"The Moral Landscape" by Sam Harris completed July, 2011

In this book, as Harris makes a case for the objectifying morality, that there are objective ways to look at right and wrong.  He attempts to show moral relativism as a cop out in the sense that it is a way to rationalize not thinking through the entire problem of morality.     Here is what Richard Dawkins said of the work:

"Beautifully written as they were (the elegance of his prose is a distilled blend of honesty and clarity) there was little in Sam Harris's previous books that couldn't have been written by any of his fellow "horsemen" of the "new atheism." This book is different, though every bit as readable as the other two. I was one of those who had unthinkingly bought into the hectoring myth that science can say nothing about morals. To my surprise, The Moral Landscape has changed all that for me. It should change it for philosophers too. Philosophers of mind have already discovered that they can't duck the study of neuroscience, and the best of them have raised their game as a result. Sam Harris shows that the same should be true of moral philosophers, and it will turn their world exhilaratingly upside down. As for religion, and the preposterous idea that we need God to be good, nobody wields a sharper bayonet than Sam Harris."


In Harris's brave search for moral truths, he is bound to bruise a few oppositional egos, but he also will teach us some important lessons.  This I'm sure of.  


This review is very interesting:

In reading all the reviews of his paperback edition (298 of them) this morning, I was shocked how immoral most of the reviews were. It is as if someone had organized a concerted effort to attack Dr. Harris argumentum ad hominen. Repeatedly, what are the virile strengths of the book were maliciously misinterpreted, twisted and distorted to such a degree that it is apparent that the majority of the reviewers had actually not read his clean, immaculate and compelling prose style. He is a 1st rate philosopher with an uncluttered psyche (as one would aspect from a cognitive scientist)! What was most disturbing to me were the tens of hundreds of the writers who "praised" his book, only to insert their own worthless dribble in their review of his book. As he simply, passionately and profoundly asserts, there is NO meeting place between Science and Religion. If we want more social inequality, malice, unncessary crulty and misery---by all means promote the verbal nonsense of Religion based in obscurantism and ancient texts. I know my ancient languages quite well---Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Egyptian, Babylonian (Akkadian & Sumerian) and Sanskrit. These ancient texts have nothing to teach the post-modern, post-secular age! In fact, we will become extinct as a species, if the Scientific community does not heed Dr. Harris' clarion call. Facts and Values both obtain within a Belief system. On the great questions of Meaning, Morality and Life's Larger Purpose [see p. 1], it is only Science that can contribute meaningful information. Because his mind is so moral, pure and translucent, he incurs the hatred from the religious scum---lunatics, pedophiles, sadists, misers, & scoundrels---who hide behind the empty nonsense of an imaginary god to further their deprivating acts of autistic fear, anger & pain (what breeds violence)! This book is formidable and monumental! It is a pity that it was not written two centuries ago when the youthful Romantic poet Shelley was expelled from Oxford University for writing his treatise, "On the Necessity of Atheism." The anti-intellectual reactions to this book (by presumed intellectuals) is proof of its singular genius! It will be read for the next four centuries (if we survive as a species) to the mutual advancement of the human race!

"In Heaven As On Earth" by M. Scott Peck completed June, 2011

This is a very imaginative look at what heaven may be like for a psychiatrist.  The fiction is not that believable but Peck's creativity is amazing.  Here's what Publisher's Weekly said about the book:

"True to its title, Peck's second novel for adults (after A Bed by the Window) imagines an afterlife which, through a number of set pieces, dramatizes some of the earthly concerns of his other books, including the perpetual bestseller, The Road Less Traveled. Daniel, a psychiatrist and successful author much like Peck himself, awakens in a small green room to discover that he has survived his physical death. Hovering about, disembodied but alert, he meets a pair of "greeters" who inform him that heaven, hell and purgatory?Judeo-Christian ideas pervade the narrative.  Ghosts are governed by a "Principle of Freedom." soul projects what it wishes to experience?though sometimes, as with Daniel's green refuge, projections are created by committees in order to ease the "Adjustment" from life to the formlessness of heaven. Peck's hell is a garbage can in which about 140,000 souls hide under rocks, too terrified to accept their freedom to choose a greater reality. In time, Daniel learns that purgatory has to do with clinging to mental and emotional attachments; to help the souls there, the most attentive and loving psychotherapy imaginable is provided. Several further encounters?with his deceased wife, a son, a seductive woman help Daniel let go of his own attachments until he is ready to join a committee. Though talky and lacking dramatic momentum, this story, more a consoling philosophical vision than a full-bodied novel, should appeal to Peck's readership."


I would agree that the work is more like a novella and a "consoling philosophical vision."   Definitely worth the time to read it and gain some insight into the character of a great writer and psychiatrist.  

"Nemesis" by Philip Roth completed May, 2011

I found this to be an extraordinary book.  It was the first book I've read by Roth and I'm convinced that he is a master story teller.  To read this review from Publisher's Weekly would make one think it is Roth's weakest effort.

"Roth continues his string of small, anti–Horatio Alger novels (The Humbling; etc.) with this underwhelming account of Bucky Cantor, the young playground director of the Chancellor Avenue playground in 1944 Newark. When a polio outbreak ravages the kids at the playground, Bucky, a hero to the boys, becomes spooked and gives in to the wishes of his fiancée, who wants him to take a job at the Pocono summer camp where she works. But this being a Roth novel, Bucky can't hide from his fate. Fast-forward to 1971, when Arnie Mesnikoff, the subtle narrator and one of the boys from Chancellor, runs into Bucky, now a shambles, and hears the rest of his story of piercing if needless guilt, bad luck, and poor decisions. Unfortunately, Bucky's too simple a character to drive the novel, and the traits that make him a good playground director--not very bright, quite polite, beloved, straight thinking--make him a lackluster protagonist. For Roth, it's surprisingly timid."


In my opinion, it's a well told tale about moral stamina in a very morally grey world, and quite brilliant.