A few general comments: I forgot to mention earlier that I would not be adverse to reading "Freakonomics", though it wouldn't be my first choice. I'm been trying to read more economics lately, but I'd prefer to read some more classical expositions before digging into something potentially controversial like "Freakonomics". It's certainly one I'll consider voting for if it makes the ballot, though.Also, I picked up a book on the Haitian revolution today, which should more or less sate my appetite for Haitian history. I'll still read along if the other book gets picked, but don't go including it on the nomination lists just for little ol' me.GOD defiles Reason: Since this is our first quarter to be more inclusive to theists than before, I'm not strongly disagreeing with that except to say that this is the suggestion thread going through the suggestion process and not yet in the selection and voting process.Good point, and I should qualify my earlier statements by saying that it's not my intention to suppress any suggestions. It's just my understanding that Chris wants us to discuss the pros and cons of each suggestion so that we're more informed going into the actual selection process. That's really the best way we, as non-moderators, have of voicing our input into the process of narrowing down the suggestions into the five nominations that make it on the final ballot.It's up to each of us individually to keep our discussions productive rather than pointless little squabbles. We can do that no matter who the author is, if we choose to do so.That's a good point as well. My concern is simply that we pick a book that encourages that.marti1900: Inventing the People, by Edmund S. MorganGlad that you brought this one back up. I was reading the first few chapters when I made the suggestion, and while I said that I would probably be finished with the book before by the time the Q4 reading selection was decided, I got distracted by a dozen other books and haven't made much progress since then. Which is simply to say that, I'd still be reading along with everyone else if this book ended up getting picked for the Q1 reading.Full House by Stephen Jay GouldNo! I've had more than my fill of the Olsen twins, thank you kindly.(Kidding.)

Imperial Grunts : The American Military on the Ground by Robert D. Kaplanwww.amazon.com/gp/product...s&v=glanceI have read the first couple chapters and am hoping to share this with you guys so I am holding off. Kaplan is known as someone higher ups read (particularly since Colin Powell gave one of his books to Bill Clinton in the early 90s). I know some have read at least one of his books, among them "Mediterranean Winter: The Pleasures of History and Landscape in Tunisia, Sicily, Dalmatia, and Greece" (2004); "Warrior Politics: Why Leadership Demands a Pagan Ethos" (2002); "Eastward to Tartary: Travels in the Balkans, the Middle East, and the Caucasus" (2000); "The Coming Anarchy: Shattering the Dreams of the Post Cold War" (2000); "An Empire Wilderness: Travels Into America's Future" (1998); "The Ends of the Earth: A Journey at the Dawn of the 21st Century" (1996); "The Arabists: The Romance of an American Elite" (1993); "Balkan Ghosts: A Journey Through History" (1993); "Soldiers of God: With the Mujahidin in Afghanistan" (1990); and "Surrender or Starve: The Wars Behind the Famine" (1988). Just read this excerpt or watch his booktv indepth interview and decide for yourselves.www.booktv.org/indepth/in...chedID=339Excerpt.

I would read Marti's suggestion of Full House by Gould. I would also read/re-read any of Gould's books.

Isn't Gould dead? "...the great events in life come from the books, rather than the people, one comes across." - Robert D. Kaplan, Mediterranean Winter: the Pleasures of History and Landscape in Tunisia, Sicily, Dalmatia, and Greece

Yes.

But his books are not....Mr. P. The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper

Under the Banner of Heaven by by Jon KrakauerWe discussed reading this book recently. I think with adding multiple nonfiction books we should give this one a shot. I can't picture this topic not making for some great discussion material.Amazon.comIn 1984, Ron and Dan Lafferty murdered the wife and infant daughter of their younger brother Allen. The crimes were noteworthy not merely for their brutality but for the brothers' claim that they were acting on direct orders from God. In Under the Banner of Heaven, Jon Krakauer tells the story of the killers and their crime but also explores the shadowy world of Mormon fundamentalism from which the two emerged. The Mormon Church was founded, in part, on the idea that true believers could speak directly with God. But while the mainstream church attempted to be more palatable to the general public by rejecting the controversial tenet of polygamy, fundamentalist splinter groups saw this as apostasy and took to the hills to live what they believed to be a righteous life. When their beliefs are challenged or their patriarchal, cult-like order defied, these still-active groups, according to Krakauer, are capable of fighting back with tremendous violence. While Krakauer's research into the history of the church is admirably extensive, the real power of the book comes from present-day information, notably jailhouse interviews with Dan Lafferty. Far from being the brooding maniac one might expect, Lafferty is chillingly coherent, still insisting that his motive was merely to obey God's command. Krakauer's accounts of the actual murders are graphic and disturbing, but such detail makes the brothers' claim of divine instruction all the more horrifying. In an age where Westerners have trouble comprehending what drives Islamic fundamentalists to kill, Jon Krakauer advises us to look within America's own borders.

Gladwell mentions Gift of Fear and quotes De Becker in "blink". So I'm not the only one seeing a connection!

Krakauer's a reputable writer, and I'm sure the book is well-researched. My only concern is that, given the true crime focus of the book, it's likely to skew any understanding of Mormonism derived from it. If it gets picked, maybe we should run a optional, concurrent reading that's specifically about the doctrives and development of Mormonism -- in the interest of balance.

Anyone is welcome to initiate a book discussion to run concurrently with one of our quarterly selections. But please keep in mind that we don't have a large number of active members. If we spread ourselves too thin by suggesting members read too many books we'll have barren discussion forums.I don't see a reason to try to find a book to counter the Mormon book. Trying to balance everything is too much work. Isn't it enough that we're getting people to read and discuss quality books? Within any particular book forum members can raise points where they disagree with the authors. I cannot see us effectively reading handfuls of books concurrently just so that we're sure we cover all sides of the subject.But I see your point, Mad. Maybe we can simply have an active discussion where we all honestly explore and discuss the book. I don't think we can afford to have the few active members we do have off reading additional books as opposed to focusing on our main books.