Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
17 of 18 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Misunderstood Wisdom, 29 Aug 2001
By A Customer
Moore diagnoses "loss of soul" as the root of many of our modern troubles. He does not define soul but tells us that it has to do with qualities such as heart, relatedness, depth, feeling and imagination. His approach makes sense; he advises us to respect those aspects of ourselves that we often reject, seeing value and necessity in shadow qualities such as narcissism and depression. I first encountered this book as a lost soul and was devastated by the accuracy with which the book confronted me with this. Having read it several times and followed some of the suggested further reading I feel that this book has been misunderstood by some of the more critical reviewers. It does not suggest living witout morality but acknowledges that we can use morality as a defence against the soul. The authors knowlegde of the the world`s spiritual traditions is impressive, but he does not advocate spirituality as an escape from the complexities of life, but through them. There are no easy solutions here, but you will find a refreshing perspective and rare consolation.
|
|
|
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A rough diamond, 3 April 1998
By A Customer
Moore's book is an excellent guide which points the way to personal enrichment. The criticisms made of it, such as lack of academic thoroughness are valid in so far as it would have been better as a more substantiated and context based book. References to other works are absent and would help enormously. However, the same criticisms fall short of destroying the books credibility. This is because the enrichment advocated is fundamentally personal. One cannot therefore present an exact guide to health for it would nearly always be irrelevant. With this in mind, Moore has clearly produced an excellent and special book. It is like a flawed diamond that, however, reflects a rare hue.
|
|
|
15 of 26 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
The soul deserves better care than this., 3 Feb 1999
By A Customer
With the very opening page of Care of the Soul, even the casual reader will find reason to question the authority and usefulness of Moore's analysis of the soul. His analysis deals with a topic that is recognizably enigmatic and complex and so it is only natural to think that within his book one would find an acknowledgment or a reference to the names and works of such other noteworthy analysts of the soul as Plato, Aristotle, the Upanishads, Homer, Sophocles, Lao Tzu, Jesus Christ, Plotinus, Buddha, Shakespeare, Milton, Rousseau, Kant, Nietzsche, or Heidegger just to name a few of the more secular expressions. (A Catholic would likely include Gregory of Nyssa, Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, Bonaventure, Catherine of Sienna, Dante, Thomas More, Theresa of Avila, Francis de Sales, John of the Cross or John Henry Newman among others.) Yet these names are nowhere to be found (with the exception of his periodic mention of Plato, Homer, the Renaissance humanist Marsilio Ficino and the sixteenth century physician Paracelsus). Instead we find that the sole support of his thought rests in the psychology of Carl Jung and the "original thinkers" like James Hillman and Robert Sardello. And for good reason. Moore's project is not about the soul, its nature, powers and its end. Rather, it is about learning the Jungian technique of developing the imagination in order to see and experience one's "shadow side" which, even given its advantages, can hardly be said to offer a true "care of the soul." Moore's project entails not simply a rediscovery of the role of the imagination in shaping human behavior, but it effectively involves a reduction of the soul to the imagination. And why not the imagination; "being follows imagination" (12). Let it be known, however, that this process involves more and less than it promises. Moore promises to revisit some of the difficulties that we typically experience today, the "emotional complaints of our time" like emptiness, vague depression, meaninglessness, disillusionment, etc. He observes that without the soul (i.e., imagination), our attempts to resolve these difficulties will be unsuccessful because what we "truly long for is the soul (i.e., imagination) in each of these areas" (xvi). He claims that his method of re-imaging offers the person "the possibility of self-knowledge and self-acceptance" and implies that such "self-knowledge and self-acceptance" will bring wholeness to the person suffering from the above ailments. However, his project 'progresses' at the cost of an understanding of the soul's true and complete nature, its end and its proper fulfillment and, therefore, it fails offer us anything substantive at all. One is right to suspect that underlying Moore's project, is a desire (unconscious, perhaps) to do away with that specific and unique object to which the soul is drawn, the object that can truly satisfy the yearning of the soul, namely the Transcendent. As Augustine said so clearly centuries ago: "Our heart is restless until it rests in You." Moore's project, on the other hand, concerns simply the observance and acceptance of the vicissitudes of the soul, but it is indifferent to the question of the soul's attraction to anything higher than itself (excepting, of course, Jung's "unconsciousness"). This suspicion becomes even more evident later on when Moore talks of wedding spirituality with soul. Moore treats spirituality in the same fashion he treats the soul. He robs the spirit of its most significant meaning by deliberately avoiding a discussion of the spirit's directedness. The dependence upon Jung, a person who considered the transcendent solely from the standpoint of its usefulness, further illustrates the demise of both the soul and of spirituality in Moore's thought. Given his use of resources and the conspicuous absence of others, and the deliberate reduction and misuse of terms like 'soul' and 'spirituality', there is good reason to question the "depth," thoroughness and usefulness of this "guide." Moore's glaring oversights and slights of hand also cause one to suspect his genuineness. That is, it would appear that a person who possesses a doctorate in religious studies and has had twelve years experience within a Catholic religious order is not forthright in his analysis if he overlooks what so many important, and time- honored people have said about the soul. Granted, one need not present or even reference the thought of every person who has ever said anything on the soul in order to develop a worthwhile analysis. But one should expect attention to be given to at least some of these authorities in the field of human nature. While it is true that on occasion a person comes along with a unique insight into the human person and condition, Moore is not that person. In addition, the absence of a dependence upon the thought of others makes it appear that Moore may have a difficulty himself dealing with authority (an appearance that is made more believable by his own admission; see p. 213). Such a difficulty would explain much in Moore's method and message. In the end, what one expects and what one gets from Moore's book is nothing but the same old nonsense so characteristic of today's ill-prepared and ill-formed soul-charlatans of psychobabble. Perhaps the most fitting description of Moore's enterprise is summed up in the incisive words of that minstrel who, not so long ago, sang of a similar band: adventavit assinus, pulcher et fortissimus. People who truly experience a "loss of soul" deserve better care than this.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Thomas Moore
by Thomas Moore
by James Hillman
