Philosophy Books

The authors made some big claims with the research they found, but didn't back things up as well as I would have liked. The book would have made a great lecture, or conversation, but doesn't cut it as a full fledged book.

I've been interested in the reasons people make the types of decisions they do even when presented with the evidence that it's the wrong decision or, at best, inappropriate. This book explains the reasons in an easy-to-understand format that makes sense.

It's a quick read without a lot of the technical gobbledygook that might be present in textbooks or peer reviewed journals. It's well worth a look.

I believed that this book would have come up with something new. But most of their examples was rather old and you have probably read about them somewhere else.

I really enjoyed reading Sway. It is written in an engaging manner and really builds on the concepts presented. The true worth of the book is helping us see how each of us is influenced by several factors that we often overlook, particularly our own bias.

This is a good read for anyone who works with large groups of people, especially in settings where tradition is important (i.e. churches, government, or education).

The Brothers Brafman chose a truly fascinating topic for their book: the irrationalities hard-wired into the human brain that can lead us to make poorer decisions than we might otherwise. A number of books have been written about this topic of late, and this one isn't bad, but it isn't the best, either.

If you want a brief, competent and readable synopsis of the topic of the consistent ways that the human mind betrays us in our decision-making process, Sway is the book for you. If, however, you are looking for a more complete, deeper review of the subject, I recommend Predictably Irrational by Dan Ariely. The Brafman's actually cite some of Ariely's work in Sway. Ariely's book is just as readable as Sway, but covers the topic better and is written by someone more directly involved in the research on the topic.

Sway provides a quick overview of a very interesting topic that can help you become a better decision maker, but if you want a deeper understanding, Predictably Irrational. You won't go wrong with either book, one just covers more ground.

Andrew Bacevich probably was able to get the publisher to re-issue this out of print book. Bacevich writes the forward. Great.

I first heard of this book on NPR where they reviewed it as timely today as it was in the 50s when first published. In this election year and the significance of the religious element in politics "The Irony of American History" explains America's Puritan and Calvinistic thinking that has shaped our nation.

Being a fan of the author, I appreciated the condition of this book. Thank you.

"Simply put, [this] is the most important book ever written on American foreign policy." Thus writes Andrew Bacevich in his introduction to the newly reissued book written by Reinhold Niebuhr in 1952. Bacevich is a Niebuhr scholar and author of the just published book, "The Limits of Power". He was largely responsible for getting "Irony" reissued.

The timing of this book becoming available, as well as of Bacevich's own book, couldn't be better. Niebuhr was a pastor, teacher, activist, moral theologian and prolific author. He was a towering presence in American intellectual life from the 1930's through the 1960's. He was, at various points in his career, a Christian Socialist, a pacifist, an advocate of U.S. intervention in World War II, a staunch anti-communist, an architect of Cold War liberalism, and a sharp critic of the Vietnam War.

The Irony of American History traces the course of American idealism and exceptionalism from its very beginnings in the providential thinking of the Pilgrims who settled Massachusetts. Written early in the Cold War, Niebuhr devotes much of his analysis to comparing and contrasting Marxian communism and the "bourgeois" liberalism, or liberal democracy of America. While he clearly argues that the liberal project of democracy offers more to the "common good" of the community than does Marxism, both have the seeds of their destruction in the illusions they hold. So-called "Niebuhrian realism" is the ability to see through such illusions as a condition for avoiding the worst pitfalls they carry.

Alas, one of the greatest of these pitfalls is the American tendency to suppose that we can manage history. As Niebuhr writes: "The illusions about the possibility of managing historical destiny from any particular standpoint in history, always involves, as already noted, miscalculations about both the power and the wisdom of the managers and of the weakness and the manageability of the historical 'stuff' which is to be managed." He goes on to point out that "In the liberal versions of the dream of managing history, the problem of power is never fully elaborated. ...On the whole, [American government] is expected to gain its ends by moral attraction and limitation. Only occasionally does an hysterical statesman suggest that we must increase our power and use it in order to gain the ideal ends, of which providence has made us the trustees."

Is it not painfully evident that we reached one of those "occasional moments" after 9/11 when "hysterical statesmen" - Bush and Cheney, et al - argued for a profound increase in the power to gain the "ideal ends" of bringing "freedom" to Iraq and the Middle East since we are the obvious "trustees" of this freedom?

Herein lies the element of "irony", the philosophical and spiritual core of Niebuhr's arguments. The first element of irony, Niebuhr points out, "is the fact that our nation has, without particularly seeking it, acquired a greater degree of power than any other nation of history" and we "have created a 'global' political situation in which the responsible use of this power has become a condition of survival of the free world."

He continues: "But the second element of irony lies in the fact that a strong America is less completely master of its own destiny than was a comparatively weak America, rocking in the cradle of its continental security and serene in its infant innocence. The same strength which has extended our power beyond a continent has also interwoven our destiny with the destiny of many peoples and brought us into a vast web of history in which other wills, running in oblique or contrasting directions to our own, inevitably hinder or contradict what we most fervently desire. We cannot simply have our way, not even when we believe our way to have the 'happiness of mankind' as its promise."

In Iraq we have met the enemy and "it is us". Not enough of us understood that "we cannot simply have our way" in the exercise of American power, which is thought to be essentially military power, to head off the folly in which we are buried and the prospect of a war without end.

Writing all this in 1952 with the cataclysmic dangers of the Cold War becoming a hot war, Niebuhr foresaw the increasing globalization of the world and the danger of not recognizing and accepting the limits of our power to bring freedom and happiness to the rest of the world, especially through military means.

This slender book of 173 pages is loaded with these prescient observations warning us clearly of the catastrophic dangers that can follow from a failure to understand the limits of our power of our exceptionalism and of the illusion that we can manage all this history to accomplish our supposedly moral and "good" ends for other nations.

When you finish reading this book you will then want to read Bacevich's book, "The Limits of Power", in which he essentially channels Niebuhr's understanding and traces the history of the last 60 years in which the Bush-Cheney foreign policy has become simply an extension of the direction American foreign policy has taken, primarily from the Reagan administration onward.

Neibuhr makes a strong case that America's history has in some ways worked against us, and brought us to a perspective that we, and we alone, have the best world view and the best way of doing things. The book is not a response to our invasion of Iraq, but our culture as he saw it during the Cold War era in which it was written.

Beginning with the attitudes which developed as a result of our being on an incredibly rick continent, and able to thrive in relative isolation from European wars, our prosperity led us into kind of an echo chamber of self-confirming blessedness: of course we (and our way of life) must be superior, or why would God have given us such a continent to live on?

Among the ironies which Neibhur focuses on is how our strength has actually put us in a position of weakness; because of our strength, we have a responsibility to use that strength very carefully (kind of a weakness, since we can't use the strength willy nilly).

Secondly, the confidence we have in the righteousness of our views is a confidence which communism also has, although Neibhur is explicit in labeling Communism as tyrannical.

It's a fine book, and I can't begin to do justice to his arguments here. But I highly recommend it, and in case you're wondering, it's not at all a "hate America first" book.

In the first chapter, he made some statements about music that I know to be wrong, so I was tempted to quit, but I thought that perhaps he may still have something interesting to say--I think of the difference between a "satellite view" map and a "street view" map. He has had many interesting things to say, and I am even suspicious that his "errors" at the beginning were an intentional simplification. Even though written for the "layman," it's still pretty heavy reading--and much more focused on the brain's processes than on how music works.
A bit heavy on name-dropping (he started out as a producer), and more "don't know what's happening here" than I hoped for (but I appreciate the honesty). Interesting--but perhaps specialized: it could easily be a different book than you're expecting.

The story about Petr Janata and the barn owls is worth the price of the book alone.

Thanks for a great resource Mr. Levitin.

One can't expect a thorough look into the interplay of phychology, mind-body mechanics, and music in a shory popular book. That being said, this was an entertaining romp through the field.

The first seventy or so pages was essentially an introduction to music theory and how the mind can proces music as, well, music. For those with a music background it will be tedious and won't tell you much that you don't already know, but for someone who has only touched on it it will be like drinking from a firehose with all the information in the pages.

The rest of the book deals more directly with why certain music is liked, how it most likely evolfved, and the practical utility of music in society and individual survival. If you're ever wondering why there are still oldies stations around, it's because of all the boomers who have an emotional attachment to music of their youth, the time when music tastes are most aggressively defined.

One annoyance was the infantile critique of mind-body interplay, where he ascribes to the opinion of Dennitt that the brain creates the mind. There's not enough room in the review to state why that is incorrect, but it shouldn't have even delved on this weighty topic. Overall though, there wasn't much blanket overgeneralization that plagues many popular science books, though the meanderings of the authors was at times tiring.

Overall, pretty good, and a quick read for someone interested in the topic.

This was a fascinating book more so because I am a deafened adult. I had my memories when I lost all hearing in 1977. Experiences I've had since seem weird to me because I remember. Now I understand why. This is a very informative book from both the music lover and indifferent listener points of view.

This book was found, as many of my great finds, on the shelves of a used-book store. The book has traveled around in my car with me as I go from school to my job as a voice teacher. It has been loaned out to music professors, and is now very well worn.

I strongly recommend this book for musicians and music lovers alike. It is beautifully written in a way that nearly anyone can understand, with common examples of music from classical to popular music styles.

An excellent introduction into the technical side of how the brain processes music.

In the past two weeks I have taken this book with me everywhere I go and it's been a delight. I've been transported in an enchanted world but not a fairy-tale; just the beauty of true life. I loved this book and cannot wait for her next novel.

A runaway bestseller in France, "The Elegance of the Hedgehog" is an unlikely title for so charming a story. Just as the novel features some unlikely heroines, so too does the title serve as a device for hiding the true splendor and riches of this most unusual novel.

The story centers around a single apartment building in a chic section of Paris that is presided over by a concierge named Renee. To the outside world, she is a typical concierge: short, plump, cantankerous, a product of the lower class, destined only to serve. The upper class residents of her building have as little interaction with her as possible, except to task Renee with keeping an eye out for their packages, watering plants, or some other mundane task they need attending to.

Behind the scenes, however, is another Renee: a scholarly woman whose reading encompasses philosophy, art, and culture. She's someone who devours Japanese film, who loves Dutch painters. Her friends are few, but devoted. Yet Renee is happy to maintain the façade her tenants prefer.

Two of the building's residents, however, seem to have discovered the real Renee, as much as she tries to hide herself. One is Paloma, the 12-year-old daughter of a rich family living in the building. Paloma, like Renee, has been hiding her own brilliance, trapped by the dull pomposity of her own family. The second (and newest) resident to unveil the true character of both Paloma and Renee is a new arrival, a wealthy Japanese man named Ozu.

The slow reveal of these three characters and their friendship is like the blooming of a beautiful flower. The writing is lovely, at times even heartbreaking. This story of the hidden talent buried in the inconspicuous among us highlights the old adage, "you can't judge a book by its cover." In the case of "The Elegance of the Hedgehog," this should be amended to "nor by its title."

This is a wonderful book, the kind that comes around every once in a while. It follows two main characters, one a concierge for a building in Paris, and the other a young girl who has decided to commit suicide when she turns 14 because she feels that adulthood is awful.

The concierge hides the fact that she is very well self educated and enjoys art, books, and music. She does not want to appear to be out of her class. The child is known through a journal she is keeping, writing about things she considers important, and how she intends to end her life.

A new owner who is Asian buys an apartment and completely remodels it. He comes to realize that the concierge is not what she appears to be and they become friends. He also befriends the child, and the three of them spend time together much to the surprise and envy of others in the building.

The book is not an 'easy summer' read, but is very much worth reading.

This review is of a translation of a novel written in French. I am doing the review before my cousin sends me the French original. Translated novels are always problematic, so please understand as I make my way.

The set-up is an twelve year-old girl and a much older woman who is a concierge. The contrasts are obvious, letting us immediately pay attention to everything else. One of my problems with the translation is that their voices, far apart as are their lives, seem close, even to be indistinguishable. They seem kindred spirits of one clear voice. The importance of this point will become obvious to the careful reader because the chapters, brief as they are, alternate their voices. This device goes on for some time, and usefully so.

This novel does not require you to be well read in philosophy, although it is gravy if you are. The book does parade them for your appreciation. This is a novel of ideas, not action, or even much dialogue. Ms. Marbery has considerable talent. She lets you read easily through a novel of difficult ideas.

Marbery's simply stated presentation of the complex human condition is early and clearly voiced by the young girl. Her exposition resonated in me immediately and profoundly. I was hooked early on. She introduced me to the haka (see U-Tube if you are as clueless as I). The young girl's father is a nice contradiction, lying on his couch, with daughter ferrying beers and salami so he not break his posture as he watches the real action. Dripping irony.

Yet Marbery writes for the careful reader, or for the active reader if you prefer. I will give just one example, and not spoil anything:

After a few other philosophers make their cameos, the concierge trots out the phenomenologist, Husserl. After her struggles, she reaches the following conclusion: Phenomenology is a fraud because self-consciousness is at least of no help to us. She gives the simplistic example that if you have an itch, your conscious awareness of the itch helps exactly nothing. Her cat fares as well without the baggage.

So nothing about the human condition is helped under the scheme of Husserl. There is more to this argument, to be sure. However in keeping close to this illustration, there is a more important point. Barbery is playing with us as her cats play with their toys, Her novel reaches beyond the pages to toy with us.

By analogy, the problem of the concierge with Husserl, namely the uselessness of self-consciousness in the problem of anything from an itch to our own being, is Barbery's problem of the structure, the effect and the very being of the novel. Our own reading of the problem is as useless as her painstaking articulation of the problem.

Barbery's seeming resolution is put into the mouth of her concierge: "But enough of phenomenology; it is nothing more than the solitary, endless monologue of consciousness {as she is doing to us right now}, a hard-core autism that no real cat would ever opportune."

I do not want to go further. It would ruin the flower of this fine novel.

Lastly, cats abound. They are the first link between the two main characters. The whole tradition of cats in culture plays. Schroedinger's cat of physics frolics.

That is as far as I want to go. Rich, fun and complex. Try it.

Others have described the plot of this book very well, so I won't repeat. I really enjoyed most of this book, since it has a great mixture of high and low concept writing, several different voices (the concierge and the teenager, of course, but also indirectly several other points of view), some nice laugh-out-loud witticisms, and in the end a very romantic plot. It got me thinking about the different layers of our life experiences--the superficial social one, the intellectual one, the symbolic one, and the artistic one. The various characters are well-drawn and complex.

What I didn't enjoy were the occasional little essays on "what art is," or "what beauty really is," and other philosophical ramblings. They didn't work well for me, but I was able to skim over them. You might like them, though. Also, the translation from French to English is good but not great. Most of it flows along well and captures the essence of the French characters in the language itself. However, every 20 pages or so there is an expression that sticks out and jars. The first page gives us an "eructation," twice we get "exacerbations," and I swear I even remember seeing "synechdoche" at least once. The translator probably considered each of those words to be "le mot juste," but to me they seemed out of place, as did a fair number of awkward colloquial expressions inartfully converted from the French culture to the anglophone one. Translation is very hard, though, and this one is really pretty good, as they go.

All in all, I'm very glad I read the book, it's caused me to pause and think about its concepts several times since I finished it, and I would be happy to try other works by the same author.

This book is definitely one of the best books ever...I claim to be a mathematician somewhat having gained straight A's in pure and applied mathematics and advanced mathematics with (a boring) engineering degree at a number of UK univerisities, and after years of dabbling in options trading and having experienced first hand; Black Monday (black swan?), the Asian Economic Crisis, living in the epicentre of SARS (lucky to avoid it), and being in this market whilst we have one of the greatest financial crisis ever since the great depression..this book in my opinion is a real diamond and i reckon Taleb is a genius. I agree with his logic and found his book so good I just could not put it down.. I would recommend this book to anyone trying to find "direction in life"(there is none cos it may be random) or those who are going thru major change in life, or simply those who are bored with life and need another " angle"...I agree totally with his analysis of noise vs market movements, and his view of how so many people misunderstand probablility and statistics...and yes I do have an MBA and did find the degree useless...this book "probably" would have been more useful in my career for sure! brilliant book!! Well done!

Some years ago, I had a colleague who organized a Mark 6 pool among friends. They had a database of previous Mark 6 results and from it derived that some numbers were more easily drawn than others. They then collectively bet on such numbers which they believed would have a higher probability of winning. I asked him the basis of his action. He explained that the fact some numbers appeared more frequently was real as proven by the statistics. The reason could be the material of the paint of different colour, the difference in the shape of the numbers painted, or their different position before drawing. Although the factors would be too complex to compute, the results shown in the statistics were sufficient to show the bias. By the time I left the department, the pool was still losing money.

It is not a coincident that the essence of the book is exactly on the same thinking. Taleb points out that human beings always overestimate causality, and we tend to view the world as more explainable than it really is. An example used in the book is the performance of stock and option investors. These investors use sophisticated statistical methods to analyze the performance of the market in the past and predict the future. The information they derived from analyzing the past may adequately explained what happened. However, the performance of the market on the following day has no relevance to the past. It is a Brownian movement which only depends on the factors at present. It is actually more random than expected.

For that matter, people always confuse between randomness and causality. The book gives an illustration on the two corresponding sides of such thoughts:
Randomness v Determinism
Probability v Certainty
Belief v Knowledge
Coincident v Law
Forecast v Prophecy
Lucky idiot v Skilled investor
Survivorship bias v Market out-performance
Stochastic variable v Deterministic variable
Noise v Signal

It is not surprising that such thinking would attract objection from the skilled investors. There are a lot of comments on this book defending the reliability and almost certainty of statistical analysis and prediction of market movements. However, from the market performance in recent months, I tend to believe that the market is much more random than we thought.

Since human being developed self-consciousness, or the soul if one likes to call it, we always wonder why things happened. This quest for reasons has also developed into the religion delusion. This innate property of the human mind makes it easy for us to attach reasons, whatever they are, to nearly everything. Thus we are easily fooled by the randomness of nature, which is now beginning to be recognized in modern science such as evolution biology and quantum physics. For the ordinary people, it is useful to reflect on the randomness misconceptions discussed in the book.

There is a survivorship bias in many statistical data we gather. We see the winners and try to learn from them, while forgetting the huge number of losers. The case study used in the book is the survey of the earning ability of the stock and option traders. While a lot of data on the traders in business can be gathered, the survey is actually gathering only the data from the survivors. Data on many traders who lost money and dropped out in the previous years are all ignored. Thus the statistics is unreliable. Let's say we want to survey among government executive officers on how the university graduates adapt to government work. We are only surveying the survivors of the government recruitment. University graduates who do not make it are all missed. If we conduct a survey in an online forum on the habit of people using computer, we are only surveying those surviving in the forum. Such statistics need to be qualified on their target participants. However, there is a misconception that survey with survivorship bias can be applied universally.

Many probabilities have skewed distributions. Many real life situations do not have a 50% probability like the two sides of a coin, but have unusual and counter-intuitive distributions. People can often be fooled by the fact that they won a bet 50 times and think that they will win next time with absolute certainty. Taleb opines that some aggressive stock and option traders eat like chickens and go to the bathroom like elephants. They earn a steady small income from selling the stocks and options, but when a disaster happens they lose a fortune. They are fooled by the randomness of the market which is hidden from them.

There is the story of black swan on probability, on which Taleb eventually wrote another book. Swans in Europe are white. People may take numerous observations to prove that swans are white. So a fact is established that all swans must be white, and the probability is 100%. However, it only takes one twist in the DNA to turn one swan black and the probability is re-written. In fact, black swans are found in Australasia. The impact of the highly improbable is severe. The more improbable it is, the harder the impact when it happens. Another joke on the false improbability is when Taleb observes an old man everyday to see if he is still alive. For eighty years, there have been about 30,000 observations and the old man is still alive. With such a large number of observations, he could conclude that this old man must be a superman who is highly improbable to die. By the track record, he may even live forever. But it only takes one death to turn the probability to zero. The truly scary thing is that the black swan could be a random event. That means it is capable of happening any time to turn a high probability totally upside down.

This book reads a lot like a self-absorbed blogger's rant, but it is a rant that is highly satisfying to read. Almost all of us have a distant relative or friend who is allegedly a "stock market genius". Taleb argues that it is usually hard to know whether that person is truly skilled or just lucky. He argues that most often trading success is either the result of ones arbitrary trading style happening to jibe with market conditions or a product of exposure to volatility in a way that allows for small regular gains leading eventually to a spectacular blowup.

One of the most self-congratulatory, didactic books I've ever read. Taleb is a convinced ideologue whose expertise in stock trading has created the conviction that he sees the invisible hand at work.

He constantly reminds the reader that he is writing, restating and recasting sections with a reference to his earlier statements (never trust a writer that quotes himself) while dismissing whole schools of thought by selectively quoting from philosophers to make them look silly and misguided--if you read any philosopher, they will eventually prove themselves silly and misguided. It happens when they take themselves too seriously, which Taleb certainly does.

Overall, his ode to skepticism is well conceived, but very thin. Unfortunately, it seems to be the only idea he ever tested. He makes the frequent mistake of confusing the success of a rigorous analysis for the justification of a philosophy as a guiding system to thought for others.

Ultimately, philosophy is what Taleb suggests science is, taking the ideas of Karl Popper over the top and placing them on an alter, "science is mere speculation, mere formulation of conjecture." Popper was a solid skeptic, while Taleb is a convinced acolyte.

Every once in a while, someone really intelligent focuses his thoughts on the most valuable skill a human can have--how to think. Nassim Taleb has done an admirable job at just that: not telling us what to think--but showing us how to think in ways we can apply to innumerable life situations. I'm talking about what Charlie Munger refers to as "multiple mental models."

The most important ideas explored are those of Popper--the idea of the open society--one in which no theory is known with certainty--only with probability, and theories continually replace one another as more information comes in. Interestingly Taleb continually cites Soros as a famous investor who utilized Popper's ideas, but Warren Buffett, the ultimate realist, if queried, would no doubt acknowledge Popper in influencing his thinking. In contrast to Soros and Buffett would be Bill Miller, an intensely philosophic investor, who recently has classified himself as an optimist--but not a realist. In any case, the methods of thinking propounded by Taleb fit nicely into what Charlie Munger classifies as "mental models"--doubtlessly useful stuff for the introspective, philosophical investor.

Difinitive guide by Iyengar. Great for any level. Answers all questions on correct form and alignment. It's the "bible" of yoga.

This is a great book. I especially love the yoga plans given in the end and prescriptions. Great buy. If you truly want to link in to hatha yoga. Get this.

Iyengar himself has disavowed this book long ago...even so, it's the single greatest reference book out there.

The first thing that will blow you away is the treatise on hatha yoga. The ease with which he describes the philosophy of yoga foreshadows his complete book on the subject. It's quite a foreshadowing!

The bulk of the book is an exhaustive detailed pictorial and written description of most practical poses (and several impractical ones).

However, I fell in love with his close to 300-week practice schedule in the back of the book. I must say that it's implausible that someone can follow it exactly and include all the poses all the time (even he says to skip the ones you can't master), it's a very keen insight into what HIS practice might have been like back when this book was published, before he started a huge yoga school.

Now he has curriculum that changes every year (to keep teacher coming back to $$$chool - smart man!). The current Iyengar school details exact angles in which to keep your body in specific poses. I love 'Light on Yoga' because it lacks that exactness, and allows you to feel the energy of poses, rather than getting stuck in anatomy of the poses.

A must read, and must re-read, and a must re-re-re-re-re-.........

Great book for anybody, but especially needed for beginers. For every asana there is at least one picture to illustrate the proper technique. Helps with breathing and flow, describing how your muscles are working and proper focus.

This book generally shows the progression of the poses from beginner to advanced. You will not be talked down to in this book. I like having more information then I need so that I can reference back and progress when I'm ready.

While this book is barely 70 pages long, the classic strategies in it are concise and valuble, quite timeless. The book was written 2500 years ago as a basic primer on strategy - and has withstood the test of time. It won't take long to digest the book - but that gives you more time to implement its strategies. There are sections on strategies, planning maneuvers, deception, etc., Together with Robert Green's book on Strategy it is a fine combination.


Michael Mandaville, Author of the upcoming "Citizen Soldier Handbook: 101 Ways For Every American To Fight Terrorism"

The book was very interesting. It really made look at issues in a totally different light. I love this book.

This is the BEST book on strategy that has ever been written! This book is timeless. I have seen strategies from this book utilized in business and politics. It does not take long to read, but has a wealth of information.

This book is great. If you have a enemy you want to take down or a solider about to go to battle, this is the book for you. It tells you everything you need to know about how to win.

This is a classic text that I have never read before. It is so interesting to see the perspective that it offers and the applications and relevance that it has today. A book that is remarkable in it's simplicity and expression of common sense. It makes me wonder how and where we've lost our way.

I wanted to like this book, but it's boring, boring, boring. Mr. Hitchens' arguments about God are not persuasive, although they do make him come across as a major jerk. If anything could make me return to religion, it would be this book.

I read a lot of athiest non-fiction. From Dawkins to Harris, at the least, I have skimmed through the book or in the case of Dawkins and Hitchens read it from front to back, enjoying every page. There's some overlap of course, it's not hard to make a case that 1)there is no god, 2) therefore the bible is a fairytale, 3)all religion is myth, etc.

But this book has something new to say and from the viewpoint of a concerned observer, read it for the information on Mother Teresa alone. Wowza, I really had no idea about her!

I am an Atheist in the very simple formulation that I have no belief. I simply do not believe, in anything. I was looking forward to reading Hitchens new book with some anticipation. A man of no small debator and written skills, he has a wonderfully devious mind especially in regards to literature and its various criticisms and defenses. However, I found that "god is not GREAT" to simply be a rehash of ideas with absolutely nothing new put forth on in the debate. As a wordsmith Hitchins excells, but when nothing new is offered I yawn. Better to read Eller's "Natural Atheism" which at least puts forth a handful of unique ideas that cage belief and religion in terms of pure logic and reason into ever diminishingly small irrational actions and ideas (at least once you get past the first few chapters). I cannot give this a single star because there are passages, paragraphs, and sentences of incredible intelligence and humor, but they do not negate the tedium of simply another 'atheistic rant' that does nothing to further the argument.

Assume that the worst book does not exist. Now imagine in your mind what the worst book would be if it existed. Clearly if that book exists in reality, it is worse than the worst book in your mind. But you were imagining the worst book, and we just found a book that is worse than the worst book. This is a contradiction, so the worst book exists, and it is christopher hitchens "god is not great." This was like reading someone's Live Journal. hitchens goes on and on, telling all these anecdotal stories about Thomas Paine and all areas of irrelevant material. Not once did this book require thought to counter any of the tired objections to religion. Page after page, hitchens builds up straw men, bringing out the worst characters in religion and basing entire faiths on these few lousy individuals. hitchens even fails to get basic facts about different faiths correct. It really was pathetic. I began to feel very sorry for him. He is so far out there and understands very little. Finally, hitchens references hardly any of his claims. A few sporadic ones here and there, but the reader cannot verify the bulk of his claims. This is so far removed from being a scholarly work. I am sure I could write a better book on atheism than this.

I read this book hoping for some new evidence, reason, logic and science. But instead I quickly found two mistakes: one is Abraham (of the Bible fame, not our president) is alleged to threaten suicide (it was murder, actually, of his son), and the comment 'rebuilding of the 2nd Temple' Actually it is the rebuilding of the 1st temple (the 2nd temple was considered a disappointment compared to King Solomon's original temple). According to the author Jesus was a false Messiah and possibly wasn't born. Hmmm. A little common sense here; if you feel Jesus was never born, why make the case that he was a false Messiah?

Short of wondering if the author was pummeled in his youth by some wayward nuns, I am bewildered by the level of anger here toward God. Whoops - forgot, God doesn't exist, does he. Why then is the author shaking his fist at - well - nothing? You can almost imagine those pesky wayward nuns somewhere - shaking their collective heads and murmuring, 'Hey, isn't that the kid we pummeled years ago..." Stay tuned - there may be a new movie coming for the Christmas season: Nuns Gone Wild.

This might very well be the 2000 version of Future Shock. If you care it is not hard to follow.

This book is quite different from Bryson's usual fare. Here Bryson steps out of his usual travel and language focus to write about science. The product is an interesting combination of the social history of science, biographies of famous scientists, and discussion of significant scientific discoveries in very accessible language. What science does Bryson cover, you might ask? This is where "everything" comes in to the picture. Bryson has chosen a wide range of scientific discoveries, from working out the theory of evolution to discovering the size and shape of the earth. Mostly, Bryson focuses on the largest and smallest things in the universe. He looks at galaxies and volcanoes, but also DNA and atoms. Truly, this book is expansive. For the lay reader, it becomes clear that there's a tremendous amount of knowledge tied up in this book, and it's amazing just how much Bryson had to learn to write it. For the non-scientist, this book manages to create a sense of awe, wonder, and fear, all at the same time. Bryson does an excellent job of highlighting just how surprising and contingent the fact of our existence is, and how complicated it was to get here. He creates amazement as the reader is forced to consider almost unfathomable dimensions, both gargantuan and tiny. Contingency is clearly the most significant theme that emerges from the work. Bryson also paints an interesting portrait of the practice of science, scientific culture, and a sense of just how difficult and tenuous some conclusions are. While it's amazing just how much scientists have discovered, it's even more daunting to consider how much remains inconclusive. Overall, this is an extremely accessible discussion of some difficult topics, infused with Bryson's humor and style. It's a long read, but well worth the effort.

Great book with broad coverage of history and science. not a quick read. You need to have your brain awake and engaged while reading.

Bill Bryson narrates a brief yet epic journey of everything from the nothingness of which the universe sprang, to the development of technologies that only a handful of people on our planet understand in one of his best-selling books, A Short History of Nearly Everything. From the top of the world's tallest mountains to the bottom of the deepest petrie dish, Bryson tells the tale of nearly every event that has shaped the universe and the people that unlocked those mysteries. By rejecting the standard stale textbook format, Bryson has assembled a collection of stories that weave together to tell the tale of how we, and everything else, came to be. This book is an easy and interesting read for those who have ever questioned the intricacies of our world, wanted answers, but was unwilling to sift through college textbooks for them.

This is a good overview of the fundamentals of science. It meanders through astronomy, chemistry, physics, biology, geology, and paleontology and is very well written. Through Bryson's style, you can tell that he enjoys the subject matter. The "History" part of the title refers to both history in the sense of the universe, but also the history of the bright individuals and their insights that have allowed us to know that history.

What makes this book distinct is that Bryson was not too long ago in the reader's position (i.e. learning the basics of the sciences) and thereby rarely omits something pertinent to understanding, and his enthusiasm is still fresh and obvious; both of which are a welcomed change from classical science writing. Unfortunately, his lack of expertise leads to the occasional oversimplification, exaggeration, and falsehood- but understandably (and forgiveably) so.

In the regrettable trade off between expertise and comprehensibility, this settles on the "comprehensible" side of the spectrum. If that's what you're looking for, you'll find it here.

Book was in okay shape but the material inside is a must for
anyone seeking truth.

Reading this book I gained a logical confirmation of the natural beliefs of the heart, which in modern times are increasingly condemned as illogical. The best scholarly defense of religion/morality in general and Christianity in particular I've read! To make the most out of it, read "The Everlasting Man" by G.K. Chesterton, a book which greatly influenced Lewis and played a major role in converting him to theism: The Everlasting Man. These books go hand in hand. Read them both!!

I truly recommend this book to anyone who wants to walk in a manner worth of the Lord.

I tend to be very hard on myself in my walk with God. This book helps me to put my walk with God in a proper perspective. I plan on reading this book once a year to remind myself of the principles that Mr. Lewis has taught me.

C.S. Lewis presents a disappointing defense of Christianity and Christian Ethics. The primary advantage of this work is that it is clearly written, and uses many analogies to help illustrate its points to the reader. The major disadvantage, however, is that these analogies and analysis are far too simplistic. By introducing an analogy Lewis merely assumes it as proof of the very thing he is trying to argue. Page after page is filled with analogy and reasoning which seems to rest on an undefended assumption. His argument that Christ was either "Divine or a Madman" for calling himself the Son of God, and that therefore we must believe the former is really ludicrous. Any number of persons have been false prophets and made false claims, but because the claims are outrageous doesn't mean we must accept them. If Christ is any different, he has not shown how Christ's ideas were different, which is where he should have gone. I write this from the perspective of one friendly to the Christian religion and its ethics, and simply don't think Lewis has done a very good job in arguing for the Christian religion. Too many of his arguments are really thinly veiled theological assumptions that are uncritically presented in two-dimensional depth.

Fitting, I think, to be reading what may arguably be one of C. S. Lewis's most important books, on a retreat during which one of my personal goals was to find a spiritual, if not religious, inner peace. Reading the work of C. S. Lewis is to meet a friend who reflects us and understands us--and helps us to understand.

Who of us has not asked these questions? Who of us has not prayed these prayers, even those of us who are atheists (which group has at times included me, and has also included C. S. Lewis), even if only praying to our void? Lewis takes on several of these questions that have held me captive since youth, when I first began to wonder about a God: who He might be, if indeed He is, and what might my relationship be with Him.

Before he has even cleared the pages of the preface, Lewis nabs me cold: "It is true that some people may find they have to wait in the hall for a considerable time, while others feel certain almost at once which door they must knock at. I do not know why there is this difference, but I am sure God keeps no one waiting unless He sees that it is good for him to wait. When you do get into your room you will find that the long wait has done you some kind of good which you would not have had otherwise." Then Lewis reminds us that this time of "waiting in the hall" is not a form of camping, but a time of rigorous seeking, questioning, praying even when we are not sure who we are praying to or if we are heard. "And above all you must be asking which door is the true one; not which pleases you best by its paint and paneling."

Christianity, Lewis writes, is a way of life. An owner's manual, if you will. It is not meant to constrain us, but to fully free us. Following its doctrines means to "transform our lives in such a way that evil diminishes and good prevails." There is an innate law, he observes, that follows along the lines of human nature, a natural right and wrong, and in examining all religions, we find right and wrong, good and evil, are more or less defined along the same lines by all humanity, regardless of religious beliefs. This is our first clue that we have found an unchangeable truth. Even the atheist, Lewis says, has a sense of right and wrong, good and bad, and as soon as one realizes this, the next step is to understand the universal standard of morality. From where does this standard come if not from some higher ruling of the universe? It echoes inside each and every one of us. "The moment you say that one set of moral ideas can be better than another, you are, in fact, measuring them both by a standard ..." which is what Lewis terms as "Real Morality."

The God Lewis has us see is not a kindly and bearded man sitting on a throne in some distant and ethereal place. He calls him a great artist, for the universe is a very beautiful place, but also a Being that is intensely interested in right conduct--in fair play, unselfishness, courage, good faith, honesty and truthfulness. Insofar as all that, one can think of God as "good." But Lewis does not see Him as an easy master. "There is nothing indulgent about the Moral Law. It is as hard as nails. It tells you to do the straight thing and it does not seem to care how painful, or dangerous, or difficult it is to do. If God is like the Moral Law, then He is not soft."

From here, Lewis proceeds to tackle those common questions: how can God exist in such a cruel and unjust world? If God knows how the story of mankind ends, why did he create us and our story at all? If the future already exists in His eyes, what does that say about free will? How can we know that Christ wasn't simply a great moral teacher, but indeed the Son of God? And, why did Christ have to die, and so cruelly, for our sins to be forgiven? Why could we not just shake hands on it?

Lewis explores free will and how God understood, as we so often have not, that in giving us free will, He gave us the ability to love. It is only when we have to ability to choose, that we can love. Anything else would be forced bondage, slave bowing to master. If we have botched up our ability to choose, so very often throughout our history, then we cannot shake our fists at the heavens and blame God, but must look to ourselves and the choices we have made. Lewis urges us to return to the basics, the Law of Morality, for only in addressing that place where our mistakes were first made can we continue forward in a progressive manner. If we cannot ever achieve perfection, it does not mean we are ever off the hook in striving for it.

Time and what is beyond time, the concepts of heaven and hell, the need to be a part of an active Christian community, what was meant by being formed in the likeness of God (no, we are not his mirror images), the true meaning of charity (far more than the occasional giving of alms to the poor), the meaning of faith and why it should not be blind, what it means to love our neighbor as we love ourselves (and this section made me laugh, perhaps in relief, as Lewis explains that to love our neighbors as ourselves does not mean we have to like our neighbors or even always to be kind to them, no more than we always like ourselves or are kind to ourselves), so Lewis covers all the basics.

There is a very real cost to being a Christian, Lewis teaches. Make no mistake, it is not a small pittance. But it is one that, if we do not pay it, will cost us far more in the long run, and not only after our lives on earth have ended. All that we do, all that we are, here on earth, already comes back to us, with our free will choices following their own natural law of returns.

"God is easy to please, but hard to satisfy," Lewis writes. We are not talking about mere improvement, but transformation. One that we choose to either retreat from, and pay the resulting price, or embrace, and pay that price. To find our own true selves, however, Lewis sums up, can be done only by submitting fully. To let go, and let God.

"The more I resist Him and try to live on my own, the more I become dominated by my own heredity and upbringing and surroundings and natural desires ... I am not, in my natural state, nearly so much of a person as I like to believe: most of what I call `me' can be very easily explained. It is when I turn to Christ, when I give myself up ... that I first begin to have a real personality of my own."

Lewis has invited us to enter into this transformation, and he helps us to do so in a manner that is far from blind.

~Abridged from Zinta's Reviews, on blogspot.com, and The Smoking Poet, Fall 2008