Chemical Principles Student's Study Guide & Solutions Manual

Customer Reviews:

it's also a study guide.......2006-09-14

The reviewer is right, but the book does come with a study guide for the entire book, not just the solutions.

Suggestion.......2005-04-16

This solutions manual is my bestest friend! Don't know what I'll do without it. Anyways, to the meat of it all, the solutions manual is actually on the website the book has (pdf format), so you don't really have to buy it, but if you really want a hardcopy then go ahead. I'd rather save $40 bucks. Hope this saves you guys some $$ (=

Chemical Principles Study Guide/Solutions Manual

Average customer rating:

Chemical Principles Study Guide/Solutions Manual
John Krenos
Manufacturer: W. H. Freeman
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General & Reference | Chemistry | Science | Subjects | Books

General | Science | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

Chemical Principles
Student Solutions Manual to accompany Calculus: Single and Multivariable, 4th Edition
Calculus: Single and Multivariable
Microscale and Selected Macroscale Experiments for General and Advanced General Chemistry: An Innovation Approach
Chemical Principles Student's Study Guide & Solutions Manual

ASIN: 1429200995

Average customer rating:

Chemical Principles, Study Guide & Solutions Manual
Peter Atkins , and Loretta Jones
Manufacturer: W. H. Freeman
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General & Reference | Chemistry | Science | Subjects | Books

General | Science | Subjects | Books

Study Guides | Reference | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Professional | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Reference | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Science | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

Chemical Principles: The Quest for Insight
An Introduction To Mechanics
Chemical Principles
Student Solutions Manual to accompany Calculus: Single and Multivariable, 4th Edition
Calculus: Single and Multivariable

ASIN: 0716762544

Chemical Principles + Media Guide + Cd, + Study Guide, + Student Solution Manual, 5th Ed

Average customer rating:

Chemical Principles + Media Guide + Cd, + Study Guide, + Student Solution Manual, 5th Ed
Steven S. Zumdahl
Manufacturer: Houghton Mifflin Company
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General & Reference | Chemistry | Science | Subjects | Books

General | Science | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Professional | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Science | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
ASIN: 0618586474

Chemical Principles Textbook + Media Guide + Cd + Study Guide + Solutions Manual + Eduspace + Blackboard

Average customer rating:

Chemical Principles Textbook + Media Guide + Cd + Study Guide + Solutions Manual + Eduspace + Blackboard
Steven S. Zumdahl
Manufacturer: Houghton Mifflin Company
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General & Reference | Chemistry | Science | Subjects | Books

General | Science | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Professional | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Science | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
ASIN: 0618515399

Chemical Principles: The Quest for Insight/Student Study Guide and Solutions Manual

Average customer rating:

Chemical Principles: The Quest for Insight/Student Study Guide and Solutions Manual
Peter Atkins
Manufacturer: W. H. Freeman Company
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
ASIN: B000MUVYEY

Chemical Principles With Media Guide + Cd-rom + Study + Solutions Manual 5th Ed

Average customer rating:

Chemical Principles With Media Guide + Cd-rom + Study + Solutions Manual 5th Ed
Steven S. Zumdahl
Manufacturer: Houghton Mifflin Company
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General & Reference | Chemistry | Science | Subjects | Books

General | Science | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Professional | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Science | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
ASIN: 0618495347

Chemical Principles 3E & Solutions Manual/Study Guide & Thinkwell Software

Average customer rating:

Chemical Principles 3E & Solutions Manual/Study Guide & Thinkwell Software
Peter Atkins
Manufacturer: W. H. Freeman
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General & Reference | Chemistry | Science | Subjects | Books

General | Science | Subjects | Books

Chemical Principles and Student Study Guide, Fourth Edition and Survey and Solutions Manual with CDROM

Average customer rating:

Chemical Principles and Student Study Guide, Fourth Edition and Survey and Solutions Manual with CDROM
Zumdahl
Manufacturer: Houghton Mifflin Company
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General & Reference | Chemistry | Science | Subjects | Books

Chemical Principles With Media Guide & Cd With Study Guide With Complete Solutions Manual, 5th Ed

Average customer rating:

Chemical Principles With Media Guide & Cd With Study Guide With Complete Solutions Manual, 5th Ed
Steven S. Zumdahl
Manufacturer: Not Avail
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General & Reference | Chemistry | Science | Subjects | Books

General | Science | Subjects | Books

Amazon.com

What is your cat thinking when she scratches at the door? What goes through Koko the gorilla's mind when she signs? For that matter, what goes through our minds when we think about animals and intelligence? Science writer Stephen Budiansky explores the difficulties of comparing intelligence between species in If a Lion Could Talk and takes a strong stance against measuring other animals using human standards. (The title is part of a Wittgenstein quote that ends "...we would not understand him.")

The book shows how the most basic principle of evolution--that all living things are related--has been misconstrued by well-meaning scientists to imply that all animals possess intelligence that differs from ours only in quantity. This leads to comparisons of near-equivalence between such intuitively likely pairs as adult gorillas and human children, comparisons that Budiansky suggests are misleading and more descriptive of our own minds than those of our distant cousins. What evolution should be telling us, he says, is that each species is equally well suited to its niche and should be examined for what it is, not how similar or different it is from us. How is it that chimpanzees can perform such remarkable problem-solving without language?

If a Lion Could Talk will not make anyone lose interest in animal minds, for that is not its intention. If anything, it inspires a real sense of admiration for the billions of living things that make it through each day despite the seemingly terrible handicap of not being human. Budiansky tells us that if we want to learn about our planet-mates, we have a lot of unlearning to do. Luckily for us he is gracious enough to provide an introductory unlesson. --Rob Lightner

Book Description

How many of us have caught ourselves gazing into the eyes of a pet, wondering what thoughts lie behind those eyes? Or fallen into an argument over which is smarter, the dog or the cat? Scientists have conducted elaborate experiments trying to ascertain whether animals from chimps to pigeons can communicate, count, reason, or even lie. So does science tell us what we assume -- that animals are pretty much like us, only not as smart? Simply, no. Now, in this superb book, Stephen Budiansky poses the fundamental question: "What is intelligence?" His answer takes us on the ultimate wildlife adventure to animal consciousness.

Budiansky begins by exposing our tendency to see ourselves in animals. Our anthropomorphism allows us to perceive intelligence only in behavior that mimics our own. This prejudice, he argues, betrays a lack of imagination. Each species is so specialized that most of their abilities are simply not comparable. At the mercy of our anthropomorphic tendencies, we continue to puzzle over pointless issues like whether a wing or an arm is better, or whether night vision is better than day vision, rather than discovering the real world of a winged nighthawk, a thoroughbred horse, or an African lion. Budiansky investigates the sometimes bizarre research behind animal intelligence experiments: from horses who can count or ace history quizzes, and primates who seem fluent in sign language, to rats who seem to have become self-aware, he reveals that often these animals are responding to our tiny unconscious cues. And, while critically discussing scientists' interpretations of animal intelligence, he is able to lay out their discoveries in terms of what we know about ourselves. For instance, by putting you in the minds of dogs or bees who travel by dead reckoning, he demonstrates that this is also how you find your way down a familiar street with almost no conscious awareness of your navigation system.

Modern cognitive science and the new science of evolutionary ecology are beginning to show that thinking in animals is tremendously complex and wonderful in its variety. A pigeon's ability to find its way home from almost anywhere has little to do with comparative intelligence; rather it is due to the pigeon's very different perception of the world. That's why, as Wittgenstein said, "If a lion could talk, we would not understand him." In this fascinating book, Budiansky frees us from the shackles of our ideas about the natural world, and opens a window to the astounding worlds of the animals that surround us.

Customer Reviews:

Very much worthwhile, but contentious.......2007-06-17

This is a very slippery book on a very slippery subject. What Stephen Budiansky is trying to do is demonstrate from his reading of the literature, including experiments published in peer-reviewed journals, that there is a distinction to be made between the minds of humans and all other animals. Budiansky seems not to believe that intelligence and consciousness are matters of degree, but matters of threshold. Following philosopher Daniel Dennett he attributes this nearly absolute difference between us and them to our ability to use symbolic language.

The reason the subject is so slippery is that an adequate definition of both intelligence and consciousness is lacking. The reason the book is contentious naturally follows from this, but additionally Budiansky seems to have an agenda or, call it a thesis. He writes: "Consciousness is a wonderful gift and a wonderful curse that, all the evidence suggests, is not in the realm of the sentient experiences of other creatures." (p. 194)

How true or not his statement may be really depends on the definition of consciousness. Unfortunately Budiansky does not give one, and so all his conclusions about the differences in consciousness between humans and other creatures are murky at best. The closest he comes to a definition is on page 193 where he asserts that "...language is so intimately tied to consciousness that the two seem inseparable." Using this "definition" it is only a matter of demonstrating that animals do not have language in order to demonstrate that they don't have consciousness.

However even in this I don't think Budiansky is successful. Much of the book is given over to showing how so many experiments using chimps and monkeys, pigeons and dogs, etc., that seem to demonstrate that language use by animals is just signaling. This position is well known. The argument is that humans are the only animals with grammatical, syntactical and symbolic ability built into their brains. Other animals cannot construct sentences because they have no syntax. They have no "theory of mind" because they cannot think symbolically.

But this is not proven, as Budiansky acknowledges. What is obvious is that whatever language ability other animals have is rudimentary compared to that of humans. And almost everyone would agree that the consciousness demonstrated by animals varies considerably. By the way, here's a quick definition of consciousness: awareness, identify, and self-awareness. A lot of confusion results because when people talk about consciousness, one person may have in mind "awareness," while another may be talking about "self-awareness" only, or about "self-identity." Awareness includes past, present and future events, and places here and elsewhere. We are very good at all of this, whereas other creatures are apparently not so good at anything other than the here and now. Because of our extended awareness, people like Budiansky are persuaded that we are on a consciousness level above other animals that should be recognized as different in kind.

Notice, by the way, that the idea that consciousness depends on language is by this definition obviously false. Sentient beings can be aware of many things without using language. Also there are different kinds of languages. Budiansky is talking about the kind of language that linguists study, the kind of language that Norm Chomsky analyzed to come up with his discovery that syntax is innate. But mathematics is a language, and when mathematicians are thinking about equations, they are conscious to the same extent that I am when I am thinking about how to put an idea into a sentence. Ditto for chess players and musicians. The languages that humans use are of one kind. We do not yet understand the languages the whales and dolphins speak.

What I don't like about Budiansky's insistence on a difference in kind is that when you stop to think about it, such a difference would be surprising since all life forms on this planet as far as we know evolved from a single ancient ancestor--unless of course you believe in a divine and separate creation.

Some other points at issue:

Budiansky wants to debunk the idea that animals are "worthy of special consideration" because their "behavior resembles" that of humans (see, e.g., p. xiii). I agree. We should appreciate other living things for what they are and not for how much they resemble us.

Consider the example of a chimpanzee holding out her hand to another in an appeasement gesture only to attack the other when he got near. Budiansky writes that a "theory of mind" interpretation would be that the tricky female knew the male would be misled in approaching and took advantage. But the "behaviorist spoilsport" interpretation is that the female had done this in the past and it worked and so did it again without recourse to reading the other's mind. (p. 182) This example illustrates just how difficult it is to say what is going on in another's mind. Personally I think the notion of a "theory of mind" should stay in the philosophy department.

One of the things that Budiansky makes clear is why some animals cry out when a predator appears. (See Chapter 6, "Speak!") Such calls seem altruistic to the point of being impossible from an evolutionary perspective; however Budiansky shows that such cries actually help the crier because their pitch either fools the attacking hawk so that it looks in the wrong direction, or the calls bring out other victims who go running about, thereby confusing the attacker or giving the attacker targets other than the crier.

Another nice thing that Budiansky does is show in sharp detail that the language accomplishments of chimpanzees and gorillas in some famous studies reveal not so much a human-like ability, but demonstrate the great gulf that exists between our use of language and theirs, which is not the kind of truth some people want to read.

its a book, not a bible.......2006-03-16

I'm a bit shocked by the seeming backlash to this work. So much so I'm going to read it again. I read it about 6 months ago and thought it was a fine piece of work.

I don't agree with all the authors conclusions, or even some of his definitions. But the book does one thing and it does it well.

It points out clearly just how careful we have to be in trying to infer conclusions from experiments. We are all subject to little soundbites on the news about this new fact or other coming from science, and yet we get no background on the methodolgies employed to arrive at these pronouncements of truth, the personal biases of the researchers or who has funded the research in the first place.

We are just encouraged to accept the new 'fact' and integrate it into our reptoire of knowledge. But as this book eloquently illustrates, if we shift perspective and rigourously subject the experimental methodology to the same degree of scientific scrutiny which we subject the phenomenon under the microscope we can often find that the results are less than definitive.

In the Behavioural Sciences, this is of supreme importance if the discipline is to provide society with valuable contributions to the knowledge base. For example, to train an animal to provide a response and to include stimuli which we recognise as numbers in that process does not mean the animal has any conception of the concept of number whatsoever. It just means the training has been effective. Replace the numbers with pictures of random objects and repeat the experiment, are the results the same? If the animal can be trained to replicate the same behaviour in the absence of numerical stimuli, the 'evidence' that a rabbit can count evaporates.

When I read his book, I sensed no 'agenda' which other reviewers are so vehemently convinced are the driving points of his motivation. Indeed I am forced to question if such emotionally driven responses to a simple book on general science are not the result of people being offended by his conclusions as opposed to being objective in their evaluation of the intent behind his work.

If you work in the behavioural sciences I strongly recommend that before you design your next experiment, you read this book and ask yourself if the behavioural test you are intending to conduct is going to provide you with insight into the animals behaviour, on its terms, not ours.

For the rest of us, if you have an objective interest in the application of the scientific method, then you'll find this book a damn good read.

You may not agree with SB, but you will appreciate the efforts he has made and enjoy the insights which are contained. Take these and develop your own conclusions and avoid the trap of soapboxing just because someone elses views are not aligned with your own.

In Search of the Animal Mind.......2006-01-23

Stephen Budiansky begins this fascinating and mind-altering book by debunking a classic story of animal intelligence and near-human understanding. It's the 1996 account of the female gorilla in Chicago's Brookfield Zoo who picked up a little boy and protected him from other gorillas when he fell into their enclosure. As reported in the newspapers and shown on TV, the story made everyone believe that the gorilla had shown concern for the boy and, in a sense, made an inter-species contact, but it turns out that previously, prior to giving birth, she had been trained by her keepers in maternal care with a baby doll. As for the other gorillas, they were kept away from the scene of the accident by fire hoses shooting water at their feet. Budiansky's demolition of an appealing myth rudely challenges our consoling assumptions about animal behavior, intelligence and consciousness, and prepares us for a rigorous and unsentimental investigation of those very attributes.

The title of the book comes from the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein: "If a lion could talk, we would not understand him." And Budiansky, in a careful survey of a wide range of research, shows how far we are from understanding the thinking of other animals--how anthropomorphic assumptions infect our testing of them in the lab, how human logic influences our observations of them in the field, how sentimental emotions govern our treatment of them in the home. Parsing out the differences, he advances the provocative hypothesis that all animals have basically the same intelligence working to satisfy their needs, only working through different anatomies and modalities, and so appearing unequal to us. The horse, the pigeon and the fish do equally well with what they've got---hoof, wing and fin; they eat, mate and get around with equal skill. We tend to rate their intelligence not by their performance in their own domain, but by how well they respond to us, or how human their actions appear. We set up IQ tests for them that favor human attributes: visual acuity, manual dexterity and problem solving with geometrical shapes. Or we teach them varieties of sign language, which feed back our own symbols to us and may mean nothing to them.

Ultimately, no matter how refined the experiment, it seems impossible to get beyond the wall separating animals and man, chiefly because they do not speak and every experiment devised by man inserts the human element. A sort of biological uncertainty principle emerges in which the experimenter foils the experiment. Budiansky is left imagining that we are most like other species when we are performing but not talking to ourselves, enjoying the zen-state so desperately sought by hyper-conscious man. Animals, he concludes, have their own ways, their own dignity and beauty. (I saw no bashing of animal rights claimed by other reviewers.) He moves perhaps into a realm of philosophy, leaving the reader bereft of easy assumptions. You will see the world of nature in a new way after reading this scintillating work.

Post scriptum. Although Budiansky does not explore the issue, his study has devastating implications for both scientists and Trekkies hoping to make contact with aliens. If ever we were to discover extraterrestrials, our approach to them inevitably would embody the same human preconceptions. Even if they were close to us anatomically, the prospect of finding common ground for communication is scant. The DNA of a chimpanzee differs from that of a man by only a couple of percentage points, yet the main thing we have been able to learn from our closest kin is that they want another banana.

Heavy in straw, but light in substance.......2005-01-11

A new class of science writer has emerged in recent years. Where science journalism was once an effort to bring often arcane material to a wider reading public, there is a new approach - debunk science whenever possible. Budiansky, in his opening to this book, is quite open about his agenda. Science, particularly the studies of animal behaviour, is actually driven by New Age animal protection schemes. This must come as a shock to those who have spent years of field and laboratory work trying to understand why various animals, including humans, act as they do.

Budiansky takes us through numerous animal studies, particularly that of primates. His theme is begun with the story of a zoo gorilla who purported(ly?) "saved" a child. That the media hype over this story is based on the fallacious assumption that these huge animals are a threat to humans never seems to have occurred to him. He is only concerned over whether it is "natural" for gorillas to "save" children. Are scientists, as Budiansky charges, over enthusiastically applying human values to our animal relatives?

From a false starting point, he continues with copious accounts of behaviour studies. Each is presented as if the research teams had claimed far more than they actually have done. This is precisely the kind of selective quotations technique others have used in attempting to refute evolution by natural selection. It's the use of whole paddocks of straw creatures that clearly lack substance or value. It also demonstrates that Budiansky is devoid of understanding how science works. Research builds up snippets of information from a great deal of work. In cognition, we're still learning to ask the proper questions, never mind the completeness of the answers.

The book goes on to address the issues of animal "self-awareness", deception, forms of communication and, of course, pain. Since he's keen to refute those seeking greater protection for animals other than ourselves, it's important to Budiansky to limit any meaning to any of these concepts. The irony in all this is that he attributes other animals with talents such as mapping, distance assessment, deception, survival strategies and other attributes without granting these traits any real value. The book is filled with self-contradictions which neither Budiansky nor his editor appear to have noticed. It's as if the manuscript was typed, then rushed into print to meet a deadline.

Budiansky's "references" make abundantly clear that he's failed to consult the more prominent animal behaviourists. John Alcock, Thomas Eisner or Bernd Heinrich are noticeably absent from the list. He gives Seyforth and Cheney ["How Monkeys See the World"] lengthy coverage, only to lambaste them for misrepresenting their findings. He cites Daniel Dennett frequently, but in doing so simply adopts a limited definition of consciousness from what he's used elsewhere in the book. While he claims to have a handle on the evolutionary roots of behaviour, it's clear he has no real grasp of the development of cognition. When he arrives at language, of course, he soars with flowery rhetoric. There's no doubt that language gives humans a special cognitive ability. Does that thus relegate the rest of the animal kingdom to a subordinate role in life? Budiansky thinks so, and wants his readers to follow his lead. It's a false trail. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Intellectually Dishonest.......2004-09-07

Let me be clear about something at the outset. I am not an animal rights activist, but I am a pet owner. I am not a scientist, and I eat meat. All biases fully disclosed at the outset of this review.

The fundamental problem with Mr. Budiansky's argument is that it is phony.

He is trying to prove that animals are not our equals -- that their consciousness is not equal to ours. This is like me trying to prove that Einstein knew more about physics than I do. You don't need a book for that.

But what's worse about this book, is that Budiansky botches such a simple argument. You could easily argue that humans have a higher consciousness than animals, but it seems reasonable that you would also argue that animals feel...something. To me, these do not appear to be inconsistent positions.

Yet Budiansky won't, or can't, allow this. His sham argument is absolute.

He states that what an animal perceives is unknowable, but then confidently asserts that animals perceive nothing. Their "pain is not pain". Did I miss something, or did logic go on a permanent holiday?

I may not be able to perceive the pain of an animal, or even know that it exists, but I hear the squeal of my dog when I accidentally step on her paw. I don't need to pay Budiansky to have him tell me that what she felt wasn't techically "pain" in the human sense nor do I need him to explain that my dog and I aren't going to have any deep philosophical conversations any time soon.

But he does have a decent command of syntax.

If a Lion Could Talk, Animal Intelligence and the Evolution of Consciousness

Average customer rating:

If a Lion Could Talk, Animal Intelligence and the Evolution of Consciousness
Stephen Budiansky
Manufacturer: New York: The Free Press, 1998
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
ASIN: B000NVNTOA

Average customer rating:

If a Lion Could Talk: Animal Intelligence and the Evolution of Consciousness
Stephen Budiansky
Manufacturer: Free Pr
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
ASIN: B000OKXIJQ

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books