I find myself wondering how you can love a book so much and give a credible review when you can barely remember the names of the main characters

Atheists believe the scientific impossibility Nothing' created everything Richard Dawkins'

"Just a single man, Fyodor Dostoevsky, is enough to defeat all the creative novelists of the world. If one has to decide on 10 great novels in all the languages of the world, one will have to choose at least 3 novels of Dostoevsky in those 10. Dostoevsky’s insight into human beings and their problems is greater than your so-called psychoanalysts, and there are moments where he reaches the heights of great mystics. His book BROTHERS KARAMAZOV is so great in its insights that no BIBLE or KORAN or GITA comes close. In another masterpiece of Dostoevsky, THE IDIOT, the main character is called ‘idiot’ by the people because they can’t understand his simplicity, his humbleness, his purity, his trust, his love. You can cheat him, you can deceive him, and he will still trust you. He is really one of the most beautiful characters ever created by any novelist. The idiot is a sage. The novel could just as well have been called THE SAGE. Dostoevsky’s idiot is not an idiot; he is one of the sanest men amongst an insane humanity. If you can become the idiot of Fyodor Dostoevsky, it is perfectly beautiful. It is better than being cunning priest or politician. Humbleness has such a blessing. Simplicity has such benediction."

Good review. I need to get a new copy of the book as I've worn out the covers and much of the Notes section.

The blurb is a massive spoiler tbh lol I think if it was too philosophical it would have been too dense for me tbh I'm glad it changed it up and had a mystery plot, the best is when it reads like an addictive TV show Also I actually don't care about padding, a lot of my favourite films would probably be considered 'boring', but it has to at least be interesting to read. But the courtroom and other scenes were quite boring and tough to get through ...

Favourite could suggest, deciding on pure emotional reasons, so intellectually problematic.

silly mind suffers. get out of your mind and suffer not. life is pain. suffering is optional. LIFE IS LIFE. attitude is everything.

I totally agree=! Great story .but give me a break unnecessary info. Never felt that way with Tolstoy who also writes long books

The sick fuck that wanted to bang his mother?

Muhammad the pedo (police be upon him).

Muslims do NOT take morality from fatherless western society . majority of western kids do NOT know their fathers .in the west girls start to have sex with boys as soon as they start to menstruate. western women sleep with a lot of guys without marriage and get pregnant out of wedlock . not talking about millions fetuses get flushed in toilets from abortions . a lot of western women are can't and kids are bus.MUSLIMS DO NOT GET MORALITIES FROM A SOCIETY LIKE YOURS .

Of course Muhammad morality is no better than people of his time who did not abuse minors.

most Church Early fathers believed Mary was married of when she was 12 years old and Joseph the carpenter was a very old man. Here is the list of fathers who believed that Joseph was fourscore years old when he married 12 year old Mary: 1. Epiphanius (Born 310Ad - Died 403Ad) 2. Hilary (Hilarius) of Poitiers (Born 300 - Died 368Ad) 3. John Chrysostom (Born between 344 and 349 - Died 407Ad) 4. Cyril of Alexandria (Born 376Ad - Died 444Ad) 5. Saint Euthymius the Great (Born 377 - Died 20 January 473) 6. Theophylact of Ohrid (also known as Theophylact of Bulgaria) (Born 1055 - 1107) 7. Cecumenius 8. Eusebius (Born 263 - Died 339 Ad)

He has a really clear head and mind

What Laing was talking about was psychosis leading to a spiritual emergence or awakening

It's the same as a false dilemma fallacy

In regards to Nelly and the unreliable narrator, she does seem genuine but there are a few times she mentions how she disliked Catherine (the elder) and I wonder how much this dislike tinged her account of Catherine. She also drives the plot infant cases. Fir example she doesn't warn Catherine that Heathcliff is listening to her speech until he runs off

Wuthering Heights, in my opinion, is absolutely unmatched. A masterpiece! Probably my favorite book

Freud obsessed with ity biti people for cash_ modern psychology based or foundation lays on pedophilia._ can only be framed within fracturing a toddlers soul for control and domination for life. This is how hateful people transcend themself because they separated from God. Hateful people transcend self actualization by destroying others _ From FROMM

The book is one of my favorites. It has a lot of intrigue and a beautiful exotic princess as the protagonist's love. It reminds me of Julius Caesar in Alexandria and his dispute with Pharaoh Ptolemy and his romance with Queen Cleopatra.

It does feel like the book starts for the 2nd time after the 10 year time jump, which is as you said is around 300 page mark, and I was put off at first by the lost momentum and new characters but it regained that momentum quick enough, I'd say around after the carnival, which is like page 350-400

I dont consider myself "antinatalist", id say im just extremely compassionate.

I’m currently reading David mcDuff translation of the idiot after having read trans by P and V. McDuff is not good at protraying prince myshkin. Avoid mcDuff on this book. It important to get a correct undering of prince myshkin.

I read the statement “man is the measure of all things” and it suggests, to me, the quantum physics “many worlds theory”. Both suggests that everything is true. Everything really does happen. If I go in a room and I think it is warm and you think it is cold - we are both right. simultaneously the universe expands to include both of our realities.

Mohammed created allah to indulge freely in carnal filth--islam is satanic---its sick to listen to muslims justifying evil!

Define “justified” or “moral.” You might disagree with eating meat, but someone else might think it’s perfectly fine. The majority of the world eats meat, so to them, unaliving less powerful beings for food and nutritional value is perfectly fine. What do you base your argument that people shouldn’t eat meat on?

I've just finished the book and I'm now going through various RU-vid reviews-yours is the one that echoes my own opinion most accurately. I'm so glad you bring up the point on unnecessary filler; I agree 100% and no one ever mentions it. I had the same thought when I read C&P. It's the dialogues, they just ramble on and on! I enjoyed C&P far more than TBK-the philosophical conceit is fascinating-but I felt that a good portion of the dialectic didn't need to be there to adequately get the point across. My opinion of TBK is that it's a novel one should read all the way through once and then go back to individual chapters throughout ones life. 'The Devil, Ivan Fyodorovich's Nightmare' was my personal favourite.

I think this might be the problem or at least one of the problems: It looks like you're holding the Everyman's Library edition of The Count of Monte Cristo. If that's the translation of The Count of Monte Cristo that you read too, then that's a translation from 1846 known as the Chapman-Hall translation. Peter Washington only slightly revised the Chapman-Hall translation for Everyman's Library. However, the Chapman-Hall translation is known to have omissions and other issues, and in general isn't considered to be a great translation. Probably the best available translation in English today is the Robin Buss translation. I forget if Lawrence Ellsworth has a translation as well. If he does, his translation should also be excellent. Ellsworth is working on The Three Musketeers series of books and he's considered the gold standard for many if not most of Dumas's novels now. In any case, it might be worth trying to read The Count of Monte Cristo in the Buss translation or the Ellsworth translation if Ellsworth has also done a translation of The Count of Monte Cristo. By the way, there's both a Count of Monte Cristo film as well as a mini series coming out this year. So it should be a good year to get back into the book. The Count of Monte Cristo is one of my favorite books of all time. I read it in the Buss translation. Happy reading or rereading! Or just enjoying the movie and/or mini series if you watch them. 😊

Limbus Company did a absolutely fantastic adaptation of Wuthering Heights Project Moon deffinitly know how to adapt something unlike Hollywood

There’s a 2-part BBC production of Wuthering Heights from 1978 that is extremely faithful to the book (including the second generation). You can watch it in full, in two parts, on RU-vid.

Sir if you don't mind from where you get these photos for editing

At best we can hope to integrate more science into religion. Like I know a PhD psychologist who treats personality disorders who writes for one of those tarot websites as they are more likley to hold those beliefs.

Awe humility and gratitude as positive psychology ways to manage death anxiety

The fact that it affects you different wheather you know it conciously or not is wild.

very generous to call him a philosopher

What a Spinless goon i am not afraid of death

New atheists are honest but not open minded, they are grounded in reality but not in its depth, they like truth-seeking but never find it.

Poor man. Jesus HAD to be God AND Man, because Man was the one creature who offended The Creator, but the Sacrifice of atonement had to be perfect -- divine -- because the "pay-back" to God had to be of equal value as the offense. Thus, the "God-Man" Jesus. People didn't know HOW to make this magnitude of sacrifice! They needed a "demonstration," so The Son of Man came here to do just that. All God really WANTED was for Man to VOLUNTARILY do what was RIGHT and JUST: "Do justice, love mercy, walk humbly with your God." God never FORCES! He INVITES. If "going good" is the result of force, what GOOD is it? If one only "repents" because he'll be annihilated if he doesn't repent, is it truly repentence? So, Jesus showed HOW to "pay back" God, and invited Man to do it. The Jews hated and were jealous of Jesus because of two things: People were paying more attention to Him than the Pharisees and Scribes, and He called them what they were -- political grifters. (Not because He hated them, but to get them to look at themselves in God's eyes.) So, as in Donald Trump nowadays, HE HAD TO GO! He was rocking their boat. "So He walked on water -- so what? So He fed 5000 with a morsel and a loaf -- so what? I can't believe this man disrespects Christ with those words. He's actually blaspheming, calling Jesus Christ, foretold in The Old Testament from Moses to Isaiah, a magician! WHY did Jesus "walk on water?" Probably many reasons which I don't know. But Peter had to actually HAVE FAITH in Jesus, and FEEL that if he took his eyes OFF Jesus, he would spiritually drown! I think this instance convinced him. The the Loaves and Fishes? WHY? Because the Disciples had to see that FAITH was the WAY to accomplish BIG THINGS for God's People. ALL of us. And so on, and so forth. Jesus IS "The Messiah" the Jews said they LONGED for. But He just didn't LOOK like a Messoiah, did he? Poor. Homeless. Meek. "Insulting." He just wasn't "Messiah-like." Poor man. Poor Jews who REFUSE to LOOK AT JESUS with an open heart. Eternity is a "Long Time." Pride goeth before the fall.

The quality of the piece actually isn't very sophisticated. It may be intentional that he uses slang from the era, that he is juvenile and has reduced most women down to their appearance. I had to stop constantly as I read because it was exasperating. I don't know if all youths are repetitive but I know a few people with mental health issues and illnesses and yes that makes sense that they'd be paranoid and anxious. As I was reading I felt exasperated, no plot, random tangents, random events, even when he ended up at the teachers house I thought finally! Go to bed Holden. And then he wakes up, fears that the teacher is a pervert. I actually don't feel like the teacher was but Holden says it has happened before. So off he goes again. I was screaming, "Go home Holden, go home!" I did feel so depressed and worse I hated that he burdened his sister with his problems. She was a child, she packs her little suitcase and wants to go with him probably to protect him because she feels he's making mistakes. Also the huge gap of what event leads him to treatment. We hear all these random events but the main thing I was curious about isn't there in the book. Maybe it was for the reader to fill in, we know on page one he's in treatment but we don't know how he ended up in treatment. I picture he's suicidal and watches his sister on the merry go round and does something dangerous which she witnesses. This enrages but at the same time. He wants to protect innocence but subject your sister to it? Or maybe nothing happened and he just went home and asked for help 🤔 We just dont know. I dont need everything wrapped into a nice neat bow but I did read the book wanting to know the actual event. Maybe it is better the way Slainger wrote it because its left me banging my head against a wall.

I already started reading book and in middle of it i am watching this understanding something 😅

It was apart of western culture until the 19th Century. But your dogs and cats are considered your children.

I've already started reading this novel and am loving every piece of it, I feel so immersed in the story and just can't put it down ever since I started it honestly speaking. Thanks a lot for confirming to me about how difficult it is to digest it at the beginning coz I felt the same as well, and I felt like repeating some chapters and reading their summaries.Nevertheless, I'm still enjoying it and having higher expectations that it's going to be one of my best classics ❤

Im Australian and after living with Russian people in my humble opinion in general Australian's sense of history doesnt go past their last breakfast. Culture is almost non existant Im sorry

Omg 😮 How can u be so annoying

How can it be the "fallacy of presentism" if God's truth doesn't change? It's either acceptable to have sex with a 9y/o pre-pubescent girl or it isn't. God's truth is permanent and immutable and it does not change. Allah is Satan. Jesus Christ is the TRUE king of the Universe and he had no sexual relationships because He came to redeem sinners and bring them back to the Lord God.

Google the pronunciation.

I took Benjamin Mcevoy’s advice to read it as a it was released - as a series. That was sound advice in my opinion, I kept wanting to keep reading when chewing small bites.

I respect this guy for his TMT work and he seems like a nice chap, pleasant company, but this is precisely the problem: he won't or can't pull the trigger. This is embarrassing. "Wishy washy" is a very good description.

"This is actually a massive issue for Muslims and always will be an issue because it goes against objective morality regarding the treatment of children (especially girls). Child marriage is completely halal in Islam. Let's look at what classical tafsir says regarding Quran 65:4 Ibn Al Kathir The `Iddah of Those in Menopause and Those Who do not have Menses Allah the Exalted clarifies the waiting period of the woman in menopause. And that is the one whose menstruation has stopped due to her older age. Her `Iddah is three months instead of the three monthly cycles for those who menstruate, which is based upon the Ayah in (Surat) Al-Baqarah. see 2:228 The same for the young, who have not reached the years of menstruation. Their `Iddah is three months like those in menopause. As you can see, not only is child marriage allowed in Islam, but also the XXX of premature girls, otherwise there wouldn't need to be a waiting period for such girls. Even if this wasn't the case, your entire argument is a red herring. There is no such thing as a mature 6 year old girl (Aisha's age at marriage), nor is there any such thing as a mature 9 year old girl (Aisha's age when Muhammad XXX her). This is a scientific fact. In fact we know that girls today mature quicker than girls from previous generations due to better nutrition and healthcare. However there is still no such thing as a mature 9 year old girl."

Mohammed's cult following is the same as MAGA Trump followers; he could "shoot someone on the street", and no one would care. He could have sanctioned intimacy between a 52 year old and 9 year old, and people would cultishly, blindly follow him. I guarantee, Muslims would be parading Mohammed's superior morals HAD he TURNED DOWN Aisha's marriage at 6 years old. I can hear them already, "See, he's the BEST example of all mankind, even though it was accepted in the Meccan culture at the time to marry very young girls, Mohammed showed us that it's wrong; see how beautiful Islam is?"