continued influence of male power is still very much in evidence, as is the role of religion - even if we have moved on a bit.

What is Socrates 'daimonion' ? A natural or a divine spirit ?
I question his mental health.
Can't wait to fast forward to the Enlightenment and Hobbes...
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

To return to the question above:
What does having 'freedom of mind' mean ?
And how compatible is it with political life ?
Why would it not be?
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

Fooloso4: " I am familiar with the Platonic texts and the way Smith reads them, and I am in general agreement. So, I read the lectures with an eye to what I can contribute to the discussion here."

Thank you for following the Lectures, even though you must know this subject inside out and back again. It never gets boring for you?
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Fooloso4 »

Georgeanna:
I am not convinced that the idea of philosophy itself was put on trial, or that Socrates is some kind of Saviour figure.
I do not think that Plato saw him or represented him as a Saviour. Plato’s Socrates is “Socrates made young and beautiful” (Second Letter attributed to Plato). The fact that in the Apology and Crito Socrates is 70 years old, and is no youngster in many of the other dialogues, should give us pause when considering what it means for Socrates to be made young.
This ruling of the minds of men for millennia. Of the public ?
Yes.
What type of men?
Until quite recently I would say most, the philosophers being the exceptions. But, following Nietzsche, it is not Plato but Christian Platonism that has been most influential.
Do you think not philosophers because their minds can't be ruled ?
Yes, but most who are called a philosopher are not in this sense deserving of the title. The philosopher is exceedingly rare.
And just like a loving, rebellious Jesus - why for millennia? What is it that moves certain types of human to fixate on a male victim of power, who then stands as some kind of superman to be idolized?
I know that many will disagree, but I do not find anything extraordinary in the teachings of Jesus. The important historical factors were that he was believed by his followers to be the messiah. Paul extended this to all men - all they had to do was believe and they would be saved, free of sin, living happily ever after. Paul’s followers took it even further, creating a man/god out of a failed messiah who died in the hands of the Roman authorities.
Is it not the case that this story has been spun by men for the benefit of men ? There are no, absolutely no references in this story to females. For the most part, they are background figures in all of mankind's history.
It’s a man’s world (I'm tempted to invoke James Brown), but perhaps not for much longer.
I can't help thinking that this study of political philosophy is simply the continual retelling of ancient myths.
The continued influence of male power is still very much in evidence, as is the role of religion - even if we have moved on a bit.
I think it would be wrong to dismiss political philosophy on this basis.
What is Socrates 'daimonion' ? A natural or a divine spirit ?
I question his mental health.
Others have as well, but we should not take what we find in the dialogues as historical evidence. There is also the question of "divine madness", and the image of Socrates a s physician of the soul (physician heal thyself?).
It never gets boring for you?
Usually not. Because Plato is a master of the play of images, I often find something new and different ways to see things, including new ways of seeing ways we see things. A recent example, but not from the texts in the lectures, his treatment of the limited and unlimited and its relationship to metaphysics, which is connected to the imagination and play of images.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Politics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021