A Guide for the Perplexed by Ernst F. Schumacher

A Guide for the Perplexed Reviews

• 
  Bob Hamilton

  I remember being very perplexed when I was led to this book. I guess that's what drew me to the title in the first place. I was already aware of "Small is Beautiful" so Schumacher was a familiar name. I was very taken with his notion of philosophical map making. I don't think I had quite fully realised before that I hadn't got such a map. It helped me to understand why I felt somewhat lost in my life. This passage is still poignant.
  
  "The first principle of the philosophical map-makers seemed to be 'If in doubt, leave it out,' or put it into a museum. It occurred to me, however, that the question of what constitutes proof was a very subtle and difficult one. Would it not be wiser to turn the priciple into its opposite and say, 'If in doubt, show it prominently'? After all, matters that are beyond doubt are, in a sense, dead; they do not constitute a challenge to the living."
  
  This was a kind of watershed for me. Previously, I was only interested in the certainties of life, that which can be known. I was at my happiest working out a mathematical proof or constructing a computer program to solve a well-defined problem. From this point onwards I became fascinated with the far richer world of that which isn't known, and quite possibly can never be known.
  
  I think Schumacher's message can best be summarised by saying that in life we each have to create our own philosophical map. We are not going to get given one. He provides some useful tools to get us started.
• 
  Caroline

  I don't like the arrogant tone or the complaints about "modern society" and its values, which are poorly articulated and not defended. I don't agree that there is a linear progression from mineral >> self-aware human + also maybe God comes after that. Rather, I believe that all four are like leaves on a clover and the clover itself is "God" or Gaia. I don't think self-awareness is effectively defined.. it is used as a cheap philosophical buzzword for the first 80 pages of the book. I don't believe that all scientists want to possess nature. I agree with the four fields of knowledge and that the scientific method cannot be applied to all of them, but not with the idea that physicists never encounter divergent problems. I do agree with the concept of love and brotherliness as indispensable resources that allow us to transcend insoluble problems; that part is inspiring.
  
  I don't think it's depressing that human life is a cosmic accident, and I didn't appreciate the attempt to debunk evolution based on the fact that it is "psychotic." Schumacher claims that since the scientific method excludes the consideration of non-physical phenomena, it is not in the position to state that it doesn't exist or didn't play a role in evolution. But I'm not sure people who believe in evolution believe the theory includes a statement that there isn't anything magical about the way things happened.
  
  I don't think Christianity has a legitimate place in the philosophy, even though Schumacher clearly adores it. "Jesus Prayer" can hardly be compared to Yoga, which includes a crucial physical aspect that links the earth, its minerals, our bodies, and our souls together, whereas Jesus prayer is just a mindless rant comparable to counting sheep.
• 
  Zanna

  Schumacher makes some useful points, such as that we think of ourselves in terms of our intentions and others in terms of their actions, but his thinking is weighted and prejudiced by his deep religiosity and preference for mysticism. The negative assessments he makes of scientific thinking and achievements seem arbitrary if you don't agree with the Christian perspective he takes as read.
  
  Schumacher sets out the basis of his philosophy as if it must be obvious to all right-thinking people, and laments that contemporary culture is so wrong-headed as not to see this. I don't buy it at all. His ideas about life-force, consciousness and self-knowledge can't be so indisputable as he casually assumes!
• 
  Peter Darcy

  This book is one for the ages. It needs demands your attention because Schumacher is brilliant, but that is actually part of the book's message. The effort to develop the "higher faculties" of the human person (mind is one of them) removes us from the one-dimensional, flat, Darwinist, materialist view of reality. Ultimately, this book is a very creative critique of Darwinism, not by taking on the infallible doctrine point by point but by making clear that the material world is only ONE dimension of reality itself. He proves this by talking about the way different religious traditions, as well as all the pagan philosophers, have always viewed the world as multi-dimensional and that only those who make the efforts to prepare their inner lives to be receptive to the higher dimensions of reality are those who can speak to us about the meaning of the world. Only in the modern age have men tried to convince each other that this material world is "all there is". If you are prone to these kinds of reflections, this book will be an intellectual companion for you.
• 
  Philip Jordan

  What amazing incite of life, from one of the great philosophical minds of the 20th century. 140 pages never covered so much difficult terrain... and the ride is so smooth & clear, you won't even spill your coffee! :)
  
  I recommend this book to all those who are done/over/through with a limited "color-blind" experience of life, and are "looking" for internal/expanded access to a "hi-def" experience of life. You can clearly see how this book inspired the the minds & creators of Landmark Education, SCI Seminars, etc.
  
  Read, Enjoy & Learn... and as a wise man once said... "The slenderest knowledge that may be obtained of the highest things is more desirable than the most certain knowledge obtained of lesser things." - St. Thomas Aquinas
• 
  Aust

  I must admit that the only reason I finished this book was so that I could tell you how I disliked it. At first I rather enjoyed the language but soon enough his arguments felt ill prepared and often resorted to the "and therefore this is obviously the right thing" kind of reasoning, when it was not convincing at all. On some smaller points I have no problem to agree, but on his whole structuring of the world I just get upset.
  
  The one good thing I can say about it is that by chapter 3 I was already so upset that I managed to write my assignment on the book with ease. Out of pure frustration.
• 
  Edwin

  You can shoot a million holes in each argument made on each page. I thought it would be interesting but I gave up after a dozen or so arguments that were just falling out of the air without any proof or whatever.
• 
  Drick

  In this 1977 book, economist E.f.Schumacher explains the philosophical theory of the Great Chain of Being, the way in which human life is the culmination of a long evolutionary pattern thru history which leads to greater autonomy, freedom and self-awareness. Schumacher's ultimate purpose is to provide a logical alternative to the materialistic, Scientism of his day which basically said that reality only consists of that which can be measured and quantified thru use of the scientific method. By use of the Chain of Being Schumacher shows how God or the Creator or the Transcendent is as real as that which can be empirically "proven." He saw that dependence on Scientism and technology was leading to human self-destruction; his words are all the more relevant today. For those wanting to speak to the functional atheism and its focus on materialism and empiricism of our day, this is a an excellent rejoinder. He does not reject science, business or materialism at all, but does not think we should turn them into the gods they have become in our age.
• 
  Andrew

  I'm writing a more detailed review for the Eighth Day Books catalog for Fall/Winter 2018, so I'll just say here that if you want to be thoughtful about thinking and if you want philosophical thought made as clear and actionable as possible, this is your book.
  
  I recommend it for everybody who is willing to be challenged a little.
• 
  Maria

  E.F. Schumacher's second book, "A Guide for the Perplexed," starts out by describing a map he consulted in Leningrad (before the fall of the USSR) to find out where he was, only to find out that it had ommitted several enormous churches that were right in front of him. When he asked a guide why the churches were not shown on the map, the guides response was"We don't show churches on our maps." This vignette becomes the opening for the premise of the book: the maps of life and knowledge that we have been given in school and university are like this Soviet map....they leave out things that are of utmost importance to those of us who are searching for how to conduct our lives.
  
  In the first section of the book, Schumacher spends some time setting out the nature of the questions he is going to explore throughout the rest of the book: Questions such as "What shoudl I do?" or "What must I do to be saved?" He writes in the first chapter that in this book "we shall look at the world and try and see it whole." The map he will be presenting will include philosophical, ethical, as well as technical questions and issues. Schumacher explains that like mapmaking,this book provides a guide, not the whole of geography (i.e., philosophy) of the territory he will be exploring.
  
  Schumacher begins by showing where in the history of philosophy our mapmaking became impoverished. He turns to Descartes and makes the case that with Descartes, philosophy no longer bothered itself with anything that could not be subjected to mathematics and arithmetic. Reason, not imaginations, argues Descartes, should rule our methodology and our approach to philosophical questions. By limiting his interest to knowledge and ideas that are precise and can be proven without doubt, Descartes, narrows the map of human thought to only that which we can grasp with ease.
  
  From the point of view of philosphical mapmaking, Schumacher argues, this meant a very great impoverishment of human interest and it erased from the map all the intense efforts of philosophers of earlier generations in one clean sweep. Earlier philosophy viewed the world as a "three-dimensional structure," which distinguished between "Higher" and "lower" levels of being. Descartes and subsequent philosophy essentially erased the "vertical dimension" of philosphical maps. The loss of the vertical dimension meant that it was no longer possible to give an answer to philosphical question, "What am I to do with my life?" other than a Utilitarian one. In traditional philosophy, Schumacher points out, our path to happiness is to move higher, to develop our highest facilities, to gain knowledge of the highest things and if possible, to "see God."
  
  In the remainder of the book, Schumacher carefully reconstructs the four levels of being and the four fields of Knowledge that are part of the map of every ancient religious philosophy, from the far east all the way to Christianity. Schumacher provides frequent quotes from major religions and philosophies (Buddhist, Hindu, Islamic, Jewish, Christian) to undergird the point that this vertical dimension has been a major part of every philosophic system prior to Descartes.
  
  Being one of the "perplexed", I read this book with great interest and was excited by the basic premise of the book -- namely, that we have erased the vertical dimension of our approach to some of life's most troubling questions. Moreover, I found myself agreeing with Schumacher's point that we have reduced some of the most complex human questions facing us to "problems" that need "fixing" and shy away from approaching these questions as deep philosphical questions that need self-knowledge, knowledge of others and the wisdom to begin to tackle.
  
  Schumacher argues that the result of this "lopsided development of the last three hundred years is that Western man has become rich in means and poor in ends, The hierarchy of his knowledge has been decapitated: his will is paralyzed because he has lost any grounds on which to base a hierarchy of values. What are his highest values?"
  
  In another section, he writes, "The modern world tends to be skeptical about everything that makes demands on man's highest facutlities. But it is not at all skeptical about skepticism, which demands hardly anything."
  
  Schumacher also makes a very insightful distinction between the validity of the theory of evolution and what he calls "evolutionism." This discussion was particularly illuminating as it helped clarify for me what has been troubling me about the debate between the creationists and the evolutionists. Schumacher writes: "Natural selection has been proved to be an agent of evolutionary change. we can, in fact, prove it by doing. But it is totally illegitimate to claim that the discovery of this mechanism--natural selection--proves that evolution 'was automaic with no room for divine guidance or design.'" Schumacher goes on to say that the Doctrine of Evolution is "generally presented in a manner which betrays and offends against all principles of scientific probity. It starts with the explanation of changes in living beings; then, without warning, it suddenly purports to explain not only the development of consciousness, self-awareness, language, and social institutions but also the origin of life itself." He shows how science has taken the doctrine of evolution and used it to explain all of life as products of chance and necessity and nothing else. He is alarmed that this is how children are taught about the beginning of life and subsequently the meaning of life.
  
  I gave the book four, rather than five stars, because while I think the book is very insightful, Schumacher's style is repetitious and feels heavy handed at times. But more importantly I think Schumacher misses a very important dimension in his discussion of "verticality"-- and that is the dimension of going deeper into wisdom. He tries to reinstate the vertical dimension of the the philosophical mapmaking but gets stuck on "transcendence", i.e., with going "upwards" -- higher. The vertical dimension of human experience also entails going deeper -- sometimes into the abyss before being able to come to some illumination about the opposites of life -- life and death, mercy and justice, etc. He hints at this in the last chapter when he says that the sinner might find redemption before the person who has walked the straight path. But he does not develop this. In fact, even in his discussion of Dante he sidesteps the fact that Dante had to go "down" before going up to wisdom. In the Eastern tradition, both Christian and Asian this dimension is in some ways the cornerstone of the "way" or the path to enlightenment and wisdom. Plato's cave -- an allegory is also about deepening one's awareness of Truth and Beauty by going into the darkness of the cave. Sinking is as important as rising in one's journey to wisdom, something Schumacher overlooks in his book and which left me feeling something important was missing in his discussion.
  
  
  
  
  
• 
  Brandon Woodward

  This is truly a terrible book. I was assigned to read it for school, which I still can’t believe. E.F. Schumacher, an economist, fails spectacularly at attempting to write a philosophical text with a scope much larger than his skills allow (see: Dunning Kruger effect). I began writing my counter-arguments in the margins of the book and every single page now has black margins. Not because I am particularly smart, but because EFS is a machine that continually pumps out bad takes.
  
  It would have been a perfectly acceptable, if derivative, self-help pamphlet if he had simply stated his opinions succinctly and left it at that. Instead, EFS chose to spend an unbelievable amount of pages fruitlessly arguing against science, academics, philosophy, biology, culture, atheism, etc. just to replace them with his low-brow conservative takes.
  
  His fallacy of choice is appealing to common sense. The number of times his arguments follow the form “It is quite obvious that x” or “Anyone who really thinks about it would find x” is absurd. His sources are very sparse, and mostly include a range of religious texts and an occasional quote cherry-picked from a wackjob scientist. It’s so insane to me that this got published.
  
  The only way to showcase how dumb this book is is to present it in its own words.
  
  The silly
  

  [...] when they think of people as naked apes, all doors are opened to the free entry of bestiality. (p22)

  
  

  To ask whether the human being has freedom is like asking whether man is a millionaire. He is not, but can become, a millionaire. (p30)

  
  
  The pseudo-scientific
  

  Yoga in its many forms [...] is the taproot, as it were, of all authentic religions. Simply to believe a religion to be true, [...] and not to know it to be true through having tested it by the scientific methods of yoga, results in the blind leading the blind. (p89)

  
  

  Thousands of people asked [Edgar Cayce, a psychic] for medical help. Putting himself into some kind of trance, he was able to give generally accurate diagnoses of the illnesses of complete strangers living hundreds or even thousands of miles away. (p92)

  
  (A quick google search for Edgar Cayce shows that his readings were usually wrong, and in many cases he gave readings to a number of people long after they were already dead.)
  
  The anti-intellectual
  

  For anyone wedded to the materialistic Scientism of the modern age it will be impossible to understand what this means. (p.44)

  
  

  [Referring to evolutionary biologists] It is one of the great paradoxes of our age that people claiming the proud title of “scientist” dare to offer such undisciplined and reckless speculations as contributions to scientific knowledge, and that they get away with it. (p113)

  
  

  This kind of [evolutionary] thinking continues to be offered as objective science [...] virtually all children are subjected to indoctrination along these lines. (p113)

  
  

  Evolutionism as currently presented has no basis in science. It can be described as a peculiarly degraded religion, many of whose high priests do not even believe in what they proclaim. (114)

  
  

  The inability of twentieth-century thought to rid itself of this imposture is a failure which may well cause the collapse of Western civilization. For it is impossible for any civilization to survive [...] without a religious faith. (115)

  
  

  Organization and direction, the exact opposite of chance, imply purpose [....] The idea that the marvels of living nature are nothing but complex chemistry evolved through natural selection is thereby effectively destroyed. (p117)

  
  
  The harmful
  

  Some people are incapable of grasping and appreciating a given piece of music, not because they are deaf but because of a lack of [adequacy] in the mind. The music is grasped by intellectual powers which some people possess to such a degree that they can grasp, and retain in their memory, an entire symphony on one hearing [...] while others are so weakly endowed that they cannot get it at all, no matter how often and how actively they listen to it. For the former the symphony is as real as it was to the composer; for the latter, there is no symphony: there is nothing but a succession of more or less agreeable but altogether meaningless noises. The former’s mind is adequate to the symphony; the latter’s mind is inadequate, and thus incapable of recognizing the existence of the symphony.
  The same applies throughout the whole range of possible human experiences. [...] an uneducated savage may regard a book as a series of marks on paper. (pp40-41)

  
  

  The human being, even in full maturity, is obviously not a finished product, although some are undoubtedly more finished than others. With most people, the specifically human faculty of self-awareness remains, until the end of their lives, only the germ of faculty, so under-developed that it rarely becomes active, and then only for brief moments. (pp132-133)

  
  

  Instruction on cultivating self-knowledge [...] is the main content of all traditional religious teachings but has been almost entirely lacking in the West for the last hundred years. That is why we cannot trust one another, why most people live in a state of continuous anxiety, [...] and why we need ever more organized welfare. (p133)

  
  
  While these last few quotes aren’t overtly harmful, they support a world view in which humans can be ranked according to ability, an ability specifically tied to western white christian values. The whole book supports “by your bootstraps” rhetoric where if you can’t transcend your circumstances its your own fault. EFS’s heirarchy of being makes it quite convenient to hold prejudice against certain races or cultures because of their biologically determined makeup and “skill” level (a skill set which can only possibly be achieved by the wealthy with an excess of free time). He says lesser humans act as if they were barely conscious machines, even referring to them as savages at one point. This is the worst aspect of the book by far, as EFS talks about the fall of western culture, the loss of christian values, and a degredation of the “human-ness” of society, with science and (presumably) African-Americans as the major culprits.
  
  I’m tired of thinking about this trash. Don’t read it. 0/5
• 
  Shahram

  مشخصات ترجمهٔ فارسی
  رهنمای حیرت‌زدگان، ارنست شوماخر، ترجمهٔ بتول نجفی، انتشارات پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی، ۱۳۹۱، قیمت: ۶۵۰۰ تومان
  دربارهٔ محتوای کتاب این کتاب چنان که عنوانش می‌نماید واقعاً درصدد است سرگشتگان دنیای مدرن را راهنمایی کند. کتاب به تعبیر نویسنده‌اش با معرفی «نقشهٔ جامع فلسفی»، گونه‌ای نقد به جهان‌بینی مدرن، فلسفهٔ جدید و علم جدید است و دعوت به بازگشت به حکمت سنتی. نویسندهٔ آلمانی کتاب می‌گوید جهان‌بینی سنتی برای جهان و نیز برای انسان ابعاد دیگری نیز قائل بوده‌اند که در علم جدید و فلسفهٔ جدید ندیده گرفته شده و جهان صرفاً معادل با همان ابعادی دانسته شده که علم می‌تواند بدان دست یابد و انسان نیز تنها مساوی همان قوایی که برای شناخت جهان طبیعت لازم است. این غفلت از ابعاد مهم‌تر و باارزش‌تر انسان، به محدودیت دید انسان و در نتیجه گرفتاری‌های متعددی در علم، فلسفه، اقتصاد، هنر، اخلاق و ... منجر شده است.
  برای فهم بهتر دیدگاه‌های نویسنده، آشنایی (هرچند به اجمال) با فلسفهٔ غرب و فلسفهٔ علم معاصر کمک بسیار خواهد بود. برخلاف برخی کتاب‌های دیگری که به جهان‌بینی معنوی دعوت می‌کنند و آدمی با خواندشان گمان می‌کند نویسنده از علم جدید یا فلسفهٔ معاصر هیچ نمی‌دانسته و از این رو همدلی با آن‌ها دشوار می‌شود، شوماخر معرفی حکمت سنتی و معنوی را مستدل و همراه با نقدی آگاهانه به علم و فلسفهٔ رایج پیش برده است. شاید این یکی از عوامل مؤثر در قدرت اقناع کتاب باشد. در مواردی هم که شوماخر درصدد نقد روش‌شناسی علوم جدید بوده اگر از آموزه‌ها و دیدگاه‌های مشهور در فلسفهٔ علم (مانند تعین ناقص) نام می‌برد سخنانش برای آشنایان مفهوم‌تر می‌بود.
  کتاب گه‌گاه اشاره‌ای کوتاه به موضوعاتی کرده که به من در فهم برخی آراء اگزیستانسیالیست‌ها (مثلاً دربارهٔ هنر یا اضطراب وجودی) همچنین در فهم برخی دیدگاه‌های آشنای معنویت و عرفان خودمان کمک کرد. به نظرم کتابی تأثیرگذار و تحول‌دهنده است.
  
  دربارهٔ ترجمهٔ کتاب ضمن اینکه باید از ناشر و مترجم ایرانی برای معرفی این کتاب خوب سپاسگزاری کرد، به نسخهٔ فارسی اثر نقدهایی وارد است: کتاب با فونتی غیرمعمول چاپ شده که برای این کتاب مناسب نیست. همچنین ترجمهٔ فارسی‌اش روان و به قول برخی خوشخوان نیست ــ نمی‌دانم مترجم را باید مسئول شمرد یا ویراستار را. جملات یا عبارات مبهم متعددی در متن مانده؛ نبود معادل برای واژه‌های تخصصی هم کار را دشوارتر کرده است. من برای فهم منظور نویسنده بارها ناگزیر شدم به نسخهٔ انگلیسی کتاب مراجعه کنم. با این همه نمی‌توان گفت ترجمه نامفهوم است و کتاب خواندنی نیست.
• 
  Harper R

  A brilliant book utilzes St Augustine as a departure point to consider 4 zones of human enquiry. The 4 zones are an intriguing way to classify the natural and human sciences. Schumacher shows us fixating on one domain only as having the only real truth - leads to folly and a sick culture unable to respond to its genuine tensions and problems well.
  
  1: How I feel
  2: How You feel
  3: How I look to others
  4: How others look to me.
  
  But I do not subscribe to EFS's somewhat implied cleavage between looking and feeling as mutually limiting dimensions.
  
  Looking feelingfully and feeling lookingly are really important and not really appreciated by EFS's exposition. But then again they are hardly appreciated by anyone so he's well above par!
  
  But a hugely important transitional book - and important polemic against reductive scientific materliaism's unjustified conceit to demean the existential neccesity and validity of the wisdom traditions.
  
  Deep, compelling, provocative, a sketch of cultural-religious history - as well as an impassioned plea for individuals to commit to an active applied yogic life throughout the arts and sciences.
  
  p.s. KW owes a staggering and largely unacknowledged debt to this EFS work - and in many ways EFS is a better departure point for integral sciences than KW's taxonomic schematics that can far too easily create too much of glib, cookie cutter take on things.
• 
  Sakib

  This book is a heavy read, but is an absolutely brilliant piece of scholarship. Really enjoyed reading it.
  
  E. F. Schumacher takes the reader on a journey of how he thinks about the world, with the goal to help you see the world a little more clearly, and to prioritise the use of one's life a little better.
  
  He does this by talking about three major things:
  - The Four Levels of Being
  - Adequatio
  - The Four Fields of Knowledge
  
  As we go through these three areas, he poses some powerful arguments: human beings, through consciousness and self-awareness, are indeed a 'higher' species capable of great things; one cannot understand his/her true power without first possessing 'adequatio'; and that to truly know the Universe and everything in it, one must first undergo a serious examination and exploration of the self.
  
  He destroys the dogma of scientific rationalism that plagues modern-day 'knowledge', and seeks to use God-consciousness and philosophy to help the reader to make a little more sense of his/her purpose on this Earth. It is truly a Guide for the Perplexed.
• 
  Matthew

  This was really hard to evaluate. On the one hand, it provides an important fundamental orientation to the world, one consistent with Christian thinking. Schumacher takes a couple steps back, allowing us to see the whole, providing a "map of life" which is truly valuable. But then he endorses a number of extremely flaky things, from Gurdjieff to Edgar Cayce. One can ignore these oddities, but it makes it harder to recommend.
  
  Schumacher does have some great take-downs of modern sensibilities and the blindness to philosophy, but one is left with the sense that this book could have been better written by someone else. As we only have this, however, I think it is valuable.
• 
  Diego Gonzalez

  Un libro al que siempre hay que volver.
• 
  Nghiêm Hoàng

  Nội dung đúng với tên sách. Một cuốn sách giá trị cho những thế hệ hôm nay.
• 
  Venky

  Ernst F.Schumacher was at the forefront of the German Economic revival post the ruins and devastation wreaked by the catastrophic World War II. Schumacher in addition to being a formidable economist was also a pioneer in a movement to better understand and preserve the ecological system within which mankind existed. This endeavour culminated in his 1973 Environmental Economics bestseller "Small Is Beautiful". Schumacher advocated a unique blend of Economics which he himself termed "meta Economics" or "Buddha Economics" where Economic progress was measured in incremental and small but measurable units.
  
  However Schumacher himself considered the publication of "A Guide For the Perplexed" to be the pinnacle of his professional and personal achievement. Basing his title on an earlier work by Maimonides, Schumacher intended "A Guide For the Perplexed" to be a cornerstone for humans to live on Planet Earth. He also wrote this book as a metaphysical and philosophical treatise on the nature and organisation of knowledge. The book is a direct and frontal assault against the values and tenets forming the heart and soul of "Scientific Materialism".
  
  One of the most interesting aspects of the book stems from Schumacher's view of the Universe as assimilating a hierarchy of being. Schumacher explains the differences between life, consciousness and self consciousness in the following unique set of equations:
  
  'Mineral' = m
  'Plant' = m + x
  'Animal' = m + x + y
  'Human' = m + x + y + z
  
  The factors x, y and z are representative of ontological discontinuities and are demonstrative of life, consciousness and self consciousness - factors which accord human beings the highest privilege in the continuum of life when compared with plants and animals. While some of the aspects dealt with by Schumacher in his book are complex, abstruse and complicated, there is no doubt about the invigorating element of provocation that is confined within the pages of this small work, which is all of 192 pages.
  
  Schumacher's daughter wrote that her father handed her the book on his deathbed, five days before he died and he told her "this is what my life has been leading to". As the Chicago Tribune wrote, "A Guide for the Perplexed is really a statement of the philosophical underpinnings that inform Small is Beautiful".
• 
  Quentin Crisp

  Basically, brilliant. It's past midnight so there's no way I'm going to write a nuanced review of this.
  
  With this book, Schumacher attempts to provide what might be called a rough map of areas of uncertain knowledge that are, as he claims, much more important than the areas of knowledge in which we can attain certainty.
  
  I knew, in advance, he would make a stop at art along the way, and I was anticipating that my faith in him would significantly wobble at this point, but, actually, it wasn't so bad. Virgil, representing art, was Dante's guide out of the dark wood (and into hell, but that wasn't the end of the story).
  
  Very near the end, Schumacher makes a very interesting distinction (almost the climax to a book which does, indeed, rise to a peak) between convergent problems and divergent problems. The former can be solved, the latter can't. As an example of the latter, he gave education. Freedom is good (say some); discipline is good (say others). Yet the extreme of freedom is really degeneration and the extreme of discipline is tyranny. So you logically cannot choose one or the other... This was one of the few places where I felt that the author faltered, since we have, with Aristotle's 'golden mean', a well established precedent for taking the middle path between extremes. However, somehow, despite this oversight, his argument about divergent problems seemed to hold together.
  
  This is probably a fragmentary review... Oh well, if I don't write something now, I'll probably never find the time.
  
  The only thing that really makes me sigh is the thought that those most in need of reading this book would probably dismiss the content out of hand. I would be interested if people with staunch materialist views ever found this persuasive.
  
  We are in an age when people have a great many anxieties about the future of the world. On the rare occasions I have said what I most fear in that respect, I have surprised people. More than global warming, or terrorism, or even Trump, what I fear will curtail the human future is science. Of course (?), I don't mean science - I mean what science has become.
  
  William Burroughs wrote: "The way to kill a man or a nation is to cut off his dreams, the way the whites are taking care of the Indians: killing their dreams, their magic, their familiar spirits."
  
  But that is the current project of science for the whole human race.
  
• 
  Tarık

  Kitabın temel argümanı bilimsel materyalizmin insanı ve doğayı kavrayabilmedeki büyük eksikliği.
  
  Kitap 1977’de yazılmış.
  Aziz Augustin’in aforizmasıyla başlıyor: “Saadete erme maksadı dışında insanoğlunun felsefe yapması için hiçbir sebep yoktur.” Ben de ekliyorum: Neden sorusu en zor ve cesur sorudur ve ancak felsefe sorabilir. Bizim disiplinlerimizin haddine düşmez olan biteni yargılamak.
  
  Descartes’ın akıl odaklı dünya görüşüne de eleştirel bakıyor.
  
  Bir insanın nihai arzusu daha yükseğe çıkmadır, takvadır.
  
  Aziz Thomas Aquinas’a sık atıf var: “Hiçkimse o şey kendisine daha önce aşina olmadıkça, kendi arzusu ve çabasıyla birşey yapmaya yönelmez.”
  
  Kitabın ilk önermesi dünyadaki varlık düzeylerinin belirli bir hiyerarşiye sahip olmasıdır. Büyük hakikati görebilmek için bu varlık düzeylerinde ilerlemek zorunludur.
  
  Bizim görevimiz dünyaya bakmak ve onu bütün olarak görmektir.
  
  Eskiden ifade edildiği gibi dünyada dört krallık vardır:
  
  1. Maden (mineral) —madde
  2. bitki —hayat
  3. hayvan —Şuur
  4. insan —kendinin farkında olma
  
  Cansız maddeye hayat vermek, canlı bir maddeye şuur vermek, şuurlu varlıklara kendinin farkında olma gücünü ilave etmek kudretimizin dışındadır.
  Yaşayan varlıklar, cansız madde düzenler ve kullanırlar. Şuurlu varlıklar hayatı, kendinin farkında olanlar ise şuuru kullanabilirler.
  
  Kadim görüş Tanrı'dan yola çıkar ve aşağı doğru varlık silsilesinin merkezden hızı artan bir uzaklaşma ve niteliklerin müterakki kaybı olarak görür. Evrim teorisinden büyük ölçüde etkilenen modern görüşü ise cansız maddeden başlamak ve insanı faydalı niteliklerin en geniş olanı görüştürmüş olarak zincirin son halkası saymak eğilimindedir.
  
  İnsan tekamülün en yüksek düzeyidir.
  Sadece düşünebilen değil, fakat aynı zamanda düşünmesinin farkında olandır. Şuur ve idrak sanki kendi üstlerine geri çekilmişlerdir. Ortada sadece şuurlu bir varlık değil, fakat şuurunun şuurunda olabilen bir varlık vardır; yalnızca bir düşünür değil, fakat bizzat kendi düşüncesini gözleme ve tetkik etme yeteneğine sahip bir düşünür.
  
  Varlık düzeylerinden sonraki en önemli ikinci argüman edilgenlikten etkinliğe nesneden özneye birlik ve bütünlüğüne doğru bir ilerlemedir. Fakat şunu da bilmek lazımdır ki en hükümran ve bağımsız gibi gözüken insan oğlunda bile çok önemli miktarda edilgenlik bulunur. Bir özne olduğu halde, bir çok bakımdan bir nesne olarak kalır bağımlı, şartlara tabii, olayların itip kalktığı bir nesne.
  
  Birlik ve bütünlük şuurlu varlıklara özgüdür. Örneğin bitkiler de canlı varlıklardır ama iç-birlik o kadar zayıftır ki, bitkinin bazı bölümleri kesilip ayrı varlıklar olarak yaşamaya devam edebilirler. Hayvan ise tam tersine son derece bütünleşmiştir ve bu biyolojik sistemin bir parçası tek başına hayatını sürdüremez fakat o hayvan en yüksek düzeyde olanı bile mütevazi bir mantıklılık ve tutarlık düzeyindedir, hafızası zayıf, idrak melekesi son derece müphemdir.
  
  Varlık düzeyi ne kadar yüksek ise dünya o kadar daha geniş daha zengin ve daha muhteşemdir. Ayrıca varlık düzeyi ne kadar yüksek ise kişinin şimdiki zamanı o kadar geniş bir alana yayılır. Ebedi bir şimdiye doğru bir genişleme…
  
  İnsan da bu dört katmana bölünebilir, fiziki beden, semavi beden, ruhani beden ve nefs veya ruh…
  
  Gerçekten insan olabilmek için sadece insan olmanın ötesine geçmeliyiz.
  
  Kitabın dörtlü tasnif, yükselme argümanlarından sonra üçüncü argüman; bilebilmek için o bilmenin bir parçası olmamız gerektiğidir. Ancak o zaman yeterlilik düzeyine kavuşuruz. Bilmek için görmek gözlemlemek yetmez duyumsamak ve içinde olmak da zorunludur.
  “Bakarlar, görmezler; duydukları halde işitmezler; ve onlar, anlamazlar” Matta i̇ncilinden bir ayet.
  
  Zira bu insanların kalpleri mühürlüdür kalpleri ile idrak edemezler yüksek varlık düzeyleri ile temas sadece kalp vasıtasıyla yapılabilir. Modern çağın maddeci bilimciliğine gömülmüş olan birisi için bunun ne demek olduğunu anlamak imkansızdır.
  
  Bilinmezcinin —agnostiğin imanı belki hepsinin en akıldışı olanı dur çünkü bir kamuflaj olmadığı sürece ehemmiyet meselesine ehemmiyetsiz sayma kararıdır onun yaptığı.
  
  61. sayfada bir mevlana alıntısı var: “i̇ran'ın en büyük sufi şair rumi; görünen iki gözün en zayıfları olduğu 70 katlı kalp gözünden söz eder.” Duyu gözlerimizi kapamalı daha parlak olan kavrayış gözlerimizi açmalıyız.
  
  Dolayısıyla yeterliliğin büyük hakikati, uygun bir idrak organı olmadıkça hiçbir şeyin algılanamayacak olma ve uygun bir anlama organı olmaksızın hiçbir şeyin anlaşılmayacağını teyit eder. Madde düzeyindeki kavrayış için insanın birincil aletleri onun beş duygusudur mesele bunun ötesine geçebilmektir.
  
  Varlık düzeyi ne kadar yüksek ise tabiatının sabitliği o kadar az, plastikliği o kadar fazla olur. “Allah indinde her şey mümkündür” Matta İncili 19. 26.
  
  Son 300 yılın aksak gelişmesinin neticesi şudur ki, batı insanı araçlarda zengin, amaçlarda yoksuldur. Bilgisinin hiyerarşisi bozulmuş; bir değerler hiyerarşisini üzerine yerleştireceği zemini kaybettiğinden, iradesi felce uğramıştır Batının en yüce değerleri nelerdir?
  
  Hiyerarşi —yukarıdan aşağı doğru bir kavrama ve kapsama kuvveti.
  Algılama —beşeri duyguların yetilerini düşünsel güçlerin benzer yapısı bize sunulanı alabileceğimiz bir organ veya alete sahip olmadıkça o deneyimi tanıyamayız -yeterliliğin büyük hakikati
  
  Maksat deruni bilgiye ulaşmak. Bunun için en önemli ve ilk adım kendilik bilgisini yakalamak.
  
  Bir alman teoloji kitabı 14. asırda şöyle yazıyor:
  Kendini tam manasıyla tanımak bütün sanatların üstündedir. Çünkü en yüce sanattır o. Eğer kendini iyi tanırsan Allah indinde kendini tanımayıp da göklerin ve bütün gezegen ve yıldızların seyrini bütün nebatların marifetlerini bütün insanların yapı ve mizaçlarını bütün hayvanların tabiyatını bilmenden ve bu gibi işlerde göklerde ve yerde bulunanların bütün ustalığına sahip olmandan daha iyi ve daha önce layık olursun.
  
  .. Antik yunan filozofu da şöyle diyor:
  Onlar kendilerini bilmezler, onun için iç dünyalarının mahiyetini anlamazlar. Eğer insan kendi içinde tohum halinde tanrının özünü ve dünyanın bütün hikmet ve gücünü barındırır bir ��eşit bilgiye diğeri kadar sahiptir ve içinde bulunanı bulunmayan hakikatte ona sahip olmadığını söyleyemez sadece onu başarıyla aramaya il değildir.
  
  .. İslam dünyasından aziz İbni Muhammet Enes Efe'yi şöyle diyor:
  Âmin Ali Radiyallahu an Hazreti Muhammed'i vaktimi boşa harcamamak için ne yapmalıyım diye sordu Resulullah şöyle cevap verdi: “kendini bilmeyi öğren”
  
  Başkalarını bilen akıllıdır kendini bilen aydınlanmış bu da bir Çin atasözü.
  
  Daha önceki herhangi bir çağdan çok daha fazla psikolojik teori ve literatür üretse bile modern dünya bütün bunlar hakkında çok az şey bilmeye devam ediyor. denildiği gibi psikolojiye bazen yeni bilim deniliyor, çok yanlış psikoloji belki de bilimlerin en eskisi ve maalesef en asli özellikleri bakımından da bilimlerin en unutulmuşudur.
  
  Psikoloji esasında insanların normal duruma getirecek konularla değil normal insanları süper normal olmaya ehil ve hatta mukadder olarak görüp yönlendiren bir yol fikri üzerinde çalışmalı.
  
  Sık sık kendimizi kaybederiz bir işe dalarız ve saatler akar geçer ama o vakit gerçek bir şuur oluşmaz orada istiğrak denilen bir durum ifade edilir ama yanlıştır ona da olan biten şey mekanikleşmeedir programlanmış gibi hareket etmelidir itici bir uyku halidir asıl mesele o akış esnasında yeniden uyanabilmektir.
  
  Din esasında insanın gerçeklikle yeniden bağlantı kurmasıdır kavramın kökenine bakalım: RE - LEGİO.
  
  İnsan diğer varlıklardan kendinin farkında olma gücü sayesinde ayrılır adresi kalptir.
  
  Herkes neye benzediği nasıl göründüğü ve başkalarının üzerinde nasıl bir izlenim bıraktı konusunda çok tabii büyük bir meraka sahiptir. Ama belki de rahmet kabilinden, hikayeninu çok özel aynaları yeryüzünde mevcut değildir. Onların vereceği sarsıntılar bizim altından kalkabileceğimizden daha çok olabilir. Kendimizin gerçekten çok kusurlu olduğunu anlamak her zaman acı verir ve kendimizi bu ifşadan korumak için bir çok mekanizmaya sahibizdir. Bu bakımdan doğal merakımız bizi üçüncü alanda çok uzaklara götürmez ve pek kolayca kendi hatalarımızı değil başkalarının kileri araştırmaya çeviriyoruz.
  
  Pragmatizim tek geçerli hakikat düşüncesinin onun başarılı oluşu olduğu görüşünü savunan bir felsefedir. Pragmatist öğüt veriyor: bir düşünce doğru olduğu zaman başarılı olur demek akılcı değildir şöyle demelisiniz bir düşünce başarılı oluyorsa doğrudur.
  
  Büyük psikiyatrist Karl Stern:
  Aşkı nefrete, adaleti adaletsizliğe tercih eden, Dante gibi şiir yazan, Mozart gibi müzik besteleyen ve Leonardo gibi resim yapan bir varlık şüphesiz böyle bir görüş biyolojik determinizm ve tesadüfler sonucu var olma —Cosmogenesis, çılgınca bir fikir. Çılgınlığı argo küfür anlamında değil, ruh hastalığının teknik anlamında kullanıyorum. Hatta böyle bir görüşün şizofrenik düşüncenin belirli yönleri ile birçok ortak noktası da vardır.
  
  Niceliğin egemenliği çağında yaşıyoruz. Her şey nicele dönüştürülebiliyor.
  Aziz Thomas Aquinas:
  “toplumların hayatında adalete, aynı zamanda da merhamet ihtiyaç vardır. Merhametsiz adalet zalimliktir adaletsiz merhamet ise çözülmenin anası.
  
  Eğer sanat esas olarak duygularımıza etki etmeyi amaçlıyorsa ona eğlence diyebiliriz eğer irademizi etkilemeye yönelmesi propaganda diyebiliriz
  
  Capax Universi…
  
  İnsan oğlunun ilk görevi toplum ve gelenekten öğrenmek ve geçici mutluluğunu dıştan alacağı talimatlarda bulmaktır.
  
  İkinci görevi iktisap ettiği bilgiyi içselleştirmek ellemek tasnif edip ayıklamak iyisini alıp koyup kötüsünü atıvermektir.
  
  Üçüncü görevi ilk ikisini başarımadan ele alamayacağı ve onun için muhtemelen bulabileceği en iyi yardıma ihtiyaç duyduğu bir görevdir: ölmeden ölmek. Sevgi ve nefretlerini bütün benmerkezci meşgalelerini aşmaktır.
• 
  Ren

  A bit all over the place. But there are many profound moments. Taken with a huge grain of salt, this has helped me feel ever so slightly less perplexed.
• 
  Mehmet

  Son yüzyıllarda dünyaya hakim olan ‘sığ’ bakış açısının (Kartezyen bakış açısı) çok ciddi ve sağlam bir eleştirisi.
  Hakikat arayıcılarının kafalarındaki bir çok soruya cevap bulabileceği bir kitap
  Yoğun bir eser. Düşünerek, anlayarak, sindirerek yavaş yavaş okunmalı mutlaka
  Düşünce dünyanızı zenginleştirmesi garanti.
  ‘Modern’ insan mutlaka okumalı
  
• 
  Jake S

  I like Schumacher's other work and continue to make reference to it regularly. However, and I very rarely do this, after 50 pages I have decided I have had enough of this book. It is self-indulgent logical extrapolations and little of any use, unlike his precious book Small is Beautiful.
• 
  Kin

  I do like some points being mentioned in this book. There are several i am not on the same page with and some others made me confused. Reading this book to me feels like going on another class of ontology and epistemology, which is not my cup of tea.
• 
  Jim

  The author starts out very well. In the beginning, he makes the case that perception of reality is not the same as measurable reality. He uses the example of mathematicians through history spending their whole lives chasing after measurable facts in search of the fabric of reality. The author goes on to say that our own faiths, beliefs, and imaginations add a depth to life that math cannot quantify. After that, the story goes downhill. The author begins talking about "Levels of Being" - some metaphysical tangent that I assume makes complete sense to him, but made little sense to me. Maybe I'm just not getting Schumacher's wavelength here. Nonetheless, the author lost me at the beginning of chapter 3, and I really didn't feel like re-reading from the beginning to see if there was a passage or paragraph I might have missed that would explain *everything*.