Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME FORUMS BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sat Aug 30, 2014 5:17 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Ch. 10: The Tawdriness of the Miraculous and the Decline... 
Author Message
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Likes the book better than the movie


Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 825
Location: Wyse Fork, NC
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified

Post Re: ethics vs. morality
Suz wrote:
Thomas, are you speaking of ethics or morality?


In so far as ethics is the study of existing moral systems, both.

Quote:
. . . a well read person does not gain great moral wisdom from the books that she chooses to read. However, how does a literary person become less trustworthy?


That is indeed a good question. Booktalk persons, I imagine, would have a bias toward the belief that a literary education is uplifting. However, I have a specific model in mind, an intellectual and literate classmate of mine whose life has been devoted to wine, women, and song, and who abandoned his wife with several small children and left the country in order to evade child support. Somehow, too much imagination seems to deprive a person of ordinary moral sensibilities.

The personal lives of literary persons are typically less than admirable -- Frost, Vachel Lindsey, Whitman, Melville -- for example. Their works would be unreadable were it not for the separation that is typically made between literature and morality. And as for Shakespeare, perhaps you are aware of the physical horror and revulsion that underlies the sonnets?

Quote:
It is impossible to debate, or exchange opinions, or discuss topics with a person uneducated on the proposed topic, a monologue would be the result. It has been my personal experience to find the one man show monologue untrustworthy.


Supposing you are speaking of me by indirection and are accusing me of a "one man show monologue" -- do three sentences make a monologue? Think of me as the loyal opposition who wonders whether an author who supports a war begun on lies and carried through with corruption and torture has any morality to speak of.

Tom



Sun Apr 19, 2009 6:28 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Upper Echelon 1st Class

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor

Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2467
Location: New Jersey
Thanks: 502
Thanked: 407 times in 325 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post ethics vs. morality
Hello Tom:

Gotcha, Hemmingway, and Slyvia Plath may meet your critieria as well, Mark Twain maybe? I see your point, and if I see it correctly, I agree. Many authors and playwrights are far from role models. The drunken author is a stereo type after all. Shakespeare, my opinion, he wrote for the appetites of the people of the time, simular to the Grimm brothers, or Jodi Piqualt. I do not appreciate shock value. You do support your point very well wtih Melville and Whitman.

I am not sure what author you are referring to about the war based on lies, I would like to refer to the author who wrote about a war fuled by missals due to a man's erection. War based on testasterone. Can't ellaborate on Pynchon, he won't take off the paper bag.

Please consider, Jane Austen, Philip Roth, Margaret Attwood, and Toni Morrison. Sad tale about your friend, I hope he makes it big, maybe send some royalty checks to his wife.

Your loyal opposition,
Suzanne

P.S.
I thought I was being direct.



Sun Apr 19, 2009 7:49 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Gold Contributor 2

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4944
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1081
Thanked: 1040 times in 813 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post 
Thomas Hood wrote:
DWill wrote:
In Shakespeare, Homer, Milton, Joyce and so many others we do have a treasury of moral literature that can serve as well as various scriptures.


Joyce?

The supposition that a literary education improves one's morals has no foundation that I know of. From personal experience I have found literary persons as a group to be less trustworthy than the uneducated.


Yes, Joyce. Read his story "The Dead," (for instance) and tell me if that is not an example of moral literature. I'm not speaking in terms of explicit moral directives, which I think can be arguably less effective, for adults at least, than the complex renderings of human motivations and actions that we find most plentifully in great novelists and playwrights. I should have added Dickens, who is above all a moral novelist.


_________________
Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance that he himself has spun.

Clifford Geertz


Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:24 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
I can has reading?

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2959
Location: Cheshire, England
Thanks: 229
Thanked: 466 times in 360 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United Kingdom (uk)

Post 
Call me a pedantic old nitpicker......DWill, but although, I love Dickens and his characters. I think he was more of a social reformer than one to look to for moral guidance.

His women characters are awful, more often than not. Either prostitutes or madonnas.

I much prefer Arnold Bennet - Hilda Lessways was so good, I could hardly believe it was written by a man.

I suppose we are talking about the difference between books which tell a moral tale, (the good are rewarded and the wicked come to a sticky end) and books which explore 'why' people behave the way they do.

I think most of us are born with a propensity to do what is 'right' - ie a child doesn't share his sweets naturally but it is easy to persuade him/her why it is best to do so.

I like the kind of books which attempt to explain why people do bad things. And then go on to 'suggest' productive ways to deal with that behaviour. I liked 'A Clockwork Orange' for this reason. A very violent book, with a hateful hero, but by the end of the book, I didn't want him to be executed, or even brainwashed. I so desperately wanted him to 'choose' to do right. So, it changed me a little, and I think for the better.

Which is rather more than the words in the NT could do by just saying 'Love your Enemies', but it doesn't tell you how to even begin to do that.


_________________
If you fall, I'll be there.

.....Floor


Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:29 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Likes the book better than the movie


Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 825
Location: Wyse Fork, NC
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified

Post 
DWill wrote:
[quote="Thomas Hood
Joyce?
Quote:

Yes, Joyce. Read his story "The Dead," (for instance) and tell me if that is not an example of moral literature.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dead_(short_story)
summary and resources

http://mockingbird.creighton.edu/englis ... s/dead.htm
text of The Dead

I did read it, maybe thirty years ago, and the impression I remember is that Joyce was unfair to the husband. Could you please say in a sentence or two why you think The Dead is moral literature?

Tom



Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:00 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Gold Contributor 2

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4944
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1081
Thanked: 1040 times in 813 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post 
Thomas Hood wrote:
I did read it, maybe thirty years ago, and the impression I remember is that Joyce was unfair to the husband. Could you please say in a sentence or two why you think The Dead is moral literature?
Tom

Sure, Tom--but not in a sentence or two. Throughout the story, Gabriel Conroy is preoccupied with his rather petty personal concerns, as we all often are. He agonizes over the impression he will make giving the toast at the dinner. Yet he has flashes of something larger going on amid all the hubbub, for example his aunts and all the older people he has known gradually fading into shadows. Meanwhile, his wife (is it Greta?) is detached from him, thinking about a poor, doomed, poetic lover of hers back in the West of Ireland named Michael Furay. At the climax of the story, Gabriel feels the rising of lust for his wife when they return to the hotel room. She is crying, though, and he learns it is about Michael and realizes that she has such a deep well of emotion that exposes him in all his shallowness. It starts to snow, and this, peculiarly enough, elicits an epiphany in Gabriel that you'll just have to read the final paragraphs of the story to experience. Response to literature is an individual matter. There is no doubt in my mind that the story presents a profound moral vision.


_________________
Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance that he himself has spun.

Clifford Geertz


Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:45 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Gold Contributor 2

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4944
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1081
Thanked: 1040 times in 813 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post 
Penelope wrote:
Call me a pedantic old nitpicker......DWill, but although, I love Dickens and his characters. I think he was more of a social reformer than one to look to for moral guidance.

Penelope, I wish I could take back whatever I said that produced the phrase "moral guidance" in response. I hope I didn't say it myself! I do not mean that literature should tell us how to act, in a didactic manner. That sounds like the old McGuffey's reader in this country. Pretty clearly, too, moral literature will give us a lot of unsavory characters, and also I hope a lot of characters who act perfectly humanly, that is sometimes as we would wish for them to do, and sometimes in an opposite or at least ambiguous manner. Biblical characters sometimes act in this inconsistent, human way, as well. Think of David and even Jesus. I think this is not the particular strength of the Bible, though.


_________________
Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance that he himself has spun.

Clifford Geertz


Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:58 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Gold Contributor 2

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4944
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1081
Thanked: 1040 times in 813 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: ethics vs. morality
Thomas Hood wrote:
The personal lives of literary persons are typically less than admirable -- Frost, Vachel Lindsey, Whitman, Melville -- for example. Their works would be unreadable were it not for the separation that is typically made between literature and morality. And as for Shakespeare, perhaps you are aware of the physical horror and revulsion that underlies the sonnets?

Oh my, Tom, how ever did we get onto the topic of the moral uprightness of "lit'ry set"? Let's get off it right away! We know nothing about the moral fiber of those scribes who wrote the bible verses, either. In both cases, whether these folks were good family people, or whatever, is irrelevant. Martin Luther King, also, had serious failings as a husband. I think he was a great man.


_________________
Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance that he himself has spun.

Clifford Geertz


Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:07 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Gold Contributor 2

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4944
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1081
Thanked: 1040 times in 813 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post 
Robert: "In practice, Hitchens did align with Wolfowitz over the Iraq War, as part of his chameleon transformation from Trotskyite to neoconservative."
Aw, Robert, does one change of coloring make him a chameleon? Better to change than be a fossilized Trotskyite, right? I thought his passage on that part of his life in God Is Not Great was admirable in its frankness. He had youthful passion, which in itself is a good thing, I think.


_________________
Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance that he himself has spun.

Clifford Geertz


Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:40 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Comandante Literario Supreme w/ Cheese

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 2857
Location: Round Hill, VA
Thanks: 421
Thanked: 331 times in 252 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post 
Penelope wrote:

His women characters are awful, more often than not. Either prostitutes or madonnas.


Oh, Penny, I beg to differ. I would say the main characters in a Dickens novel can be a bit flat sometimes, all good or all bad, and generally male. I can think of several female characters that are neither prostitutes or madonnas; Little Dorrit for one.


Quote:
I think most of us are born with a propensity to do what is 'right' - ie a child doesn't share his sweets naturally but it is easy to persuade him/her why it is best to do so.


Babies do share without being taught. I am sure you must have had the experience of sitting with a baby that is eating and it insists on putting food in your mouth.

Quote:
I like the kind of books which attempt to explain why people do bad things. And then go on to 'suggest' productive ways to deal with that behaviour. I liked 'A Clockwork Orange' for this reason. A very violent book, with a hateful hero, but by the end of the book, I didn't want him to be executed, or even brainwashed. I so desperately wanted him to 'choose' to do right. So, it changed me a little, and I think for the better.


It seems to me, if memory serves and sometimes it doesn't, that at the end of A Clockwork Orange the main character is actually unchanged and either chooses to continue to be violent or is unable to not be violent.

I think literature can and does provide for moral development. For a piece of literature to fall into the category of morally instructive or to have moral value or I don't know -- not sure how to phrase it, it simply needs to provoke you into examining your own worldview and sense of right and wrong. The first step toward moral development is self awareness; not someone telling you what is good and bad.


_________________
"may my mind stroll about hungry and fearless and thirsty and supple"
- e.e. cummings


Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:45 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Likes the book better than the movie


Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 825
Location: Wyse Fork, NC
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified

Post Re: ethics vs. morality
DWill wrote:
Oh my, Tom, how ever did we get onto the topic of the moral uprightness of "lit'ry set"? Let's get off it right away!


For me it started here:

Quote:
In Shakespeare, Homer, Milton, Joyce and so many others we do have a treasury of moral literature that can serve as well as various scriptures.


And, not to step on anyone's reverences, I do question whether literature has moral suasion and can serve as a replacement for scripture. But I will follow your advice and meditate on the question privately.

Tom



Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:42 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
I can has reading?

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2959
Location: Cheshire, England
Thanks: 229
Thanked: 466 times in 360 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United Kingdom (uk)

Post 
Tom, dear Tom, said:-

Quote:
I do question whether literature has moral suasion and can serve as a replacement for scripture.


Literature is scripture (writings) isn't it Tom? The Jews are influencial in religious thinking today, only because they wrote everything down. They wrote everything down because they had a lot of rules and regulations to record. If they had no rules and regulations, there would be no Jewish Race. Because they had no Country for a long time. And even now, they are fighting for what was imo - given to them, injudiciously.

What I am saying is, that the only thing which makes a Jewish person separate from the rest of us....is their recorded history and rules.

You are an American, because you were born there. I am English because I was born here....but the Jews don't have a Country they are everywhere. They have an international language - Yiddish. They only have their laws, to keep them separate.

I don't dislike Jewish people. But I don't think we should revere their rules and laws, belief system......just because it is ancient and written down.


_________________
If you fall, I'll be there.

.....Floor


Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:06 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
I can has reading?

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2959
Location: Cheshire, England
Thanks: 229
Thanked: 466 times in 360 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United Kingdom (uk)

Post 
Saffron:

Quote:
It seems to me, if memory serves and sometimes it doesn't, that at the end of A Clockwork Orange the main character is actually unchanged and either chooses to continue to be violent or is unable to not be violent.


I didn't read it like this. This is how I read it:-

Alex, after having been brainwashed, felt sick at the thought of doing a violent act, but he still wanted to do it......and my goodness, I wanted him to do it too......because I wanted him to choose...

Eventually, he married the girl he raped earlier in the book.....and she 'balanced him'. He didn't want his children to be how he was and so, he 'chose' not be be 'nasty'. Maybe there are two endings.

I also was impressed with the idea, that it took a thug to deal with a thug. So Alec's friends became policemen and were responsible for his arrest and torture. Our police, actually are becoming more yobbish, but they have 'yobs' to deal with....I don't know what the answer is, but at least I feel I understand the question. :(


_________________
If you fall, I'll be there.

.....Floor


Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:17 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Slut

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4125
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 1129
Thanked: 1179 times in 886 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post 
DWill wrote:
Robert: "In practice, Hitchens did align with Wolfowitz over the Iraq War, as part of his chameleon transformation from Trotskyite to neoconservative." Aw, Robert, does one change of coloring make him a chameleon? Better to change than be a fossilized Trotskyite, right? I thought his passage on that part of his life in God Is Not Great was admirable in its frankness. He had youthful passion, which in itself is a good thing, I think.
The attractiveness of Leon Trotsky to impressionable youth was rather like the cult of Che Guevara, high on romance and low on facts. Orwell went the same path, fighting with the Trotskyite POUM in Catalonia and going on to write Animal Farm, which could almost be read as a Trotskyite work except that Orwell is too humane and sane to support Trotsky’s mad totalitarianism. You are right that ‘chameleon’ is too strong a term to describe Hitchens as he is stable in his views. I just used it to highlight the chasm between his communist past and his capitalist present. Indeed, it is better to change than be a fossilized Trotskyite, but the interesting thing here, in Orwell and Hitchens, is that both retained from Trotsky an orientation towards large scale questions of world politics and a desire to articulate global strategies for reform. This neo-Trotskyism can be compared to the outlook of former Chinese Premier Jiang Zemin, whose favourite authors were reportedly Milton Friedman and Mao Zedong, in that both combine a communist eschatology with capitalist rationality.



Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:24 pm
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Brilliant

Bronze Contributor 2

Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 674
Thanks: 17
Thanked: 20 times in 15 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Canada (ca)

Post 
Robert Tulip wrote:
The attractiveness of Leon Trotsky to impressionable youth was rather like the cult of Che Guevara, high on romance and low on facts. Orwell went the same path, fighting with the Trotskyite POUM in Catalonia and going on to write Animal Farm, which could almost be read as a Trotskyite work except that Orwell is too humane and sane to support Trotsky’s mad totalitarianism.


Yes, difficulty does arise when one is shifting from the theory of political philosophy towards its relationship to the functional practice of the political movement as unwittingly a disjunction inevitably occurs. Perhaps no small reason why Che is afforded a cult while Trotsky and Orwell are given the trust of dissimulators? Che was never a novelist where as Orwell and Trotsky were never more than intellectual revolutionaries.

This is important as in the cases of Trotsky and Orwell, with regards to the personal dynamism Che, the theory was able to substitute its own frames of references and suggestions without the need for all that detailed of an awareness as to specific sociological and political function within which it would necessarily operate as a emergent process. Functional process was Che's legitimacy. In this sense, that the political theory of Trotsky and Orwell is a actually a simplified subset of rather particular assumptions opposed to a balanced theory tested in action, the projection of particular features onto disparate types of hypothetical situations based on preceding thought fostered a rather distrusting mutual development. Based on the almost implicit duplexity in creating a moral double standard rather than a more accommodating systems or meta-systems perspective concerning intraspecific competition within a community adopted by the pragmatic Che.

Che and Orwell were different from Trotsky in many respects not the least in amount of respect they willingly afforded to alternative fields of thought and reasoning. The distrust of general intellectual reasoning (especially formal philosophy and philosophers) was a trait of Trotsky who saw action only in disregarding moral qualms. This results in a continual requirement for the taxation of a readers sensitivities towards a specific recognition that his works require careful reconsideration in light of its many presuppositions. Ignorance to what Trotsky represents may create an artificially stimulating read, but only through ignorance of the factors I have briefly outlined. To simply make the assumption that defining either Trotsky or Che as distastefully "low on facts" as constructive commentary constitutes an evasion regarding the reasonable nature and significance of association formed effectual responses to particular works, sentences, and words continually and more importantly dynamically as constructed and as identifiable in modern western society.



Last edited by Grim on Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:37 pm, edited 3 times in total.



Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:20 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:


BookTalk.org Links 
Forum Rules & Tips
Frequently Asked Questions
BBCode Explained
Info for Authors & Publishers
Featured Book Suggestions
Author Interview Transcripts
Be a Book Discussion Leader!
    

Love to talk about books but don't have time for our book discussion forums? For casual book talk join us on Facebook.

Featured Books

Books by New Authors



Booktalk.org on Facebook 



BookTalk.org is a free book discussion group or online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a group. We host live author chats where booktalk members can interact with and interview authors. We give away free books to our members in book giveaway contests. Our booktalks are open to everybody who enjoys talking about books. Our book forums include book reviews, author interviews and book resources for readers and book lovers. Discussing books is our passion. We're a literature forum, or reading forum. Register a free book club account today! Suggest nonfiction and fiction books. Authors and publishers are welcome to advertise their books or ask for an author chat or author interview.


Navigation 
MAIN NAVIGATION

HOMEFORUMSBOOKSTRANSCRIPTSOLD FORUMSADVERTISELINKSFAQDONATETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICY

BOOK FORUMS FOR ALL BOOKS WE HAVE DISCUSSED
Oliver Twist - by Charles DickensSense and Goodness Without God - by Richard CarrierFrankenstein - by Mary ShelleyThe Big Questions - by Simon BlackburnScience Was Born of Christianity - by Stacy TrasancosThe Happiness Hypothesis - by Jonathan HaidtA Game of Thrones - by George R. R. MartinTempesta's Dream - by Vincent LoCocoWhy Nations Fail - by Daron Acemoglu and James RobinsonThe Drowning Girl - Caitlin R. KiernanThe Consolations of the Forest - by Sylvain TessonThe Complete Heretic's Guide to Western Religion: The Mormons - by David FitzgeraldA Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man - by James JoyceThe Divine Comedy - by Dante AlighieriThe Magic of Reality - by Richard DawkinsDubliners - by James JoyceMy Name Is Red - by Orhan PamukThe World Until Yesterday - by Jared DiamondThe Man Who Was Thursday - by by G. K. ChestertonThe Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven PinkerLord Jim by Joseph ConradThe Hobbit by J. R. R. TolkienThe Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas AdamsAtlas Shrugged by Ayn RandThinking, Fast and Slow - by Daniel KahnemanThe Righteous Mind - by Jonathan HaidtWorld War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War by Max BrooksMoby Dick: or, the Whale by Herman MelvilleA Visit from the Goon Squad by Jennifer EganLost Memory of Skin: A Novel by Russell BanksThe Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas S. KuhnHobbes: Leviathan by Thomas HobbesThe House of the Spirits - by Isabel AllendeArguably: Essays by Christopher HitchensThe Falls: A Novel (P.S.) by Joyce Carol OatesChrist in Egypt by D.M. MurdockThe Glass Bead Game: A Novel by Hermann HesseA Devil's Chaplain by Richard DawkinsThe Hero with a Thousand Faces by Joseph CampbellThe Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor DostoyevskyThe Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark TwainThe Moral Landscape by Sam HarrisThe Decameron by Giovanni BoccaccioThe Road by Cormac McCarthyThe Grand Design by Stephen HawkingThe Evolution of God by Robert WrightThe Tin Drum by Gunter GrassGood Omens by Neil GaimanPredictably Irrational by Dan ArielyThe Wind-Up Bird Chronicle: A Novel by Haruki MurakamiALONE: Orphaned on the Ocean by Richard Logan & Tere Duperrault FassbenderDon Quixote by Miguel De CervantesMusicophilia by Oliver SacksDiary of a Madman and Other Stories by Nikolai GogolThe Passion of the Western Mind by Richard TarnasThe Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K. Le GuinThe Genius of the Beast by Howard BloomAlice's Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll Empire of Illusion by Chris HedgesThe Sound and the Fury by William Faulkner The Extended Phenotype by Richard DawkinsSmoke and Mirrors by Neil GaimanThe Selfish Gene by Richard DawkinsWhen Good Thinking Goes Bad by Todd C. RinioloHouse of Leaves by Mark Z. DanielewskiAmerican Gods: A Novel by Neil GaimanPrimates and Philosophers by Frans de WaalThe Enormous Room by E.E. CummingsThe Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar WildeGod Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher HitchensThe Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco Dreams From My Father by Barack Obama Paradise Lost by John Milton Bad Money by Kevin PhillipsThe Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson BurnettGodless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists by Dan BarkerThe Things They Carried by Tim O'BrienThe Limits of Power by Andrew BacevichLolita by Vladimir NabokovOrlando by Virginia Woolf On Being Certain by Robert A. Burton50 reasons people give for believing in a god by Guy P. HarrisonWalden: Or, Life in the Woods by Henry David ThoreauExile and the Kingdom by Albert CamusOur Inner Ape by Frans de WaalYour Inner Fish by Neil ShubinNo Country for Old Men by Cormac McCarthyThe Age of American Unreason by Susan JacobyTen Theories of Human Nature by Leslie Stevenson & David HabermanHeart of Darkness by Joseph ConradThe Stuff of Thought by Stephen PinkerA Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled HosseiniThe Lucifer Effect by Philip ZimbardoResponsibility and Judgment by Hannah ArendtInterventions by Noam ChomskyGodless in America by George A. RickerReligious Expression and the American Constitution by Franklyn S. HaimanDeep Economy by Phil McKibbenThe God Delusion by Richard DawkinsThe Third Chimpanzee by Jared DiamondThe Woman in the Dunes by Abe KoboEvolution vs. Creationism by Eugenie C. ScottThe Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael PollanI, Claudius by Robert GravesBreaking The Spell by Daniel C. DennettA Peace to End All Peace by David FromkinThe Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey NiffeneggerThe End of Faith by Sam HarrisEnder's Game by Orson Scott CardThe Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time by Mark HaddonValue and Virtue in a Godless Universe by Erik J. WielenbergThe March by E. L DoctorowThe Ethical Brain by Michael GazzanigaFreethinkers: A History of American Secularism by Susan JacobyCollapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed by Jared DiamondThe Battle for God by Karen ArmstrongThe Future of Life by Edward O. WilsonWhat is Good? by A. C. GraylingCivilization and Its Enemies by Lee HarrisPale Blue Dot by Carl SaganHow We Believe: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for God by Michael ShermerLooking for Spinoza by Antonio DamasioLies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them by Al FrankenThe Red Queen by Matt RidleyThe Blank Slate by Stephen PinkerUnweaving the Rainbow by Richard DawkinsAtheism: A Reader edited by S.T. JoshiGlobal Brain by Howard BloomThe Lucifer Principle by Howard BloomGuns, Germs and Steel by Jared DiamondThe Demon-Haunted World by Carl SaganBury My Heart at Wounded Knee by Dee BrownFuture Shock by Alvin Toffler

OTHER PAGES WORTH EXPLORING
Banned Book ListOur Amazon.com SalesMassimo Pigliucci Rationally SpeakingOnline Reading GroupTop 10 Atheism BooksFACTS Book Selections

cron
Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2014. All rights reserved.
Website developed by MidnightCoder.ca
Display Pagerank