Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME FORUMS BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sat Nov 22, 2014 7:54 pm

<< Week of November 22, 2014 >>
Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
22 Day Month

23 Day Month

24 Day Month

25 Day Month

26 Day Month

27 Day Month

28 Day Month





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 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  Next
The Selfish Meme? 
Author Message
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
No Bell Prize Winner


Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1298
Thanks: 518
Thanked: 484 times in 368 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
Geo wrote:
The idea that certain religious concepts can be embraced by a culture while other religious concepts from the same religious text can be largely ignored seems very meme-centric to me. It breaks down the larger religious texts into individual memes, a meme being a unit of culture. Many Christians ignore a good part of the Old Testament, but cannot jettison it completely because original sin is so intrinsically tied in with the New Testament's message of salvation. But these days almost nobody pays much attention to the Old Testament. Its God is laughably cartoonish. The New Testament's message of universal love and salvation, on the other hand, remains very appealing to the masses. And Christianity is alive and well, although arguably becoming less relevant. I wonder, at what point is critical mass reached wherein a culture rejects so much of a religion's texts that there's almost nothing left?


Out Of Context !!!

* Funny as can be ...



_________________
A) The Origins of Religious Worship

B) The Christmas Nativity

C) The Mythicist Position

D) YEC theory put to rest!


The following user would like to thank tat tvam asi for this post:
geo
Fri Sep 24, 2010 2:17 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Diamond Contributor

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 4610
Location: Florida
Thanks: 149
Thanked: 253 times in 220 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
geo wrote:
stahrwe wrote:

I can't expect any of you to understand because you immerse yourselves in the equivalent of pulp novels when it comes to God, religion and Christianity. TEog is an excellent example. That book has no substance to it. It is self contradictory and full of fluff and speculation.


I know, it's so unfeasible. All those, like, words!

When it's so much easier to believe that 6,000 years ago Magic Sky Daddy made the earth and later flooded it, destroying all humans except for Noah, a few friends, and a pair of every single species on the planet, who survived by living on Noah's boat. And then, even later, Magic Sky Daddy sent down his son, Jesus, to save all humans from original sin, a badness caused by Adam and Eve--the very first humans--when they ate an apple in the Garden of Eden.

Yes, so much more believable! So less self-contradictory, and so unfluffy! :P


If you follow the thread Epistemology and Biblical Evidence you will see a fully developed structure of interrelationship develop for the Bible. We are just getting started there but with time it will emerge. On the other hand, TEog is, well, read page 117 for an example of spculation. That is the way the whole book is.


_________________
“You cannot evade the issue of God, whether you talk about pigs or the binomial theory, you are still talking about Him. Now if Christianity be. . . a fragment of metaphysical nonsense invented by a few people, then, of course, defending it will simply mean talking that metaphysical nonsense over and over. But if Christianity should happen to be true – then defending it may mean talking about anything or everything. Things can be irrelevant to the proposition that Christianity is false, but nothing can be irrelevant to the proposition that Christianity is true.”
- G.K. Chesterton


Fri Sep 24, 2010 2:19 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
One more post ought to do it.

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor 2

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3254
Location: NC
Thanks: 1124
Thanked: 1174 times in 886 posts
Gender: Male

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
stahrwe wrote:

If you follow the thread Epistemology and Biblical Evidence you will see a fully developed structure of interrelationship develop for the Bible. We are just getting started there but with time it will emerge. On the other hand, TEog is, well, read page 117 for an example of spculation. That is the way the whole book is.


With all due respect, Stahrwe, this is a discussion of Wright's book. His premise is that religion and "God" are human inventions. All of his arguments and speculations follow from that premise. He states this up front in the introduction. Obviously, you disagree with that premise and it is predictable that this book will hold no interest for you. And that's fine. Why don't you let us discuss the book and meanwhile you're perfectly free to have your Bible class discussions in those forums that are specifically set up for that purpose. Anyone who wants to participate with you knows where to find you.


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


Fri Sep 24, 2010 6:57 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: 4962
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1089
Thanked: 1060 times in 828 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
stahrwe wrote:
The point about Islam is that Allah is an impersonal god. One's postion (not relationship to him because that concept is alien to Islam) is based on works (the five pillars of Islam) and even then one's ultimate fate is unknowable.

stahrwe, I don't believe this. Have you been inside the heads of Muslims? If not, why are you so sure of the nature of their feelings toward their Abrahamic god?


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

Clifford Geertz


Fri Sep 24, 2010 7:29 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: 4962
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1089
Thanked: 1060 times in 828 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
stahrwe wrote:
If you follow the thread Epistemology and Biblical Evidence you will see a fully developed structure of interrelationship develop for the Bible. We are just getting started there but with time it will emerge. On the other hand, TEog is, well, read page 117 for an example of spculation. That is the way the whole book is.

It's a kind of exploration that Wright does. Do you see him engaging in this exploration, or speculation if you prefer, and then coming to dogmatic conclusions based on it? If he did, I would find your criticism justified. But it appears that what bothers you is the simple fact that he raises the questions at all.


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

Clifford Geertz


Fri Sep 24, 2010 7:36 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: 4962
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1089
Thanked: 1060 times in 828 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
geo wrote:
To be honest, I have largely ignored your ongoing debate with Robert regarding memes.

Your honesty appreciated!
Quote:
One of these days I'd like you to spell out for me your resistance to the idea because I came in late and never quite got a handle on it. It might be interesting for us to read and discuss Susan Blackmore's The Meme Machine sometime.

I'm aware of venturing into a hazardous area with meme-criticism. The reason I say this is that I can't disavow a plain emotional reaction against the concept, or maybe against what it represents. It repels me, to be plain, but repulsion is not something to rest on. People may be repelled by the selfish gene theory, but that's not a reason, as Dawkins rightly says.

We could take a closer look at the basis of memes sometime. Perhaps the most concise remark I could make at this point is that, considering the definition of meme as a unit of cultural transmission, there are appropriate and inappropriate uses of "units," and culture falls into the latter category. Marxism was the first attempt to bring science to the study of culture, and it failed just as I think memetics does.


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

Clifford Geertz


Sat Sep 25, 2010 5:09 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 5578
Location: California
Thanks: 743
Thanked: 1473 times in 1164 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
Quote:
there are appropriate and inappropriate uses of "units," and culture falls into the latter category. Marxism was the first attempt to bring science to the study of culture, and it failed just as I think memetics does.


This is one of the problems with memetics. In genes, even when it's nearly impossible to distinguish a specific unit, there is always the mind's eye view of a visual 'protein' the must, as least, serve as the lower limit to what a unit can be. In memetics, there are no clear distinctions. A single word with an accent could very well be a "sticky idea". See, I can't really use another term to describe what I mean here. "Sticky Idea" doesn't suffice. I really must use "meme" to explain myself, problems notwithstanding. A single word with an accent may for reasons unknown be catchier than other mundane words, and for some reason spread through society. Such a single word is possibly the lower limit to what a meme unit could be, but there are still problems. There would be variety within the unit, and even unspoken communication perhaps which is transmitted in parallel with the unit.

The way I've come to think of it is akin to how I think of a photon. It's a particle, but not really... it's also a wave. Meaning, it's not a discrete unit as we normally envision one, but is something of a "range" all to itself. To think in terms of units is to think too mechanically, which culture is not. Perhaps we should abandon the idea of units so that memetics can make progress. Or at least transplant the concept with one of lesser discretion. I can't even think of a word that would take it's place right now. "Unit" comes close, but misses the mark. The word is not an achilles heel to memetics, but rather a distraction. Memetics is elegant and disturbing when you consider it in the raw form; without our attempts to explain it. The evolutionary algorithm is the necker cube looking glass.



The following user would like to thank Interbane for this post:
DWill
Sat Sep 25, 2010 8:52 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: 4962
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1089
Thanked: 1060 times in 828 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
When you say that memes suffer from being too mechanical in concept, I agree. If there is a void needing to be filled by some other language concept, it should be adaptable to organic and emergent models of development and change. Memes as I usually hear them talked about seem to miss the boat on this score. It could be part of the reason that memes are now seldom mentioned in the scholarship on history and culture, and why they are used most often as synonynmous with "internet fads."


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

Clifford Geertz


Sat Sep 25, 2010 1:25 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 5578
Location: California
Thanks: 743
Thanked: 1473 times in 1164 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
Quote:
When you say that memes suffer from being too mechanical in concept, I agree.


I think this is backwards. Though many champions of memetics use mechanical terms, I think it is a linguistic failure rather than a conceptual failure.

In other words, if you think of memes in mechanical concepts, the theory suffers. Therefore, don't think of them mechanically. The same words may be used, as there are few good ways to explain the concept currently, but holding to less mechanical connotations helps.

Each sub-concept in memetics should be understood fuzzily. In practice, the phenomenon becomes apparent, but it's non-physical nature makes it tough to pin down. This is the same way I think of free will. I understand there is a disconnect between collections of neurons as data storage devices and how the world really is, but it's my inability to process the hidden layer rather than a failure of the concept. "A" is true and "C" is true, but "B" is an invisible bitch.



Sat Sep 25, 2010 3:43 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Diamond Contributor

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 4610
Location: Florida
Thanks: 149
Thanked: 253 times in 220 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
DWill wrote:
stahrwe wrote:
The point about Islam is that Allah is an impersonal god. One's postion (not relationship to him because that concept is alien to Islam) is based on works (the five pillars of Islam) and even then one's ultimate fate is unknowable.

stahrwe, I don't believe this. Have you been inside the heads of Muslims? If not, why are you so sure of the nature of their feelings toward their Abrahamic god?



Read a book. I can recommend several. You might also read the Koran. Islam is a very fatalistic religion.


_________________
“You cannot evade the issue of God, whether you talk about pigs or the binomial theory, you are still talking about Him. Now if Christianity be. . . a fragment of metaphysical nonsense invented by a few people, then, of course, defending it will simply mean talking that metaphysical nonsense over and over. But if Christianity should happen to be true – then defending it may mean talking about anything or everything. Things can be irrelevant to the proposition that Christianity is false, but nothing can be irrelevant to the proposition that Christianity is true.”
- G.K. Chesterton


Sat Sep 25, 2010 9:51 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Diamond Contributor

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 4610
Location: Florida
Thanks: 149
Thanked: 253 times in 220 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
geo wrote:
stahrwe wrote:

If you follow the thread Epistemology and Biblical Evidence you will see a fully developed structure of interrelationship develop for the Bible. We are just getting started there but with time it will emerge. On the other hand, TEog is, well, read page 117 for an example of spculation. That is the way the whole book is.


With all due respect, Stahrwe, this is a discussion of Wright's book. His premise is that religion and "God" are human inventions. All of his arguments and speculations follow from that premise. He states this up front in the introduction. Obviously, you disagree with that premise and it is predictable that this book will hold no interest for you. And that's fine. Why don't you let us discuss the book and meanwhile you're perfectly free to have your Bible class discussions in those forums that are specifically set up for that purpose. Anyone who wants to participate with you knows where to find you.


I don't object to speculation. I do object to speculation masquerading ad more than that. Wright's MO is to issue a disclaimer, then cite an obscure source it might even say is out of favor, then a few pages later refer back to the source as legitimate.

In Genesis the Bible records Abram called out of Ur by God. Of course Ur was polytheistic and so therefore was Abram prior to his call. This specifically provides an explanation for everything which follows in the history of Israel, yet, Wright prefers to invent his own history. What happened to Oakum's razor in this case? Is there anywhere in TEog where Wrigt directly deals with Abram's call? Maybe I missed it. Please refer it to me and I will leave you to your echoes.


_________________
“You cannot evade the issue of God, whether you talk about pigs or the binomial theory, you are still talking about Him. Now if Christianity be. . . a fragment of metaphysical nonsense invented by a few people, then, of course, defending it will simply mean talking that metaphysical nonsense over and over. But if Christianity should happen to be true – then defending it may mean talking about anything or everything. Things can be irrelevant to the proposition that Christianity is false, but nothing can be irrelevant to the proposition that Christianity is true.”
- G.K. Chesterton


Sat Sep 25, 2010 9:57 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 5578
Location: California
Thanks: 743
Thanked: 1473 times in 1164 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
Quote:
This specifically provides an explanation for everything which follows in the history of Israel, yet, Wright prefers to invent his own history. What happened to Oakum's razor in this case?


History accords to the uniformity we see in nature VERSUS magical things happened. Ockham's Razor still applies here.

You have it backwards, the history which is invented is told in the bible. The way things actually happened are much more difficult to discern when you approach it objectively, rather than having faith in a book. The very best we can do, much of the time, is speculate then see where the speculation leads.



Sat Sep 25, 2010 11:08 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4231
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 1167
Thanked: 1221 times in 918 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
Thanks Geo for starting this thread. What I like about memes is that they provide a way to interpret ideas from a materialist perspective. I also get the feeling that this is what DWill does not like about memes, because it reduces cultural change to natural causality.

The point here is to find common mechanisms of cause and effect within complex natural systems. We can similarly apply some of the principles of evolution to entirely non-living complex systems such as stars. Like life and ideas, stars are born, grow, decline and die, and they start out simple, in the early hydrogen-helium universe, and they later get more complex, with the current generation of metallic products.

Memes are a bit like Murphy's Law - whatever can prosper will prosper. In material terms of cause and effect, or matter in motion, we can see that if a culture is receptive to an idea, and that idea emerges, then over time the idea will naturally evolve to occupy the available space. It is just like a niche for DNA.

Memetic explanations are about excluding supernatural miracles from explanation of religious belief, so I think it is fair to argue the whole of The Evolution of God is memetic in its inspiration. If we reject the memetic view, and don't interpret culture as bound by the laws of nature, we can end up seeing humanity as unconstrained by natural law, protected by a transcendent miraculous God who exists primarily in our own imagination. This attitude of blind supernatural faith brings to mind the saying 'pride comes before a fall'.



The following user would like to thank Robert Tulip for this post:
geo, Interbane
Sat Sep 25, 2010 11:36 pm
Profile Email WWW
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: 4962
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1089
Thanked: 1060 times in 828 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
Ah, but Robert, tell me about one natural law we can deduce about culture that actually informs us about culture. I'm thinking of natural law as a compact description, available beforehand, of the regularities of a process. You or somebody should also find out what actually has been achieved through application of memetics. I mean, it has been 35 years since the darn term was invented.

Natural law doesn't matter in culture because it is only the form that culture assumes that has any meaning for us. It's like different patterns in a blast effect, or a volcano eruption. We know some energy force caused the explosion, but the minute variations in the resulting patterns aren't all that diagnostic of anything in particular.


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

Clifford Geertz


Sun Sep 26, 2010 6:07 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
No Bell Prize Winner


Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1298
Thanks: 518
Thanked: 484 times in 368 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The Selfish Meme?
Interbane wrote:
Quote:
This specifically provides an explanation for everything which follows in the history of Israel, yet, Wright prefers to invent his own history. What happened to Oakum's razor in this case?


History accords to the uniformity we see in nature VERSUS magical things happened. Ockham's Razor still applies here.

You have it backwards, the history which is invented is told in the bible...

Very backwards indeed. Wright invents his own history? Ah, no! He's talking about modern archaeology and things that are quite well known in this day and age. Oakum's razor? Come on. Really? A NASA scientists who doesn't even know how to spell Ockham's Razor or use the spell check on his tool bar? Lying idiot...



No evidence for an historical Abraham.
And certainly no evidence for a migration from the north.

No evidence for an historical Moses.
And certainly no evidence for an historical Exodus which is contradicted by the actual archaeological evidence of that time period.

The polytheism is that of the Canaanite based Elohim pantheon. And ancient Judaism is something that arose out of the local Canaanite population, not some mythical migration from the north pertaining to the polytheism of Ur that contradicts the historical record and has no historical evidence to support it any way. The claim of polytheism has nothing do with the mythical story of a migration from Ur, it has to do with the immediate Canaanite polytheism of the region and the ancient Jews as a sect from the local population of Canaan that arose after the final collapse of the Egyptian run city-state system of Canaan.

They would not become monotheistic until after going through a phase of monolatry first. We have one sect of the population trying to separate itself away from the rest and these myths of Abraham and Moses came from that ongoing process of evolution within that region of the world. And archaeologists feel that it came from the lower class serfs and slaves gathering around in the hill country following the final collapse of the Egyptian ruled Canaanite city-state system. This trumps any pointing at bible verses or apologists trying to use bible verses in order to negate what some one like Wright is talking about while addressing the polytheism of ancient Judasim, obviously. It's not Wright who's in error and doesn't know the bible, he's simply discussing the evidence of modern archaeology which is a slap in the face to traditional assumptions about the historicity of the bible.


_________________
A) The Origins of Religious Worship

B) The Christmas Nativity

C) The Mythicist Position

D) YEC theory put to rest!


Sun Sep 26, 2010 8:48 am
Profile Email
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 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  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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:

Recent Posts 
Renewable energy - the old chestnut, puréed

Sat Nov 22, 2014 7:32 pm

bionov

If you were God, would you give humanity moral free will?

Sat Nov 22, 2014 7:06 pm

Cattleman

Why is there something and not nothing?

Sat Nov 22, 2014 6:45 pm

David Rain

"Logical Fallacies: The Key to Proving Christians Wrong"

Sat Nov 22, 2014 6:45 pm

ManofEcstasy

Is God the epitome of both good and evil?

Sat Nov 22, 2014 6:30 pm

ManofEcstasy

Why Do So Many Have Trouble Believing In Evolution?

Sat Nov 22, 2014 6:09 pm

Movie Nerd

COSMOS - Episode 5 (more quasi subliminal propaganda)

Sat Nov 22, 2014 5:52 pm

Chris OConnor

How do you read a boring book?

Sat Nov 22, 2014 5:11 pm

Movie Nerd

What are you reading right now?

Sat Nov 22, 2014 5:10 pm

Movie Nerd

The "Recent Topics" block now shows 20 posts instead of 10

Sat Nov 22, 2014 4:59 pm

Chris OConnor

How important is the news?

Sat Nov 22, 2014 4:55 pm

Crystalline

Faith closes the mind. It is pure idol worship.

Sat Nov 22, 2014 4:33 pm

Interbane

Back! Will Be More Active

Sat Nov 22, 2014 4:18 pm

PoeticJustin

"What Book Changed Your Mind?"

Sat Nov 22, 2014 3:42 pm

Chris OConnor

Many thanks for having me, Joe

Sat Nov 22, 2014 3:37 pm

Chris OConnor

Wearable Fitness and Health Tracking Devices

Sat Nov 22, 2014 2:01 pm

Crystalline

Evolution and the 2nd law of thermodynamics

Sat Nov 22, 2014 10:49 am

johnson1010

Writing is the light of imagination playing over shadow of thoughts

Sat Nov 22, 2014 6:49 am

khaled Talib

NEW MEMOIR - LOVE OF LIFE - A MIRACULOUS STORY!

Sat Nov 22, 2014 4:16 am

sokhom

What are you currently reading?

Fri Nov 21, 2014 4:10 pm

Cattleman


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

Poll

Yes  66%  [2]
No  33%  [1]
Total votes: 3

Books by New Authors


Top Posters

Of all time: Chris OConnor (14170), Interbane (5578), DWill (4962), stahrwe (4610), Robert Tulip (4231), Mr. Pessimistic (3542), johnson1010 (3326), geo (3254), ant (3061), Penelope (2969), Saffron (2859), Suzanne (2474), Frank 013 (2021), Dissident Heart (1796), bleachededen (1680), President Camacho (1614), Ophelia (1543), Dexter (1448), tat tvam asi (1298), youkrst (1287)

Of the last 24 hrs: Movie Nerd (18), Chris OConnor (17), ant (15), lehelvandor (15), geo (11), ManofEcstasy (10), johnson1010 (8), Dexter (5), Crystalline (5), Interbane (4), PoeticJustin (4), danimorg62 (4), LanDroid (3), sokhom (2), Cattleman (2), Robert Tulip (1), DWill (1), heledd (1), David Rain (1), Gnostic Bishop (1)




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
Atheist Mind, Humanist Heart - by Lex Bayer and John FigdorSense 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

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