Customer Reviews

Dictionary of Theories

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I was pleasantly surprised at the precision and substantiality of the definitions. Each one references the name of the source and the text from which it was taken. All entries vetted by a board of respected thinkers in the subject area from places like Oxford, U. Edinburgh, London School of Econ & Poli Sci, King's College London, etc. I trust its entries, which I have found worthy on the few subjects I know about.

They also have a softcover version out, ISBN 1-57859-045-0.

Nice reference for the modern thinker to have around!

Jennifer Bothamley has compiled more than 5,000 theories from all disciplines, from times ancient to modern, in this fascinating volume. It's a great book to leaf through; the concise, clear definitions will pique your interest. Some of the theories have been discredited, although all have had influence.
Do you need to see technical diagrams or equations? These are included. The book is cross-referenced to make browsing easier.
It's a marvelous addition to anyone's library.

This is indeed an admirably broad survey of literally thousands of theories from a wide range of disciplines and traditions. My training and expertise is in the Arts and Humanities, and I was surprised to find such reliability amongst categories spanning from the social sciences to postmodern literary criticism and cultural theory to more traditional philosophical concerns.

To address two issues from the previous review: Firstly, I suspect that the lack of attention to the major world religions is a result of this being a dictionary of THEORIES, not beliefs. While there is certainly a component of faith involved in speculation we generally consider more scientific, it seems sensible for such a work to leave out religious doctrine and ideas more mystic and ethereal than systematic and empirically rigorous. Secondly, although I can't speak to the broad appeal or cosmic significance of meterology, it could hardly be more obvious to someone outside the number-crunching lab that feminism is certainly not a "minor sub-field". In fact, I can think of few theoretical orientations with more enormously wide-ranging consequences, both historically and in the present moment, and more vital and relevant for inclusion in any collection of theories.

I bought it for $5 (paperback) on sale at Borders. Contains twenty-five indexed subjects. The book cover states, "... brings together theories ... from all subject areas". However, religion is completely missing. A book making this claim for itself should at least include major systematic theology and doctrinal theories of the world's top four or five religions. There is also no mention of military or educational theory. Subjects should be grouped hierarchically. Minor sub-areas like feminism and meterology are presented at the same level as major subjects such as sociology and physics. The cover of the book advertizes several subjects which I could not find anywhere inside: advertizing, botony, computer science (there are just three entries under the sub-area of computing), ecology, finance, geography, and natural science. The book cover claims over 5,000 entries. I counted just under 4,000. Mean number of entries per subject: 141. Median entries per subject: 43. Top three subjects: mathematics (526), psychology (484), biology (463). Bottom three subjects (all with 3 entries each): business, computing, and marketing. In the subjects I am most familiar with (math and physics) the book does give good references: most are readily avialable and popular books. Good source for short descriptions of both current and outdated ideas that have been popular enough, in the academic world at least, to acquire names.

"Dictionary of Theories," edited by Jennifer Bothamley, is one of the best references I've purchased in recent years. As a fiction writer, I've collected many compendia of information and this one has proven to be one of the most used. What is the "Pleasure Principle"? What are Aristotle's "Four Causes"? What about the "Big Bang Theory"? The "People" and "Subject Area" indexes at the end of the book, along with the bibliography, are very helpful and make this dictionary that much more fun to use.

A helpful, unpretentious presentation of a most ambitious project: a reference which gathers many of the most important theories from many of the most pursued disciplines under one cover. The results here are decidedly mixed, but it's great to have on my shelf (I have about 80 lbs of reference books not used as regularly in boxes).

Simply put, many of the entries are quite good, replete with explanation, significance, history, and singular example - others are not, deficient in one or more of these essential categories, too narrow, or even dubious. The variation in quality seems to have to do with the individual contributor. An improvement would be to increase the staff for another edition, having, let's say, a minimum of ten contributors from each field involved, and then expanding the editing process within each field accordingly.

Examples of what I mean:

Good:

mise en abyme (1948) Literary Theory. The term originated with French novelist Andre Gide (1869-1951) and is exemplified in his novel The Counterfeiters (1926). Prominent in Postructuralism during the 1970's.

`Placed in the abyss': the infinite regress of mirrors. In narrative, a story within a story, the internal story mirroring and therefore commenting on the framing story. Also in Deconstruction, the infinite deferral of meanings.

A model of concinnity and explanation.

Bad:

revisionism (19th century) Politics. An adaptation of Marxism, originally associated with the German socialist Eduard Bernstein (1850-1932).

Capitalism was not in crisis, and its replacement by Socialism was likely to be a matter of peaceful development and adaptation. A British version of this body of ideas is Fabianism.

While the above may be the origin of the term in its present usage, revisionism is a much broader term theoretically, with enough applications not to be restricted merely to politics, and, even within the realm politics alone, is given a variety of interpretations of far greater contemporary import than the rather obscure, vapid, and narrow reference offered here.

All in all, the book is a great idea, in a useful ready-to-hand size and weight, which could and should be perfected and slightly expanded.

Ability-to Pay Principle (16th century) Economics Taxation should be levied according to an individual's ability to pay; that is the more prosperous will meet a proportionately higher percentage of the national tax demand. This principle was extended by the Swiss philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-78), the French political economist Jean-Baptist Say (1767-1832) and English economist John Stuart Mill (1806-73). - Jennifer Bothamley's Dictionary of Theories.

In the United States no one wants to pay taxes. If a politician wants applause all they have to do is say that they will cut taxes. It is absurd to cut taxes or cheer for someone to do so. Taxes go to pay for public services. If we eliminate taxes, we will have to pay for these services individually, and if you think that it will be cheaper, you are sadly mistaken. Just imagine that you had to pay for private companies to pick up your garbage, police your neighborhood, etc. In New York City the mayor refuses to raise taxes and it showed the winter of 2010-2011 when there were not enough snow plows to clear the streets after a blizzard. New Yorkers were upset, but this is life without taxes. Mayor Bloomberg had to pay for private companies to clear the streets for that snow storm as well as the next one. The money used on the private companies came from the city's coffers and was not replaced, so that now it has to be taken from other agencies.

I have never handed anyone the book without within a minute a smile of pleaseure comes back. 5,000 theories of course gives one lots to think about. I read a page or two a day for awile and then let it sits until I need my mind charged again.

Excelent content, well written, fun, and a very good conversation starter.

This is a standard of my library. I like the way this book presents theories. If the reader is fond of ideas and their origins in theory this is the book to have.

This is a dynamite book for people with a broad interest of philosophical human thoughts and beliefs.The only drawback is that the last edition was updated in the mid 1980s.So many great economists,musicians,artists,physists,and thinkers have left their imprint on human evolutional values.And their validity is still accepted or doubted today.This book will get you thinking about evident or obscure beliefs and challenge yourself to elucidate upon your own set of beliefs.Some theories are widely accepted,and some are debunked by the progression of time.The cover photo ,i believe,is that of Albert Einstein,circa 1931.When he was visiting Cal Tech,on his first American tour.I love the book because of the eclectic classification, presenting the vast range of credos,that has shaped human history and social civilizations.For the better of worse.