Browse Results

Select your format based upon: 1) how you want to read your book, and 2) compatibility with your reading tool. To learn more about using Bookshare with your device, visit the Help Center.

Here is an overview of the specialized formats that Bookshare offers its members with links that go to the Help Center for more information.

• Bookshare Web Reader - A customized reading tool for Bookshare members offering all the features of DAISY with a single click of the "Read Now" link.
• DAISY (Digital Accessible Information System) - A digital book file format. DAISY books from Bookshare are DAISY 3.0 text files that work with just about every type of access technology that reads text. Books that contain images will have the download option of ‘DAISY Text with Images’.
• BRF (Braille Refreshable Format) - Digital Braille for use with refreshable Braille devices and Braille embossers.
• MP3 (MPEG audio layer 3) - Provides audio only with no text. These books are created with a text-to-speech engine and spoken by Kendra, a high quality synthetic voice from Ivona. Any device that supports MP3 playback is compatible.
• DAISY Audio - Similar to the DAISY option above; however, this option uses MP3 files created with our text-to-speech engine that utilizes Ivonas Kendra voice. This format will work with Daisy Audio compatible players such as Victor Reader Stream and Read2Go.
• EPUB - A standard e-book format that can be read on many tools, such as iBooks, Readium or others.
• Word - Accessible Word output, which can be unzipped and opened in any tool that allows .docx files

Is Administrative Law Unlawful?

Is administrative law unlawful? This provocative question has become all the more significant with the expansion of the modern administrative state. While the federal government traditionally could constrain liberty only through acts of Congress and the courts, the executive branch has increasingly come to control Americans through its own administrative rules and adjudication, thus raising disturbing questions about the effect of this sort of state power on American government and society. With Is Administrative Law Unlawful?, Philip Hamburger answers this question in the affirmative, offering a revisionist account of administrative law. Rather than accepting it as a novel power necessitated by modern society, he locates its origins in the medieval and early modern English tradition of royal prerogative. Then he traces resistance to administrative law from the Middle Ages to the present. Medieval parliaments periodically tried to confine the Crown to governing through regular law, but the most effective response was the seventeenth-century development of English constitutional law, which concluded that the government could rule only through the law of the land and the courts, not through administrative edicts. Although the US Constitution pursued this conclusion even more vigorously, administrative power reemerged in the Progressive and New Deal Eras. Since then, Hamburger argues, administrative law has returned American government and society to precisely the sort of consolidated or absolute power that the US Constitution—and constitutions in general—were designed to prevent. With a clear yet many-layered argument that draws on history, law, and legal thought, Is Administrative Law Unlawful? reveals administrative law to be not a benign, natural outgrowth of contemporary government but a pernicious—and profoundly unlawful—return to dangerous pre-constitutional absolutism.

Is Anyone Responsible?: How Television Frames Political Issues (American Politics and Political Economy Series)

A disturbingly cautionary tale, Is Anyone Responsible? anchors with powerful evidence suspicions about the way in which television has impoverished political discourse in the United States and at the same time molds American political consciousness. It is essential reading for media critics, psychologists, political analysts, and all the citizens who want to be sure that their political opinions are their own. "Not only does it provide convincing evidence for particular effects of media fragmentation, but it also explores some of the specific mechanisms by which television works its damage. . . . Here is powerful additional evidence for those of us who like to flay television for its contributions to the trivialization of public discourse and the erosion of democratic accountability."—William A. Gamson, Contemporary Sociology "Iyengar's book has substantial merit. . . . [His] experimental methods offer a precision of measurement that media effects research seldom attains. I believe, moreover, that Iyengar's notion of framing effects is one of the truly important theoretical concepts to appear in recent years."—Thomas E. Patterson, American Political Science Review

Is Death Ever Preferable to Life? (International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine #14)

This is an original contribution to the much debated area of the value that we should place on human life. With the euthanasia issue highlighted in the public arena this book argues for a non-absolutist highest value on life ethic and how that fits with society's current emphasis on individual autonomy. By the use of everyday examples the impact of placing a high value on life is explored. It will be useful for students of ethics, nursing and medicine and those engaged in the public debate on euthanasia.

Is Democracy Possible Here?: Principles for a New Political Debate

Politics in America are polarized and trivialized, perhaps as never before. In Congress, the media, and academic debate, opponents from right and left, the Red and the Blue, struggle against one another as if politics were contact sports played to the shouts of cheerleaders. The result, Ronald Dworkin writes, is a deeply depressing political culture, as ill equipped for the perennial challenge of achieving social justice as for the emerging threats of terrorism. Can the hope for change be realized? Dworkin, one the world's leading legal and political philosophers, identifies and defends core principles of personal and political morality that all citizens can share. He shows that recognizing such shared principles can make substantial political argument possible and help replace contempt with mutual respect. Only then can the full promise of democracy be realized in America and elsewhere. Dworkin lays out two core principles that citizens should share: first, that each human life is intrinsically and equally valuable and, second, that each person has an inalienable personal responsibility for identifying and realizing value in his or her own life. He then shows what fidelity to these principles would mean for human rights, the place of religion in public life, economic justice, and the character and value of democracy. Dworkin argues that liberal conclusions flow most naturally from these principles. Properly understood, they collide with the ambitions of religious conservatives, contemporary American tax and social policy, and much of the War on Terror. But his more basic aim is to convince Americans of all political stripes--as well as citizens of other nations with similar cultures--that they can and must defend their own convictions through their own interpretations of these shared values.

Is Democracy Possible Here?: Principles for a New Political Debate

Politics in America are polarized and trivialized, perhaps as never before. In Congress, the media, and academic debate, opponents from right and left, the Red and the Blue, struggle against one another as if politics were contact sports played to the shouts of cheerleaders. The result, Ronald Dworkin writes, is a deeply depressing political culture, as ill equipped for the perennial challenge of achieving social justice as for the emerging threats of terrorism. Can the hope for change be realized? Dworkin, one the world's leading legal and political philosophers, identifies and defends core principles of personal and political morality that all citizens can share. He shows that recognizing such shared principles can make substantial political argument possible and help replace contempt with mutual respect. Only then can the full promise of democracy be realized in America and elsewhere. Dworkin lays out two core principles that citizens should share: first, that each human life is intrinsically and equally valuable and, second, that each person has an inalienable personal responsibility for identifying and realizing value in his or her own life. He then shows what fidelity to these principles would mean for human rights, the place of religion in public life, economic justice, and the character and value of democracy. Dworkin argues that liberal conclusions flow most naturally from these principles. Properly understood, they collide with the ambitions of religious conservatives, contemporary American tax and social policy, and much of the War on Terror. But his more basic aim is to convince Americans of all political stripes--as well as citizens of other nations with similar cultures--that they can and must defend their own convictions through their own interpretations of these shared values.

Is Evidence-based Psychiatry Ethical? (International Perspectives In Philosophy And Psychiatry Ser.)

Rated as one of the top 15 breakthroughs in medicine over the last 150 years, evidence-based medicine (EBM) has become highly influential in medicine. Put simply, EBM promotes a seemingly irrefutable, principle: that decision-making in medical practice should be based, as much as possible, on the most up-to-date research findings. EBM has been particularly popular within psychiatry, a field that is haunted by a legacy of controversial interventions. For advocates, anchoring psychiatric practice in research data makes psychiatry more scientific valid and ethically legitimate. Few, however, have questioned whether EBM, a concept pioneered by those working in other areas of medicine, can be applied to psychiatric disorders. In this groundbreaking book, the Canadian psychiatrist and ethicist Mona Gupta analyzes the basic assumptions of EBM, and critically examines their applicability to psychiatry. By highlighting the basic ethical tensions between psychiatry and EBM, the author addresses the fundamental and controversial question - should psychiatrists practice evidence-based medicine at all?

Is Faith in God Reasonable?: Debates in Philosophy, Science, and Rhetoric (Routledge Studies in the Philosophy of Religion)

The question of whether faith in God is reasonable is of renewed interest in today’s academy. In light of this interest, as well as the rise of militant religion and terrorism and the emergent reaction by neo-atheism, this volume considers this important question from the views of contemporary scientists, philosophers, and in a more novel fashion, of rhetoricians. It is comprised of a public debate between William Lane Craig, supporting the position that faith in God is reasonable and Alex Rosenberg, arguing against that position. Scholars in the aforementioned fields then respond to the debate, representing both theistic and atheistic positions. The book concludes with rejoinders from Craig and Rosenberg.

Is Faith in God Reasonable?: Debates in Philosophy, Science, and Rhetoric (Routledge Studies in the Philosophy of Religion)

The question of whether faith in God is reasonable is of renewed interest in today’s academy. In light of this interest, as well as the rise of militant religion and terrorism and the emergent reaction by neo-atheism, this volume considers this important question from the views of contemporary scientists, philosophers, and in a more novel fashion, of rhetoricians. It is comprised of a public debate between William Lane Craig, supporting the position that faith in God is reasonable and Alex Rosenberg, arguing against that position. Scholars in the aforementioned fields then respond to the debate, representing both theistic and atheistic positions. The book concludes with rejoinders from Craig and Rosenberg.

Is God a Scientist?: A Dialogue Between Science and Religion

The scriptures of the Faiths use models to depict what God is like; namely Father, Mother, Husband, Judge, Lover, Friend, shepherd and so on. Science also uses models to advance its knowledge, and in a scientific age a model of God as the Cosmic Scientist interacting with the traditional could communicate well. It would imply that the world is a laboratory created by God in order to test whether humanity will obey his laws and live up to the values which he embraces. Using material drawn from science and six world faiths, the book shows the difference and similarity between divine and human experiments and argues that God will bring the experiment to a successful conclusion.

Is God an Economist?: An Institutional Economic Reconstruction of the Old Testament

This book offers a radical new way of approaching the Old Testament. Sigmund Wagner-Tsukamoto argues that rational, institutional and constitutional economic lessons can be derived from the Old Testament, with applications to social conflict and resolution. The book suggests that this religious text also anticipated many modern economic advances.

Is God A Delusion?: A Reply to Religion's Cultured Despisers

Is God a Delusion? addresses the philosophical underpinnings of the recent proliferation of popular books attacking religious beliefs. Winner of CHOICE 2009 Outstanding Academic Title Award Focuses primarily on charges leveled by recent critics that belief in God is irrational and that its nature ferments violence Balances philosophical rigor and scholarly care with an engaging, accessible style Offers a direct response to the crop of recent anti-religion bestsellers currently generating considerable public discussion

Is God A Delusion?: A Reply to Religion's Cultured Despisers

Is God a Delusion? addresses the philosophical underpinnings of the recent proliferation of popular books attacking religious beliefs. Winner of CHOICE 2009 Outstanding Academic Title Award Focuses primarily on charges leveled by recent critics that belief in God is irrational and that its nature ferments violence Balances philosophical rigor and scholarly care with an engaging, accessible style Offers a direct response to the crop of recent anti-religion bestsellers currently generating considerable public discussion

Is God Happy?: Selected Essays

'The most esteemed philosopher to have produced a general introduction to his discipline since Bertrand Russell' Independent In these essays, one of the most important thinkers of the twentieth century writes about communism and socialism, the problem of evil, Erasmus and the reform of the Church, reason and truth, and whether God is happy. Accessible and absorbing, the essays in Is God Happy? deal with some of the eternal problems of philosophy and the most vital questions of our age. Leszek Kolakowski has also written on religion, Spinoza, Bergson, Pascal and seventeenth-century thought. He left communist Poland after his expulsion from Warsaw University for anti-communist activities. From 1970 he was a fellow of All Souls College, Oxford.'His distinctive mix of irony and moral seriousness, religious sensibility and epistemological scepticism, social engagement and political doubt was truly rare ... a true Central European intellectual-perhaps the last' Tony Judt, The New York Times Review of Books

Is God Real? (Library of Philosophy and Religion)

Is God the Best Explanation of Things?: A Dialogue

This book provides an up to date, high-level exchange on God in a uniquely productive style. Readers witness a contemporary version of a classic debate, as two professional philosophers seek to learn from each other while making their cases for their distinct positions. In their dialogue, Joshua Rasmussen and Felipe Leon examine classical and cutting-edge arguments for and against a theistic explanation of general features of reality. The book also provides original lines of thought based on the authors’ own contributions to the field, and offers a productive and innovative inquiry into on one of the biggest questions people ask: what is the ultimate explanation of things?

Is He Out There?: Debating The God Delusion

Is He Out There? is an interdisciplinary examination of the Christian reaction to Dawkinss The God Delusion. That reaction has offered a wide range of counter-arguments, among them: that Dawkinss demonstration of how God almost certainly doesnt exist addresses an out-dated conception of God; that science and religion are not conflictual as Dawkins contends and indeed may well be converging upon an understanding of how God acts in the universe; that Dawkinss denigration of the Bible depends on an overly literal reading; and that Dawkins assumes a narrative of progress in which human beings take the place of God in controlling the course of history. Is He Out There? responds to these arguments in the context of current scientific understanding, biblical criticism and philosophy. Paul Laffan demonstrates how the desire to meet the challenge posed by Dawkinss viewpoint has led to the perversion of scientific theories and accepted positions in other important fields of inquiry. It suggests that Christianity is wedded to a God who is the cause of the universe a classical conception of cause that is anachronistic; that denying the Bible was read for most of the Christian era as offering a literal account of divine creation is a significant misrepresentation of doctrinal history; and that a complete dismissal of progress requires the dismissal of scientific achievement. The author considers the extent to which attractive, secular values like tolerance and freedom of opinion are Christian in source and whether moral systems require God to underwrite them. The wide-ranging nature of Is He Out There? not only provides a review of the state of contemporary Christian apology but is a measured address of the arguments put forward in The God Delusion and indeed of the substantive commentary on Dawkinss thesis.

Is He Out There?: Debating The God Delusion

Is He Out There? is an interdisciplinary examination of the Christian reaction to Dawkinss The God Delusion. That reaction has offered a wide range of counter-arguments, among them: that Dawkinss demonstration of how God almost certainly doesnt exist addresses an out-dated conception of God; that science and religion are not conflictual as Dawkins contends and indeed may well be converging upon an understanding of how God acts in the universe; that Dawkinss denigration of the Bible depends on an overly literal reading; and that Dawkins assumes a narrative of progress in which human beings take the place of God in controlling the course of history. Is He Out There? responds to these arguments in the context of current scientific understanding, biblical criticism and philosophy. Paul Laffan demonstrates how the desire to meet the challenge posed by Dawkinss viewpoint has led to the perversion of scientific theories and accepted positions in other important fields of inquiry. It suggests that Christianity is wedded to a God who is the cause of the universe a classical conception of cause that is anachronistic; that denying the Bible was read for most of the Christian era as offering a literal account of divine creation is a significant misrepresentation of doctrinal history; and that a complete dismissal of progress requires the dismissal of scientific achievement. The author considers the extent to which attractive, secular values like tolerance and freedom of opinion are Christian in source and whether moral systems require God to underwrite them. The wide-ranging nature of Is He Out There? not only provides a review of the state of contemporary Christian apology but is a measured address of the arguments put forward in The God Delusion and indeed of the substantive commentary on Dawkinss thesis.

Is it Rape?: On Acquaintance Rape and Taking Women's Consent Seriously (Live Questions in Ethics and Moral Philosophy)

The issue of acquaintance rape has been gaining increased prominence in recent years. In this book Joan McGregor analyses the ethical and legal problems that arise in connection with acquaintance rape cases. She discusses with great clarity and precision the complexities involved in notions such as consent, force, autonomy, power, intention and the impairment of responsibility through drugs, alcohol and mental illness. Arguing that criminal rape laws are too narrow, capturing only cases where there is clearly recognized physical violence and resistance from the victim, she sets out a new proposal for how the criminal law should deal with cases of nonconsensual sex which captures the ideals of a liberal political society and in particular the idea of equality. This book explains fully what it means when a woman says no and means no.

Is it Rape?: On Acquaintance Rape and Taking Women's Consent Seriously (Live Questions in Ethics and Moral Philosophy)

The issue of acquaintance rape has been gaining increased prominence in recent years. In this book Joan McGregor analyses the ethical and legal problems that arise in connection with acquaintance rape cases. She discusses with great clarity and precision the complexities involved in notions such as consent, force, autonomy, power, intention and the impairment of responsibility through drugs, alcohol and mental illness. Arguing that criminal rape laws are too narrow, capturing only cases where there is clearly recognized physical violence and resistance from the victim, she sets out a new proposal for how the criminal law should deal with cases of nonconsensual sex which captures the ideals of a liberal political society and in particular the idea of equality. This book explains fully what it means when a woman says no and means no.

Is It Tomorrow Yet?: Paradoxes of the Pandemic

One of our most scintillating public intellectuals explores the political paradoxes of the pandemic and helps us think our way through it'We are able to imagine anything because we are being besieged by something that was considered unimaginable...'Beneath the panic and bluster, beneath the confusing speeches and the conflicting advice, the Coronavirus pandemic acted, changing our world in the most profound ways. The tragic human cost and the economic devastation will be assessed and calculated for decades to come. But the pandemic also changed things in ways that are less easily expressed and understood. It has made bare the frayed contradictions of modern life. It has distorted things that seemed simple and settled. It has affirmed plain, uncomfortable truths. In this brilliant, thought-provoking essay, Ivan Krastev, one of our most interesting thinkers today, explores the pandemic's immediate consequences and conceives of its long-term legacy. Will things be different for the communities most harmed, and for those who escaped the worst? Where are we now with the US and China, with the UK and Europe? And how do we think our way through the unthinkable?

Is It Wrong to Buy Sex?: A Debate (Little Debates about Big Questions)

Is it wrong for a man to buy sex from a woman? In this book, Holly Lawford-Smith argues that it is wrong: commercial sex is quintessentially hierarchical sex, and it is wrong both to have, and to perpetuate a market in, hierarchical sex. Angie Pepper argues that it isn’t wrong: men are permitted to buy sex from those women who freely choose to sell it.Important but different interests are at stake in these two positions. According to the first, we should prioritize the interest of all women in securing a society that has achieved equality between the sexes, and we should make the changes needed to get there including prohibiting men from buying sex from women. In contrast, the second position prioritizes the protection of individuals' rights to engage in consensual commercial sex exchanges and demands that we strive for gender equality without compromising these rights. The two authors debate the ethical issues involved in the decision to buy sex, arguing passionately for very different conclusions, in a way that is lively, constructive, and sure to leave readers with a lot to think about.Key Features: Focuses on the pressing moral issue of whether we’re morally permitted to buy sex Advances two different normative ethical approaches to the issue and develops two competing arguments Demonstrates how philosophical debate on controversial topics can be productive and easy-to-follow Provides a glossary with definitions of key terms that are bolded in the main text Includes section summaries that give an overview of the main arguments and a comprehensive bibliography for further reading

Is It Wrong to Buy Sex?: A Debate (Little Debates about Big Questions)

Is it wrong for a man to buy sex from a woman? In this book, Holly Lawford-Smith argues that it is wrong: commercial sex is quintessentially hierarchical sex, and it is wrong both to have, and to perpetuate a market in, hierarchical sex. Angie Pepper argues that it isn’t wrong: men are permitted to buy sex from those women who freely choose to sell it.Important but different interests are at stake in these two positions. According to the first, we should prioritize the interest of all women in securing a society that has achieved equality between the sexes, and we should make the changes needed to get there including prohibiting men from buying sex from women. In contrast, the second position prioritizes the protection of individuals' rights to engage in consensual commercial sex exchanges and demands that we strive for gender equality without compromising these rights. The two authors debate the ethical issues involved in the decision to buy sex, arguing passionately for very different conclusions, in a way that is lively, constructive, and sure to leave readers with a lot to think about.Key Features: Focuses on the pressing moral issue of whether we’re morally permitted to buy sex Advances two different normative ethical approaches to the issue and develops two competing arguments Demonstrates how philosophical debate on controversial topics can be productive and easy-to-follow Provides a glossary with definitions of key terms that are bolded in the main text Includes section summaries that give an overview of the main arguments and a comprehensive bibliography for further reading

Is Just War Possible?

The idea that war is sometimes justified is deeply embedded in public consciousness. But it is only credible so long as we believe that the ethical standards of just war are in fact realizable in practice. In this engaging book, Christopher Finlay elucidates the assumptions underlying just war theory and defends them from a range of objections, arguing that it is a regrettable but necessary reflection of the moral realities of international politics. Using a range of historical and contemporary examples, he demonstrates the necessity of employing the theory on the basis of careful moral appraisal of real-life political landscapes and striking a balance between theoretical ideals and the practical realities of conflict. This book will be a crucial guide to the complexities of just war theory for all students and scholars of the ethics and political theory of war.

Is Morality Real?: A Debate (Little Debates about Big Questions)

In this book, Spencer Case and Matt Lutz debate whether objective moral facts exist. We often say that actions like murder and institutions like slavery are morally wrong. And sometimes people strenuously disagree about the moral status of actions, as with abortion. But what, if anything, makes statements about morality true? Should we be realists about morality, or anti-realists? After the authors jointly outline the major contemporary positions in the moral realism debate, each author argues for his own preferred views and responds to the other’s constructive arguments and criticisms. Case contends that there are moral truths that don't depend on human beliefs or attitudes. Lutz maintains that there are no moral truths, and even if there were, we wouldn't be in a position to know about them. Along the way, they explore topics like the nature of common sense, the meaning of moral language, and why the realism/anti-realism debate matters. The authors develop their own arguments and responses, but assume no prior knowledge of metaethics. The result is a highly accessible exchange, providing new students with an opinionated gateway to this important area of moral philosophy. But the authors’ originality gives food for thought to seasoned philosophers as well. Key Features Gives a comprehensive overview of all the main positions on moral realism, without assuming any prior knowledge on the subject Features both traditional and original arguments for each position Offers highly accessible language without sacrificing intellectual rigor Draws upon, and builds on, recent literature on the realism/anti-realism debate Uses only a limited number of technical terms and defines all of them in the glossary

Is Morality Real?: A Debate (Little Debates about Big Questions)

In this book, Spencer Case and Matt Lutz debate whether objective moral facts exist. We often say that actions like murder and institutions like slavery are morally wrong. And sometimes people strenuously disagree about the moral status of actions, as with abortion. But what, if anything, makes statements about morality true? Should we be realists about morality, or anti-realists? After the authors jointly outline the major contemporary positions in the moral realism debate, each author argues for his own preferred views and responds to the other’s constructive arguments and criticisms. Case contends that there are moral truths that don't depend on human beliefs or attitudes. Lutz maintains that there are no moral truths, and even if there were, we wouldn't be in a position to know about them. Along the way, they explore topics like the nature of common sense, the meaning of moral language, and why the realism/anti-realism debate matters. The authors develop their own arguments and responses, but assume no prior knowledge of metaethics. The result is a highly accessible exchange, providing new students with an opinionated gateway to this important area of moral philosophy. But the authors’ originality gives food for thought to seasoned philosophers as well. Key Features Gives a comprehensive overview of all the main positions on moral realism, without assuming any prior knowledge on the subject Features both traditional and original arguments for each position Offers highly accessible language without sacrificing intellectual rigor Draws upon, and builds on, recent literature on the realism/anti-realism debate Uses only a limited number of technical terms and defines all of them in the glossary