Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
13 of 19 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Amusing but please, a serious work??, 3 Mar 1999
By A Customer
A work of unbelievable naivety, devoid of any credible academic standards. Derivative of a nineteenth century sub-culture based around mystical appropriations from masonic, Rosicrucianist and Theosophist sources, James has written a very bad book which has never been taken seriously by learned people.The errors in the book are just unbelievable. For instance, James claims (pp. 125-130) that Aristotle "stole" the great library of Alexandria. Hello! The library was founded *after* his death, as ANY first-year classicist knows. This is just but one example of a book filled with grave flaws and basic errors. I am surprised by the passion that it has evidently raised on these pages, as the book is looked upon as an amusing joke in academia - certainly nothing to get excited about and most definitely nothing to take seriously as a historical work!
|
|
|
10 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Thought Provoking, 15 Sep 1999
By A Customer
This book has got some inaccuracies, but you cannot deny its facts. The Egpytians were great architects, mathematicians, philosophers, engineer, chemists and teachers. Learned people around the world have marvelled at their knowledge but have failed to associate them with the world that we live in today. Is it because these Egyptians were black Africans, Pre Hyskos invaison. Instaed they rave about the Romans, Greeks and how great they were. It is as if Egypt has not contributed to the western world. Those of us who know different, both learned and self taught, are fully aware of the influence that Egypt has had on todays world. Just look at the format of Washington DC, Memphsis or a dollar bill and you see a strong link. All the author is trying to do is reclaim their accomplishments and point out the fact that the Greek philosophers, mathematicians were taught by these people. This book will be rideculed for its flaws but more sadly because it ruffles the feathers of the establishment and questions what we have been told to date.
|
|
|
5 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
worth thinking about, 7 Jan 1999
By A Customer
this book has been cited as a prime example of afrocentric scholarship (a term with very different meanings for the two sharply divided sides in the culture wars). as such it is worth our reflection. what's at stake here is the source of our culture; "our" because what is traditionally called the western heritage, in science, art, philosophy, politics, etc., is now conquering the entire world peacefully and successfully. both sides of this debate over afrocentrism seem to think that this is a good thing, that, for instance, modern science is wonderful. but who can claim the credit for this culture that we have inherited? power is at stake here, for whoever can claim the origin of our culture on his or her side shall be empowered, or so many believe. The detailed arguments aside (for this is a case in which arguments, however extensive they may be, may only be convincing to those making them), two points are worth our consideration. first, there is a lack of critical reflection on our present cultue--are science and democracy accepted as faith, taken for granted? second, there is a lack of critical reflection on the self--how much of us is defined by our culture, and how much of that culture, in turn, is defined by its origin? what is the source of power? in order to give appropriate consideration to the arguments themselves, it is above all necessary to consider the nature of knowledge and of scientific inquiry, so that we can shift the debate away from narcissism and towards critical inquiry. as to the arguments at hand here, i would suggest a few practical points. for instance, the author of this book claims that aristotle "stole" his ideas from the thinkers of an older culture, namely the egyptians. so all this time the man who is, in dante's phrase, the master of those who know, is merely a dishonest student who concealed his debt to his teachers. now it is clear that these so-called teachers of aristotle did not leave their writings to us; thus our greek man is our only link to great "black" philosophy. it then follows that we should study aristotle with more eagerness. why afrocentrists do not advocate the study of the greek philosophers is a fact beyond my comprehension. in all cases, it is not necessary to prove them wrong, for history is often an impossible dispute; when the consequences of their arguments are pointed out, however, i am not sure that they would stick with their original contentions.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Cheikh Anta Diop
by Van Sertima
by Carter G. Woodson
by Edward Bynum
