Customer Reviews

Written on the Heart: The Case for Natural Law

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

"Quarry the granite rock with razors, or moor the vessel with a thread of silk, then may you hope with such keen and delicate instruments as human knowledge and human reason to contend against those giants, the passion and the pride of man." -John Henry Newman

Everyday we make decisions about the paths we will take in life. At times we find ourselves conflicted beyond the normal level of simple decisions making. What we often desire is obviously in direct conflict with our inner knowledge of right and wrong and no matter how we try to rationalize our decisions, taking the wrong path brings us immense internal conflict and emotional pain.

We lose our sense of peace and become filled with chaotic desires. Frustrated with our decisions we try to find self-satisfying justifications for our unethical behavior. Breaking a general precept of the natural law carries the penalty of guilt. As human beings, we find this to be a constant struggle between what we want and need, what we should do and should not do.

When our conscience accuses us of these facts, we either change the path we are on or smother the knowledge written on our hearts and keep right on walking, rationalizing to ourselves that the pleasure we will gain from this path is greater than the pain of the thorns of conscience we keep stepping on repeatedly.

"The good of a human soul lies in the activity of using and following reason, and its highest good lies in the activity of using it and following it excellently."

Sometimes the only way off a path we have chosen is a decision to just do the right thing. The conflict that leads up to that decision can at times make us set up road blocks on paths we don't ever want to take again. Even J. Budziszewski lived through this process and if he could hear God's voice through the cacophony of voices in the modern world calling us in so many directions, anyone can find their way back to the inner knowledge of ancient truths.

J. Budziszewski became a Christian at the early age of ten. He the fell away from his faith after becoming caught up in radical politics. He tried to find ways to believe that God didn't exist. While earning his Ph.D. at Yale, he was convinced he had found plenty of reasons for atheism and moral relativism.

He came to believe that humans were not responsible for what they did and yet he came to feel a greater and greater horror about himself and an overpowering sense that his condition was terribly wrong. Finally his self-deception collapsed. He is now a defender of the natural-law tradition.

He believes there are universal moral principles that are knowable to everyone and if they are followed, they bring good into the world instead of evil. This belief has roots all the way back to the rabbinical tradition of the Noachian commandments forbidding sexual immorality, idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed and theft.

In this "textbook-like" discussion, he presents an intellectual evolution of thoughts from the beginning of time to the present. It shows how the Human consciousness perceives God's moral law and how we can inherently understand divine truth. The challenge is to listen to what we know to be true. To seek truth in all its beautiful forms and develop a discipline of mind strong enough to resist the temptation not to listen to what we know to be true in order to avoid evil. While we might know what is good or evil, character is not inborn and is acquired. The author shows how our human souls are designed for two things. To understand and to love. When there is a defect in one, there is a defect in the other. He describes "love" as a "constant will to the true good of another person."

Chapter Four was especially interesting as he expounds on the beliefs of Thomas Aquinas, a thirteenth-century Dominican Monk who is regarded as the greatest of all medieval philosophers. The beliefs of Aristotle, John Locke, C.S. Lewis and John Stuart Mill make this a fascinating read.

There are discussions about "Why Government is Necessary?" and why we are born with human rights. Why a government that denies natural law is so terrible and why a state of liberty is not a state of license. He also gives the seven criteria for when a country can go to war and explains that for the first time in American history, political leaders committed themselves to following the principles of a just war during the War in the Gulf. The discussion on private property is enlightening and leads into more discussion about Tyrannical rulers and revolution, which is discussed earlier in a chapter on Human Law & Regime Design.

You will find some horrifying ideas that are balanced with sanity, so beautiful you cannot help but desire within your very being to choose truth. This book will awaken within you all that you know to be true.

The deepest part of you will recognize truth when you see it. Making the right decisions
once you awaken to the truth is the real challenge. After reading one of his books you will find yourself hungering to read everything he has written.

While most modern secular thinkers reject the natural law and are constantly having discussions on such fundamental issues as morals, there does seem to be a desire to go back to the idea that there is a moral standard known by all. The Moral Sense by James Q. Wilson is a book the author also recommends. If you are new to the works of J. Budziszewski, I would recommend "The Revenge of Conscience" as the first book you read as it deals with moral neutrality, liberalism and conservatism.

Everyday we are faced with paths that will lead us to a more enlightened human existence or a path that will cast a shadow over the laws written on our heart. This book will show the way to more enlightened thought and shows why our civilization is in an advanced state of decay.

~The Rebecca Review

Since the great works of classic Greek philosophy are seldom taught either at the high school or college level, the author gives a brief but convincing grounding in Aristotle. Proceeding through other great thinkers like Thomas Aquinas, he relentlessly shows the universal applicability of moral principles. The book is a very effective foil for those post-modern thinkers who believe (without proof) that mankind has moved beyond the natural law, or that there is no such thing. The book is written at a very readable level.

Professor Budziszewski's defense of natural law is that, in spades, but is more. It gave me the sort of clear understanding of the basics of political philosophy that I should have received along with my B.A. in Political Science.

Written on the Heart is a must-read for anyone who "knows" that there must be universal truth, and absolute standards of right and wrong, but just can't articluate the reason for that conviction.

Written by The University of Texas government and philosophy professor J. Budziszewski, Written on the Heart is a very deep and complex look at the issue of natural law using Romans 2:15 as the foundational concept that God has written the truth on the hearts of every man, but that this truth while apparent and undeniable to all is obfuscated to the unregenerate. Budziszewski then examines some of the great thinkers on this issue starting with Aristotle, moving to Aquinas, followed by Locke and ending will Mill. Examining each philosophy and how it relates to this concept of natural law, Budziszewski breaks down these four intellectual giants showing where he believes each supports and strays from the natural law theory.

Finally, Budziszewski ties all the loose ends together by presenting his concept and understanding of natural law grounded in the divine revelation of God's Word. In essence, God's general revelation of natural law is only made clear by God's special revelation of His Word. Budziszewski supports the notion that law originates with God who has given man enough information about His nature and the nature of man to relate to Him and each other in the most productive and effective manner. Yet, since most people suppress their knowledge of the truth by their sin nature (as well as their sins), mankind faces great difficulty producing and sustaining harmony and community.

Written on the Heart is written for the serious thinker and student - probably only for high school seniors and above, this book is a difficult read not only in the depth of the concepts addressed, but also in the vocabulary used and its length. However, for those wanting to know more about the concept of natural law, Budziszewski is one of the best modern thinkers on this subject and this book is well worth the time, energy and effort required to read.

While Budziszewski offers a well-written CliffsNotes-styled survey of natural law thinkers, it is important to note that he avoids allowing his Christian worldview or Weltanschauung to interfere with the discussion - it is only in the concluding third of the text where Budziszewski relates natural law theory of the past and present to the Christian belief system. The text covers natural law thinkers Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, and John Locke, as well as one of the great modern opponents of natural law, John Stuart Mill. Following these four units, the author offers a critique of these thinkers. This critique is very well done, and is a bit terse - only 9 pages long - but the following chapter on recent natural law thinkers is roughly twice the length and offers an excellent survey-within-a-survey that includes sections on Roman Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, and secular reconsidersations of natural law (Budziszewski argues that the philosophy of natural law is experiencing a renaissance, and he illuminates some of the current directions that these varied perspectives are taking). Of particular note, the author writes that "...the secular way of thinking is just as full of theological commitments as the other three - just as full of faith, but of a different sort...". Some readers may be interested in the fact that Written on the Heart includes an appendix on elementary reasoning.

As part of the modern revival of Natural Law thinking this book is very welcome. It is pitched at undergraduates but would also be useful in pre-university courses in philosophy, law, and politics, or for an advanced reading group. Questions for reflection/discussion set at the end of each chapter with references for further reading.

Starts with Aristotle's 'Nicomachean Ethics', correctly one step back from the Stoics with regard to the historical roots of NL philosophy, but misses that Plato was the practitioner and Aristotle the theorist. (For two contrasting approaches identifying Plato as the first NL theorist, see C.S. Lewis's 'The Abolition of Man', chapter 1, and John Wild's 'Plato's Modern Enemies and the Theory of Natural Law'. Also John Wild's 'Introduction to Realistic Philosophy', and Plato's 'Republic', Bks. I-IV.)

UNIT ONE: ARISTOTLE

Chapter 1: Politics and the Human Good.
Eight pages: concepts of ethics as a practical science, some definitions according to Aristotle. Useful and concise.

Chapter 2: Moral Excellence & Regime Design
Nine pages: why society in general and civilization in particular is impossible without moral rules underlying law of society. Briefly explains Aristotle's Doctrine of the Mean (ie, moral virtue is usually intentional habitual behaviour pitched between the two extremes of vice.
Eg, Cowardice---COURAGE---Rashness; and,
Stinginess---GENEROSITY---Extravagance.)

Virtues are based on morals and are unified and interrelated. Very brief overview of the types of political regime. Useful and concise.

Chapter 3: Friendship, Justice & the Moral Significance of Law
Nine pages.

UNIT TWO: THOMAS AQUINAS

Chapter 4: The Grand Design of Law
Nine pages: introduces ideas of the great Aquinas on NL, and the relation of Aristotle and the Pauline analysis of Law in Romans. Particular reference to Aquinas' 'Treatise on the Law'. [For which I recommend philosopher/jurisprudence expert R.J. Henle's outstanding Latin text, translation, and commentary 'The Treatise on Law': ISBN: 0-268-01881-2. A good introduction to Aquinas' jurisprudence, theology, and philosophy combined. Supplies essential background notes in clipp'd Aquinan style]. An excellent chapter.

Chapter 5: The Law of Nature & The Law of Man
Twelve pages: common theoretical objections to NL discussed with ref. to Aquinas. Explanation of relation of general morals to their practical implementation as specific law and statute in a national setting. Good debunking attack on Margaret Mead/Samoan mythmaking. Good discussion point on Prohibition. Good chapter.

Chapter 6: Human Law & Regime Design
Thirteen pages: bad laws and what to do about them. The forms of government (monarchy, aristocracy, democracy), their good and bad forms.

UNIT THREE: JOHN LOCKE

Chapter 7: The State of Nature & The Social Contract
Nine pages: summary of Locke's theory of government by social contract; Kant and other sundries. [Locke's theory not coherent, so mere summary as opposed to refutation is also less than coherent. See John Wild's 'Plato's Modern Enemies' pp.127-133 for better analysis.]

Chapter 8: Two Views of Natural Law
Twelve pages: pot-pourri. Theology-and-political theory-and-practice discussion of the putative ancient v. modern positions on NL. Unfortunately Hobbes', and especially Locke's, use of NL terminology is taken as proof simpliciter of their proper belief in the essential tenets of NL theory: not true. They have the form of words but not the power thereof. (See John Wild, 'Plato's Modern Enemies', pp.123-133, for decisive proof of their subjectivist tendencies. Hobbes entirely lacks NL foundations, but the equivocal Locke hath them secundum quid. Locke may quote Hooker, but only agrees with him in practice, not in ontology. [Consider Locke's simplistic 'blank slate' theory of mind. Can a blackboard understand the difference between a chalk scribble and a quote from 'Romeo and Juliet'? Would it care if it could?]) Incidentally, Tom Paine is shown to be a full-blown NL theorist and practitioner. A bore, but a good bore.) Useful summary of Just War dogma.

Chapter 9: Private Property & Revolution
Eight pages: discussion of ownership of property, taxation, trade, etc. Discussion of Revolution (internal conflict), not properly distinguished from 'Just War' (international conflict).

UNIT FOUR: JOHN STUART MILL

Chapter 10: The Pleasure Principle
Six pages: hedonism/utilitarianism.

Chapter 11: The Problem with the Pleasure Principle
Twelve pages: the cruel calculus of hedonism.

Chapter 12: Utility & Justice
Five pages: J. S. Mill's shortcomings discussed.

INTERMEZZO: THE ART OF TEACHING
Four pages: on dealing with difficult modern students due to the decay of common sense from: 1) false anthropology/sociology, ie spurious teaching of moral relativism across societies; 2) outright attack, eg J.S. Mill; 3) presentation of artificial ethical quandaries deliberately contrived to cause moral deadlock and confusion [a real second-rater's technique]; meta-ethics--ignoring the facts and just discussing opinions about ideas, eg presenting NL as just another theory of morals, as if there could be any other [there's just NL and degrees of falling away]. Blunt technique for re-inculcation of common sense. It works. An incisive chapter.

UNIT FIVE: WRITTEN ON THE HEART

Chapter 13: A Christian Appraisal of Natural-Law Theory

Seven pages: centrality of concepts of General Revelation, the NL 'written on the heart' (Rom. 2: 14-15) is stressed as essential in witness, in that it is relied upon even when not discussed: without knowledge of sin there can be no salvation. NL is universally understood as it is universal to human nature in all times and place. Basic problem of the human condition is not just lack of knowledge [hence humanistic "education" mantras], but also volitional. A key chapter.

Chapter 14: A Reprise of the Older Thinkers
Eight pages: Aristotle critiqued.
Sophocles' play 'Antigone' attributed to Euripides (p.188)...oops.
Aquinas' critiqued (!).
Confused on Plato: read it yourself instead. 'Apology', then 'Republic'.
Locke's theories attacked. [This should have appeared in ch. 7-9.]

Chapter 15: A Sampling of Recent Thinkers
Twenty pages: modern Catholic thinking.
Modern Jewish thinking.
Calvin and Luther shown to NOT be anti-NL by direct quotation, despite some modern Prot. commentators. [Short section on antinomianism would be helpful here.]
Secular reconsiderations: review of book, 'The Moral Sense' by James Q. Wilson, sociologist.

Although this book is written as sort of a college textbook/primer on natural law, it is a very readable summary of the main theories of natural law, as well as an evaluation of each. Budziszewski also provides a short, but well written apologetic of the Christian view of natural law at the end. That section, as well as the first section on Aristotle, I found to be the most interesting and useful.

He shows how important natural law is in politics (very broadly defined as the partnership in a good life). In an pluralistic era such as we are in, with prevailing theories of post-modernism and humanism, there often seems to be little or no recognized common basis for truth. Many do not even believe in ultimate truth, which presents a sure formula for chaos. As truth continues to be eroded, what common basis for maintaining "the good" in society remains? If ultimate truth is not recognized, then how can morality be determined?

Here is where Budziszewski's book steps into the gap to show, through logical consideration and the common intuition of mankind, that there are in fact moral standards that humanity as a whole recognizes. There is an inherent knowledge of good and evil, written on our heart, as Romans 2:15 says. He also has excellent discussions on how is is possible for humans to obscure or distort this law written on their heart so that they ignore it or twist it to the detriment of themselves and their fellow members of society. Coming to a common recognition of natural law principles is an important part of governing a pluralistic society where not everyone accepts the authority and inspiration of the Christian Bible and the Law contained therein.

But God in His providence has written the essential content of the Law on the hearts of all mankind. Budziszewski does a fine job of showing this to be true, and his argument would even be persuasive to non-Christians. He also clearly delineates between natural revelation and "special revelation", and how natural revelation does not lead one to a saving knowledge of God in Christ Jesus (whereas "special revelation"--i.e. the Bible/Word of God--does). Budziszewski also does a fine job of answering critics of natural law theory, both from Christian and non-Christian contenders.

This book is a strong introduction to various philosophers that have marked Western civilization, starting with Aristotle and proceeding to Thomas Aquinas, John Locke, and John Stuart Mill. Budziszewski begins by outlining the basic premises of each of these thinkers' philosophical systems and then proceeds to critique each of their views of the natural law, while then providing an overview of some recent natural law thinkers.

Unit I: Aristotle
According to Aristotle, the purpose of politics and the city is to enable man to enter into a partnership for the realization of the good life. Community in family and friendships is important to man's social nature, yet these are not enough. The city is required as a broader partnership to place these other partnerships under law and obtain justice. Politics and the city provide the framework from which man can attain the good.
What is Aristotle's conception of the "good"? To properly understand this, one must analyze his Ethics. Aristotle concludes that the good of the soul "lies in the activity of using and following reason, and its highest good lies in the activity of using it and following it excellently" (p. 23). In this way, man achieves true happiness, the greatest human good. It is by acting according to man's purpose that he obtains true happiness, and man's purpose is according to Aristotle the contemplation and understanding of reality.
Community in family and friendships is important to man's social nature, yet these relationships are not enough; the city is required as a broader partnership to place them under law and obtain justice. Aristotle discusses three kinds of justice: (i) obedience to the law (complete justice); (ii) fairness in the allotment of goods (partial justice); and (iii) the civic arrangement of a free people who aer equal under law (political justice). The first kind is complete justice it touches on all of the different virtues. However, although it touches on all of the virtues, it does not touch on every act. Rather, it touches only upon those acts that relate to fellow men. This is because the law is concerned not with all good, but only with the common good.

Unit II: Thomas Aquinas
Aquinas's Summa Theologica was meant to be a summary treatise "about God, about man and about their relationship" (p. 53). The Treatise on Law is one part of the Summa (Part I-II) that deals with the natural law, the human law, the divine law, the revision of laws, the effects of the law, and the "law of sin," which is not a law in the strict sense, but rather "a penalty or consequence resulting from Divine law for man's turning his back on God" (p. 63).
Aquinas distinguishes between the eternal law (God's will), the divine law (God's will as promulgated in the Scriptures); the natural law (the divine law that man knows by virtue of his rational nature), and the human law (the law that is created by the governor who has care over the community). Aquinas warns of those human laws that seek to forbid all evil deeds. Such laws are dangerous because they risk doing away "with many good things" in addition to evil things (p. 77). Although the law should not prohibit all vices, the public should not cease to think of them as vices.
On the question of civil disobedience, Aquinas writes that Christians do not have to obey unjust laws, except when "disobedience would cause either scandal or disturbance" (p. 81). Civil disobedience is the proper course of action when an unjust law is imposed on the subject, but even unjust laws should be obeyed when their disobedience would cause a disturbance to one's fellow citizens or would lead to a misunderstanding that draws others into sin. Under these circumstances, it is preferable to obey rather than disobey the unjust law. However, when an unjust temporal law contradicts God's divine law, it should always be disobeyed.
Laws may be changed or improved upon, but it must be noted that frequent or frivolous changes will exasperate the general population and cause citizens to lose respect for the law. Aquinas writes that "the mere change of law is of itself prejudicial to the common good; because custom avails much for the observance of laws" (p. 84). Changes to the human law may thus be permitted, "but only if the impsrovement in the law outweighs the harm done by change itself" (p. 84).

Unit III: John Locke
Budziszewski argues that a crisis in natural law thinking was sparked by the Protestant Reformation. Many theologians, basing their views on the fall of man as recounted in the Genesis narrative, came to reject the idea that man could through reason know the natural law. Because "[s]in has twisted the faculty of reason at least as much as it has the passions" (p. 110), we could no longer be sure of the validity of our perceptions of the natural law. Those who held to this line of reasoning, which Budziszewski calls the "rejectionists," argued that natural law reasoning should be rejected and faith should instead be cast in the Scriptures.
Budziszewski concedes that not all of the reformers accepted this reasoning. Philip Melanchton for instance, "saw no problem with natural law" (p. 109). John Locke similarly took a moderate view of the natural law and, although he believed in the biblical account of the fall (he authored A Vindication of the Reasonableness of Christianity), he did not believe that human reason was so tainted that it was completely unreliable.
Yet Locke's view of natural law departs from that of Aristotle and Aquinas. Whereas the latter viewed the political condition as man's natural condition, Locke viewed our pre-political state as having everything necessary for people to "live truly human lives" (p. 112). Political society to Locke merely introduces certain guarantees and conveniences otherwise lacking in man's pre-political state. For example, he is able to better protect his natural rights, the enforcement of which is transferred from each individual to the government of the political society. Yet if the government goes beyond the enforcement power that each individual had transferred to it, "the power that the people gave to the government reverts back to them" (p. 130).

Unit IV: John Stuart Mill
John Stuart Mill's system of absolute values does not revolve around truth, beauty, or goodness, but rather, around feelings or sensations. For him, the greatest good is pleasure. Therefore, good is not to be discovered as inherently abiding in any object; rather, the good of a thing is directly related to its utility in creating pleasure. There are thus no normative principles in human nature that we are to explore as we seek to discover what creates human happiness. Rather, in determining the good, we are to determine the sums of pleasure and pain for the aggregate of society and thereby discover which of the array of options before any one decision-maker is the one that promotes the greatest amount of pleasure.
Budziszewski raises several objections to Mill's utilitarian value system. For example, it is practically impossible to calculate all possible courses of action available to a decision maker at any one time and to determine the pain or pleasure likely to result from each course of action for every person who will be affected, summing up the net gains or losses for pleasure and pain in order to determine the "utility" of each decision. There is far too much uncertainty in such calculations and it is unreasonable to expect. This process is so complicated that another utilitarian, Jeremy Bentham, "devoted a number of paragraphs jus to the investigation of whether and how to belch and pass gas!" (p. 146). Mill tries to argue around this weakness in his system by suggesting that it would not be necessary to undertake these calculations at every decision, but rather, it would be possible to undertake one calculation that can be applied with some exceptions to several groups of similar situations. Budziszewski replies that the very act of determining whether a situation falls under an "exception" involves the same burdensome and impractical calculation that Mill tried escaping. Other objections that Budziszewski raised include the incommensurability of different pleasures, the distinctness of persons, and the moral irrelevance of aggregate pleasures.
Budziszewski further argues that Mill's system, which values utility, usefulness, expediency, and aggregate pleasure, completely excludes justice. "If the just is the right and the expedient is the useful, then justice and expediency are two different things [that] may even come into conflict with each other" (p. 162). When such a situation arises, Mill holds that the commonly accepted rules of justice should be broken.

Unit V: Written on the Heart
After having stated the positions of various philosophers on the natural law in the preceding chapters, Budziszewski proceeds to analyze and critique their positions.
Budziszewski proceeds to analyze the thinkers that he had theretofore analyzed, and states:
- Aristotle views natural right but fails to see natural law. Yet he may represent the closest to truth that a pagan who has had no exposure to God's revealed truth can arrive.
- Aquinas places too must trust in the mind and man's reason, which he does not adequately view as tainted by the fall, as well as too much reliance on pagan sources, which "seems to lead him into misinterpretation of Scripture itself" (p. 190).
- Locke writes of principles "written on the heart," but means something different from the Scriptures mean. He does not, for example, believe in underived knowledge. While Locke correctly states that newborn infants have no innate knowledge, he does not recognize that they are born with some underived knowledge, for a baby's mind is structured by underived first principles (p. 193).
Yet natural law thinking did not end with early modern writers such as Locke. Rather, there is today a renaissance of natural law thinking in the following traditions:
- Roman Catholic. A new natural-law theory in the Catholic tradition holds that "we have `pre-moral practical principles' that identify the various kinds of human good as self-evident objects of pursuit. Second, we have `modes of responsibility,' equally self-evident, that tell us how to pursue them. Third are ordinary moral rules, which result" (p. 197).
- Jewish. Whether natural law thinking is compatible with the Jewish faith is a controversial question. Yet those who accept the natural law hold that it is presumed already in the Torah, but under a different name.
- Protestant. The early reformers, including Luther and Calvin, never doubted the place of the natural law. The Catholic Church's natural law tradition was not one of the areas of reform that they instituted. More recently, though, the natural law has been rejected in Protestant circles based on a series of objections that Budziszewski enumerates. The rejectionists contend, for example, that natural law theorists contradict one another as to the content of the natural law. Budziszewski deals with these objections, concluding that they are mostly due to misunderstandings.
- Secular. Some modern secular thinkers, such as James Wilson, accept the idea of universal standards of right and wrong in accord with natural law thinking. As Budziszewski points out, however, the secular argument for the natural law can have no basis on absolute values. Budzisewski asks: "How do we know which sentiments are `moral,' which motives are `nobler' or which aspect of nature is `better' if the only tool we have for judging is sentiment or motive or nature itself?" (p. 218).
Conclusion
This book begins as an overview of the philosophies of various thinkers throughout history. With respect to Locke, for example, rather than provide an overview of Locke's law of nature, its meaning, and its implications, Budziszewski provides a general overview of Locke's state of nature, contract basis for society, and man's right to property and to change government when it has violated this contract. In Unit V of the book, Budziszewski at last ties together the previous four units and offers a critique of the philosophies of prior generations as they relate to the natural law, while giving an overview of modern philosophies and shows where some of them fall short.
One may draw the conclusion that the case for the natural law is undermined rather than furthered by this work because the reader, rather than come across a uniform tradition of natural law throughout history, finds quite distinct theories on the natural law as mediated by the classicists, Aquinas, Locke, and Mill.

This was a fantastic book which has increased my understanding of Natural Law. I would strongly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in morality or politics.

This is a book everyone needs to read. Excellent content and presentation. The book uplights the spirit, as the message is a good one for all.