Digital List Price: | $6.99 |
Kindle Price: | $4.08 Save $2.91 (42%) |
Sold by: | Amazon.com Services LLC |
Your Memberships & Subscriptions
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
OK
Audible sample Sample
What's Wrong with the World Kindle Edition
This groundbreaking work epitomizes why G. K. Chesterton is considered one of the pithiest and most versatile philosophers of his era. An anthology of his early writings, What’s Wrong with the World takes on such thorny subjects as public education, jingoism, feminism, imperialism, politics, and the modern family. Chesterton’s humor and intellectual verve are on full display, making these incisive essays as applicable in their exploration of ethics and the human heart today as when they were penned over a hundred years ago.
This ebook has been professionally proofread to ensure accuracy and readability on all devices.
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherOpen Road Media
- Publication dateSeptember 22, 2015
- File size1844 KB
Customers who read this book also read
Editorial Reviews
About the Author
Product details
- ASIN : B014QI1OCY
- Publisher : Open Road Media (September 22, 2015)
- Publication date : September 22, 2015
- Language : English
- File size : 1844 KB
- Text-to-Speech : Enabled
- Screen Reader : Supported
- Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
- X-Ray : Enabled
- Word Wise : Enabled
- Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
- Print length : 177 pages
- Best Sellers Rank: #1,088,272 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
- #312 in British Contemporary Literature
- #1,379 in British & Irish Literature
- #1,803 in Essays (Kindle Store)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author
G. K. Chesterton (1874-1936) was a prolific English journalist and author best known for his mystery series featuring the priest-detective Father Brown and for the metaphysical thriller The Man Who Was Thursday. Baptized into the Church of England, Chesterton underwent a crisis of faith as a young man and became fascinated with the occult. He eventually converted to Roman Catholicism and published some of Christianity's most influential apologetics, including Heretics and Orthodoxy.
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
The organization of this book is straightforward, but certainly intriguing. The first, and longest, part, deals with the homelessness of man, that is, the lack of property possessed by poor people in England. If this was true in the early 1900’s, it is certainly just as true now. The second part is a short discussion of the error of imperialism, namely that Britain’s taste for gaining land through colonial adventures and romanticizing its colonies suggested a form of weakness as much as a form of strength. The third part, a critique on feminism, shows a fine appreciation for what we would consider the multi-tasking abilities of women as opposed to the more focused attention of men. Before this became a topic of brain studies, Chesterton viewed it as the difference between specialist man and generalist woman, and did so soundly. The fourth and final part, on the education of children, has an especially touching ode to the importance of the beauty of poor girls, which the author then takes around to demonstrate what would be required to preserve that beauty, namely parents who are not overworked and harried, and who possessed at least some modest property and a decent standard of living.
This book criticizes socialism for not being revolutionary enough, for being too much like the grim sort of big box businesses that were even in the early 1900’s showing themselves in the United Kingdom. Nevertheless, this book is no mere partisan attack, for it is critical of the lack of ideals and imagination and biblical focus of the Tories as well. It is immensely critical of the ruling aristocratic class, in part for its lack of interest in history, many of them being parvenus who merely went to good schools and had class inculcated into them. The book is especially scathing at the active suppression of honesty and moral courage among upper class “public” schools. It is the book’s combination of harsh criticism of moral failing and its charitable attitude towards people in general, and its grudging approval of others where credit is given that accounts for the humanity of the author, and for the worthiness of this book. More surprising than just about anything else that could be imagined is that a book originally written by an eccentric man about current events should still be au currant more than a century later, just as painfully relevant, and with lessons just as frequently unheeded. As is true of so much else in this book, this saying still holds: Christianity has not been tried and found wanting, it has been found difficult and left untried.
The book is more than a century old, it was published in 1910! And of course, it has the 1910 writing style which is what puts me off I think but that is just personal preference.
The book is still very good. The ideas put forward are still applicable to this day - it's as if our social progress barely moved in 100 years!
If it wasn't for the writing style and some of the examples in the arguments, you'd think the book was written last year.
Our society is still suffering from the same illnesses as it was back then. Unfortunately we still haven't found the solutions to these age old problems. What's more, our discussions have become even more acute and fruitless. We don't even try to reconcile our differences any more. Instead, whoever can shout the loudest on TV is deemed the winner of the argument.
The book does have a lot of humor though I wouldn't call it funny. I would probably call it sad, especially if you start pondering about this 100 year total social stagnation.
Anyway, the book does have a lot of good ideas and makes you think back and ask yourself, why do we keep repeating the same mistakes and doing the wrong thing? why do we refuse to move forward?!
Chesterton is absolutely a refreshing and original thinker. He can take a popular idea and turn it on it's ear with the greatest humor and abashment. He is not politically correct. If one with an agenda were to read his words without context, he could presumably come across as sexist, but surely not misogynistic. As a woman, I did find many things he said to be a bit sexist, but in the strangest, flattering way. He seemed to put women so far on a pedestal that it came across at times naive, but I think it came from a place of genuine chivalry.
This book is certainly more political than religious. Religion really has little place in the book at all. Chesterton is a self-described Distributionalist. He is anti-Socialist and had some great insight on Socialist dogma. "What's Wrong With the World" should really be- what's wrong with early 20th Century England. The book was written in 1910 and centers on political movements at that time.
Though some of the political issues may seem far removed; the underlying ideology is surprisingly relevant for today. It is uncanny how much modern American politics reflects previous English politics. Chesterton loathes the two party system and even accuses them of partnership. Many Americans could find good company with him on that belief. I think he gets it best in the final chapter "The Home of Man" when he describes his characters; Hudge (Socialist) and Gudge (Tory). It is his suspicion "that Hudge and Gudge are secretly in partnership." Their quarrels are public and a "put-up job" ending with one always playing "coincidentally" into the other's hands. Gudge, the plutocrat, wants anarchic industrialism, cheap women workers, obedient workmen, a tame populous without arms to rise up, and a family broken by overwork. Hudge, the Socialist, gives Gudge in return praises of Anarchy, work for women that are "free to live her own life", teetotalism for the worker, a populous that takes arms against no one for no reason, and tells the populous that the family is something that will soon be outgrown. If that doesn't smack of modern day Republican (Gudge) and Democrat (Hudge); I don't know what does. Hegelian dialectic at work again. Chesterton, though you might find much to disagree with, will definitely make you question your own beliefs.