Sprawdziany Matematyka Klasa 3 Czytaj online

Archita Rajpal _rchita_ajpal — At first, I wasn't sure if I was going to like this book. To be honest, I thought Krugman was just going to be too liberal for me. I was expecting to be bowled over with statistics and numbers, and I imagined I would read this book thinking, "yeah, but.. I'm not so sure if I buy this argument." Well.. there are a lot of statistics and numbers, sure. But.. that's not really the point of this book, I don't think. Krugman IS liberal -- but he makes a convincing case for why that's a very GOOD thing and why it's okay to really embrace liberal thinking. I guess this book just helped point out my own faults to me. I want to think of myself as "liberal-minded," but then some sort of knee-jerk sense of moderation kicks in and I tell myself, "well okay, but not that THAT liberal." Sometimes, moderation for its own sake just isn't worth it. On the down side, Krugman is a little bit of a conspiracy-theory bamboozler when it comes to hard-right conservatism and the "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy" that's infected our politics. I'm not sure he really makes the case that conservatives are inherently evil. But he does a good job of explaining why many of them are fundamentally misguided.

Sergio González terzer — This one is a good testament to why people should avoid falling in love with 'players' however gorgeous and charming.

Jimmy Yuan jimmyplay — Two men who are very different from each other become very close friends. One is small, the other is tall. One is smart, the other is a bit slow. Of Mice and Men is a great book. John Steinbeck did a great job writing this book. This novel was engaging and exciting to read . John Steinbeck made it easy to read this novel. The author didn’t overdo on writing on the story. This novel was my first I’d ever read from John Steinbeck. I’ve heard about John Steinbeck in my middle school and never took the chance of reading one of his books. Now I’m in high school I took the chance of reading one of his books and I enjoyed the story. “ Of Mice and Men” was a great and entertaining story. In the beginning of the story I didn’t understand, but after reading the first chapter I started to get more into the story. It had some humorous parts in the story which made the story exciting. The vocabulary used in the story wasn’t too advanced which made it easier to read. The conflict of this story was awesome. I’d like how there was a bully in the story. The bully in this story is what made the story more exciting. Almost every character in the story had a problem with the bully. Also I’d like how there was a narration before every chapter in the story. Having a narrator telling about the chapter really visualize a picture in my imagination about of was the setting of the scene. I feel this book should of never been banned from schools. This novel really didn’t have a lot of profanity, sex, and violence. This book being banned was a seriously dumb idea. I believe everyone should at least read this book in high school. It's a great book and entertaining for students in high school. This book is one of my favorites.

Peter Cho pjcho27f5aa — I enjoyed this book and laughed (and cried a few times!) reading this book. It's a great story about women in the sixties who start a book club. You follow the women's lives until the mid nineties.

Aaron Hogg hogboy — در میان بهبوبه مرور آسار علوی در کانون کتاب خواندمش..

Ksenia Ufox ufo_ — Detective stories without detectives. Mysteries without resolution. Stories about stories, and writing about writing. If you can make this compelling instead of insufferable, then you are Paul Auster.

Waiphyo Aung evilspirit94aa — Robert Alter, well known for his translations of The David Story (I and II Samuel), The Psalms, and The Five Books of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy), takes on another section of the Hebrew Bible: the three Wisdom Books of Job, Proverbs, and Qohelet (Ecclesiastes). As Alter mentions in his introduction, what makes these books unique amongst the canon is their universal, philosophical aim. Relatively unconcerned with the Temple cult of Israel, these books make general observations on life, both descriptive and prescriptive. The truth is, Job and Qohelet are a lot more fun to read, as they topple the banal moralisms of traditional piety. In both these books, life just doesn't make a lot of sense most of the time, but we humans still have to figure it out somehow. As longsuffering Job tells us after God and the Adversary have teamed up to strip him of everything he has: If only my hope were fulfilled, and my hope God might grant. If only God would deign to crush me, loose his hand and tear me apart. (6:8-9) Or Qohelet, lamenting life's unfairness: I returned to see under the sun that not to the swift is the race and not to the mighty, the battle, nor to the wise, bread, not to the discerning, wealth, nor to those who know, favor, for a time of mishap will befall them all. Nor does man know his time, like fish caught in an evil net and like birds held in a trap, like them the sons of man are ensnared by an evil time when it suddenly falls upon them. (9:11-12) Of all the books in the Hebrew Bible, these two look life squarely in the face and consider its possible meaninglessness. There's something in them that especially resonates in the early 21st century, after so many traditional structures have been ripped down. The bulk of Proverbs, by contrast, consists of witty formulations of reverential sayings, such as, "When the Lord is pleased with the ways of a man, even his enemies will make peace with him" (16:7). A number of these sayings are flatly contradicted by Qohelet and Job. To be fair, though, Proverbs does not attempt to present any sort of unified worldview. Many contradict one another (e.g., 26:4-5), and many are simply pragmatic observations without any moral overtones. See, for example, 21:14: "A gift in secret allays anger, and a stealthy bribe, fierce wrath." Furthermore, the book of Proverbs actually contains several distinct sections. It opens with an extended (nine-chapter) praise of Wisdom, which many commentators have taken to be an allegorical figure or a cosmic principle. Christian interpreters, for instance, would later align some traits of cosmic Wisdom with the Logos (the Word) of John 1. Proverbs also contains two distinct sections that appear to be adaptations of Egyptian maxims (22:17-23:11 and 23:12-24:34), as well as (among other parts) what appears to be a confessional from someone named "Agur, son of Yaqeh" (30:1) and an acrostic poem about an ideal wife (31:10-31). In all, it's a bit of a hodgepodge, and though the praise of Wisdom is fascinating, the rest is about as fun as reading a collection of Ben Franklin's sayings. As for Alter's translation, he has focused on recapturing the peculiar qualities of Hebrew poetry: concise rhythm and vivid physical imagery. At times he does this well, as with Proverbs 27:19: "Like water face to face, thus the heart of man to man." At others, he fails, as with the famous refrain of Qohelet 1:2: "Merest breath, said Qohelet, merest breath. All is mere breath." Of course, I don't blame his failures - he is writing in the shadow of perhaps the most important book in the English language: the King James Bible. Not wanting to mess with a good thing, Alter occasionally repeats the word of the King James Version. Compare, for example their versions of Job 38:1-4, in which God finally responds to Job's cries of desperation: Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. (KJV) And the Lord answer Job from the whirlwind and He said: Who is this who darkens counsel in words without knowledge? Gird your loins like a man, that I may ask you, and you can inform Me. Where were you when I founded earth? Tell, if you know understanding. (Alter) One further point of interest in this volume is the extensive footnotes providing commentary. While they occasionally intrude unnecessarily (such as in explaining a proverb that's fairly clear, or telling the reader that a given proverb is banal), they often provide great insight into textual and translational difficulties. As a translator of ancient texts myself (Chinese), I appreciate his lifting the veil a bit. All ancient texts are riddled with tiny scribal mistakes, the Bible included. The scholar, therefore, must compare versions, ancient translations, consider the possibility of mistaking one letter for another, etc., in order to produce the best version possible. I don't see this as a subversive act; in fact, I see it as a holy one. If you respect a text, you want to figure out what it's trying to tell you, what belongs there, etc. How much more so if you revere a text. That said, textual criticism is always to a degree subjective. While some things can be proven with a reasonable degree of certainty ("this passage wasn't originally here because the language is from a later date"), others are guesswork ("this passage wasn't originally here because it's tone/message is different from the rest"). This is nothing new. Even the King James translators made guesses in the face of a corrupt text (such as in Proverbs 24:21). Alter, for his part, remains fairly conservative, not proposing corrections unless they're absolutely necessary. My only beef with him (and the "strong consensus of scholarship" which he follows) is in regarding the final portion of Qohelet (12:9-14) as an editorial addition. The basis for this is not linguistic or archaeological, but the fact that the section contains pious message, which seems at odds with much of the rest of the book. However, the whole book of Qohelet, as Alter points out, brims with paradox and contradiction, an attempt to capture the vast inward contours of a human being. Why should such a writer, after all is said and done, come to the conclusion that it is best to "fear God and keep His commands" (12:13)? One suspects that modern scholars reject this passage as authentic as a projection of their own beliefs: they don't believe a deep thinker, wrestling with doubt, could conclude in reverence. And that, indeed, is a vanity of vanities.

Petit Souvenir petitsouvenir — Overall I enjoyed it. I was able to get through it pretty fast, and the stories that follow along the way are interesting to read. The dynamics of the places and behind the scences stories were entertaining, and I also ended up skimming through other parts of the book.

Diego Otálora diegootaloa5a9 — in ketabo man be sefaresh yeki az doostam khoondam va az safheye avalesh lezzat bordam.amma ba'd kar kharab shod.harchand hanooz fazaye oon ketabkhooneye vagheyi va zehnie ghahramanesh baram jalebe.shaiad kariam ke inja too goodreads daram mikonam shabihe hamoon bashe.amma baarye khodam ham oomadane in mail(ke be baziam neshoon dadam va kolli ham ba'ese khandam shod)gheire montazere bood.hala ba ejaze az shoma einesho copy mikonam ta shomam kami bekhandin ya be ghole ishoon be hale man tarahom konin:)baraye vagheyi tar shodane neshoonie oon agha ro ham gozashtam: (from: mohammadreza ch.hosseini to: bahman subject: heyyyy message: kheili bebakhshidaaaa.vali shoma fek mikoni mardom kharan? 1033 ta ketab khoondi????dorough gooye past.2ktor hesabi ham inghadar ketab nakhoonde!!! ba in doroughaa donbale chi migardi?donbale inke dide beshi? vaghean motassefam eghvagar haye ghaabele tarahhom)

Sujey Sánchez sujeysanchez — family story, .. a good undertaking of a son's learning about the life of his father.

Carlos Jiménez carlosjimenezdesign — This book was pretty good and well written, maybe a little too redundant and science fiction is not necessarily my thing.

Rudy Secco _udyse — Having loved Angels and Demons and The DaVinci Code, I thought I'd give Brown's other books a try. Deception Point was mostly enjoyable except for the moments when it was glaringly obvious that Brown was trying to prove he'd done his research for the book. He's the art history conspiracy writer to most of the world, so when he went to write science, he used a lot of forced (and unnecessary) exposition to prove that he'd looked up facts in some very large books and perhaps even talked to a few experts. The plot is just as twisted and enjoyable as the "artsy" books, you just have to read around all of the "I did science-y research, I SWEAR!" parts.

Brian Mcg _rcheri — All time favorite.

Bart Van bartvaneemeren — I don't know what to say...wonderfully written, it kept me always wanting more. However, it let me down at the end...I felt like the author ran out of ideas and got tired at the end. It was not the ending I expected or wanted. Maybe that's the way it's supposed to be, just as in life we don't get always the ending we expected nor deserved:)

Brittany Sharp _bsharp — Yeah, so this is my second ex-Gunners memoir this month and screw what you're thinking, buddy, if Izzy wanted to pen a tell-all I'd be ready to start in on it tomorrow. And Slash's book is good. It's more of a straight rock memoir than Adler's. He makes his childhood sound interesting; he and Adler, if they're to be believed, were both completely insufferable delinquents. He tells a good story about the origins of Guns, and he writes about the extremes of his drug abuse (post-Lies, pre-UYI) as a sort of black comedy. Those pages would justify the entire book, on its own. I found myself bored by the later portions of the book. I'm not sure whether that's just because I'm not very interested in Slash's career after the mid-'90s (Velvet Revolver's okay, but not exactly the sort of band I can imagine getting excited about) or whether it's just that Slash lacks any sort of critical distance to that period, and therefore just ends up recounting factual details, instead of telling any sort of particularly compelling story. I have a stylistic bone to pick: all of Slash's analogies are tortured. Most of Slash's analogies are set up between people he knows and character actors in movies, or between whatever situation he's discussing and other situations which involve mirrors. But they are all terrible. One thinks that this is the sort of thing a ghostwriter/cowriter would address, but maybe the idea was that Slash's comparisons offer a window into his personality-- if they do, it's sadly not a flattering view. And while we're on the topic, see if you can find the problem here: "If John Lennon had his lost weekend, I had my lost year." EDITORS! PAY ATTENTION! The best sentence in the book is, hands down, a description of James Hetfield engaging in groupiesex in Slash's room: He was standing on the bed, ramming her head against the wall, moaning in that thunderous voice of his, just slamming away, and bellowing "That'll be fine! That'll be fine! Yes! That'll be fine!" Just try to get that mental image out of your head. You're welcome. The second best sentence in the book is: To me, those books [rock-and-roll biographies, and for the record I think it's hilarious that Slash writes rock-and-roll that way] were basically written for the authors' own entertainment; they seemed inaccurate and full of shit. And after that I never read another rock-and-roll biography again. And with that, Dear Reader, I must bid you adieu.

Zarah Hsu imzarahh — I enjoyed the read. It wasn't my favorite Diana Wynne Jones book (although it does mention Lego Daleks, which is awesome), but it was fun and different.