A cogently argued overview
585707
I received my uncorrected proof copy of Collision 2012 through the Goodreads first reads giveaway program. I felt like I had paid less attention to the 2012 election than I should have, and Dan Balz's book certainly remedied any ignorance I was concerned I was harboring.

His arguments are cogent but quite cynical. One of his most interesting ideas about an election that he characterizes, as I read it, as disappointingly stagnant is that the ideas presented by both parties were the most stagnant, unresponsive element of the campaign. I think Balz emphasized too much the increased political polarization of the electorate at the expense of this more compelling idea (in my view).

Balz does do an excellent job of citing and discussing some unique aspects of the 2012 political landscape -- the role of social media, especially the peculiar role of Twitter in public discourse about the debates, and of course the role of SuperPAC funding. His analysis is thorough and far-reaching; the book seems very well-researched as far as I can tell.

While this book may not offer as much behind-the-scenes gossip as some others, I definitely found some interesting tidbits.

Altogether, this is a worthwhile read about an important historical moment in our lives.
4233330
Among the books in defense of globalization, this is among the best for the methodlogical care with which the author has presented his arguments. The text is lucid and very appropriate for students. Perhaps the only deficiency is a reluctance to engage the question of institutional reform with the WTO that could potentially compromise environmental and social protection. The failure of the Doha round and the WSSD in this regard is neglected. However, the author does an admirable job debunking a lot of myths that are so vitriolically presented by antiglobalization activists.
505638
This book, consisting of a preface and five concise chapters, addresses a major text-critical issue, as the title indicates.  The diversity of the perspectives of the authors is remarkable:  Wallace and Bock propose that Mark intentionally stopped writing at the end of Mk 16:8; Robinson and Black propose that Mk 16:9-20 was present in the autograph of the Gospel of Mark, and Elliott proposes a more complex view that includes the premise that the Gospel of Mark originally had a different ending which is no longer extant.

It may seem unfair that Dr. Bock was allowed, as he was at the 2007 conference that led to this book, to advocate the same view as Dr. Wallace (his fellow professor at Dallas Theological Seminary).  Their view thus receives extra coverage.  However, since Bock really brings nothing new to the table, as far as evidence and analysis is concerned (except a misconception of the lectionary-evidence), this is a benign flaw.

This book has some shortcomings:  Wallace got some facts mixed up.  Robinson is insightful but seems preoccupied with some modern poetry.  Black uses the book as an opportunity to promote an unlikely solution to the Synoptic Problem.  Elliott seems to contradict himself on several points.  And Bock is clearly not well-acquainted with the pertinent evidence.  Nevertheless this book, taken as a whole, is an adequate introduction for non-specialists to this specific text-critical controversy.
1770105
The volume excels at carrying on an exegetically rich conversation regarding the relevant Gospel passages yet remains astutely engaged in the contemporary theological conversations regarding atonement theology.  While the conversation with Girard and his adopters is central throughout along with the Last Supper sayings, the volume encompasses a lot more.  The arguments presented herein obtain not just for a consideration of Girard's scapegoat theology but for any argument that would seek to eliminate atonement theology from a biblically informed soteriology.  Biblical theologians would benefit from the chapters devoted to the Gospels, which offers a convincing argument for atonement theology being implied in the Gospel of Luke and an insightful defense of atonement as central in the Last Supper sayings in the Synoptic tradition..

It is not entirely clear in the end whether the author intends this as a revision to Girard's scapegoat theory or its undoing altogether, though it seeems to be more of the latter.  Finally, the two chapters on Second Temple Judaism and its impact on reading the Gospels might not be relevant for all readers, though, it does set up the author's argument of how the Gospels should be read as products of their times, which presupposes a need for atonement.
4704721
Genuine civility and clear thinking are tested by the most controversial of debates, not the slam-dunks. The marriage debate is nothing else if not controversial, and it is so controversial because it concerns matters that deeply affect us on a personal and cultural level. And while there are people of good will on all sides of this issue, too often proponents of various stripes find it easier to label and dismiss potential interlocutors rather than actually engage with the argument.

Anderson, Girgis, and George do not engage in this lazy practice in this book. Rather, in defending conjugal marriage, they pay their interlocutors the respect of treating them as rational beings capable of considering arguments, as opposed to mere slogans or ad hominems. Those who favor same-sex marriage, or who are considering the matter, may disagree with various of the arguments put forth, but they cannot claim that the argument has not been clearly and concisely stated.

This virtue of the book cannot be overstated. For in most discussions about matters that truly matter, we must rise to the level of argument. Doing so means agreeing on what is contested, fairly representing the other side, and presenting one's own views with clarity and precision. The authors rise to this challenge, and meet it, and anyone who would similarly engage would do well to attend to the arguments herein.
2427030
The book offers an overview of Nicholas Wolterstorff's theory of rationality and scholarly practice. It is a published dissertation, and so focuses determinedly on that one topic (and not, for instance, on Wolterstorff's ideas on other topics, such as teaching or art) and sticks to systematic exposition of the concepts without many examples, so it is not a light read. Nevertheless, Wolterstorff's theory is one of the most cogent and important attempts to describe a positive role for belief in theory construction and weighing, and anyone interested in the recent resurgence of interest in the relationship between religion and higher education who has not already examined Wolterstorff's work will find here a lucid and helpful exposition. Even having read much of Wolterstorff's work, I found it helpful to have the themes brought together systematically.
1268347
The previous reviewers make the major arguments in favor of buying, reading and digesting this book. It is well-written, thoroughly researched and very well thought out. I want only to add a few specific points that might further perk your interest.
 Keyssar is able to present succinct summations of complex historical and legal issues. For example, one of the themes of the final historical chapter is to outline how the Warren Court developed the standard of  "one man, one vote". In a few brilliant pages (pp. 298-302 of the paperback edition), Keyssar gives a synopsis of just how complicated and convoluted even this standard can be. Keyssar points out that this standard works only where there are no structural biases to the way that the individual votes are aggregated. A simple example: in my home city of Portland, OR, we elect our city councilors at-large. For a majority white city, this has the consequence of making it more difficult to elect minority councilors. Keyssar lays out the complexities of the debates on the resulting issues from this line of thought with clarity and fairness.
For me, another of the pleasures of the book was learning about some lesser known moments in our national history, e.g., the Dorr War in Rhode Island in 1841-1842. This is part of one of the overall themes of the book, which is the class bias that has always been (and still is) part of our politics. Keyssar is very good at explicating how both parties have played that game.
One final point that Keyssar makes and which is worth reminding ourselves of in light of the last election. There is no constitutional right to vote for the President for any of us.  To quote: "... the Founding Fathers, in writing the Constitution, declined to institute any national suffrage standard at all: for pragmatic political reasons of their own, they left to the states the power to determine the contours of the franchise"(P. 329).  There have been subsequent Amendments and Voting Acts all phrased negatively to limit the state's ability to disfranchise certain voters or from using certain techniques to disfranchise but nothing that positively asserts the individual's right to vote.
Keyssar in his afterword written post-Election 2000, points out that the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed that fact in it's majority opinion in Bush v. Gore.
Keyssar quotes that opinion, "The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States unless and until the state legislature chooses a statewide election as the means to implement its power to appoint members of the Electoral College...[and] the State...after granting the franchise in the special context of Article II, can take back the power to appoint electors." To our current crop of Supreme Court judges, that means, as Keyssar points out, that the presidential electors (and thus the President) "need not be chosen by popular vote at all." Now that is States Rights for you with a vengeance. If there is an afterlife, John C. Calhoun loves Justice Scalia.
Whether or not you agree with Keyssar's point of view (which he states very clearly), you cannot help but learn from this book. He presents an enormous amount to think about in a lucid and interesting fashion. I definitely agree with all of the reviewers below- this is one of those books that everyone should read. Not all will agree with it's conclusions but it would start and improve many an excellent debate and might inspire some action.
3046111
This short book is divided into four chapters and one appendix. The first three chapters lay out the theoretical foundations. The fourth chapter draws  together the previous three chapters, and the appendix shows the application of the author's arguments in terms of contemporary US politics. The first three chapters are intellectually challenging, especially for those lacking a reasonable knowledge of philosophy and to a lesser extent psychology. Nonetheless, the book is worth reading for the fourth chapter and appendix alone---these too are challenging, but in a different way, since they question fundamental political and social assumptions and provide ideas for how those who feel that humanity is not well served by global capitalism might go forward.
218531
Evolution has been one of the most hotly debated ideas in Western civilization over the last century and a half, and in this volume, Michael Shermer presents the case for evolution and against intelligent design.

The author recounts his own journey from creationism to Darwinism in the 1970s, and goes on to present the most important arguments in favor of evolution.

One of these most important arguments is, as Shermer states, that so many independent lines of evidence, including evidence from geology, paleontology, botany, zoology, herpetology, entomology, biogeography, comparative anatomy and physiology, and genetics, all point to the conclusion that life evolved.

Perhaps the most convincing argument is the genetic evidence uncovered in just the last ten years.  Shermer discusses the evolution of blood hemoglobin over the last half billion years and how only evolution could explain it.  One recent discovery he does not mention is that humans share DNA errors with other primates, such as the error that results in humans and closely related primates having to have vitamin C in their diets or take supplements for it.  Other mammals, such as dogs and cats, do not have this error and can make their own vitamin C.  As biologist Kenneth Miller points out, our sharing this exact DNA error and other DNA errors with other primates is akin to students in a college course turning in term papers with words that are misspelled in exactly the same way.  This is incontrovertible evidence for common descent.

The author also notes concerning the fossil record that geological strata consistently reveal the same sequence of fossils, and also discusses vestigal structures--whales have been born with hind limbs, and many humans have been born with tails.  Shermer lists ten human characteristics that we inherited from our non-human ancestors.

Shermer talks about the debates between science and religion, about why conservatives should accept evolution, and closes by discussing the current unsolved problems in evolution.

This book was an integral part of my own very reluctant change of mind on this issue.  Shermer notes how difficult it is for people whom he terms "True Believers" to accept evolution, but with this powerful book he is certain to have helped convince many more people than just me of the truth that mankind evolved from lower forms of life.
1769004
Dr. Winter's arguments are, dare I say it, *too* convincing, and seldom gives leverage for other opinions (despite the fact that throughout, his tone suggests that he wants his own opinions not to be the final word).  He gives cites compelling evidence (by that word I mean "data," not "truth" or "facts") as to which excerpts of Paul's letter are subject to changes in cultural milieu, and which are not; although even here, I had expected his notion that Paul's letter as a snapshot (i.e., events occurred beforehand leading up to what is reported in the letter, other events occurred afterward but obliquely anticipated by Paul).  Granted, producing a text that would have satisfied my expectations would had certainly doubled the length of this book.  I also appreciated how he didn't get bogged down on interpreting the theology of the culture, thus producing potential filler to his evidence (although peculiarly, I would have imagined Dr. Winter is certainly equipped to posit such opinions). But Winter's text is a very good first step, as it introduces evidence otherwise neglected.  And the presentation reflects half a life's labor of research.  I could never discourage this book, but neither could I ever propose it to be the final word, either (as I'm sure Dr. Winter would concur).
2815049
Even though it is now twenty years old, Phillip E. Johnsons Reason in the Balance serves as a helpful analysis of the liberal, modernist agenda to supplant Christian theism with a metaphysical theory of reality that completely excludes God. In the two decades since Johnson wrote this book, his words have proved to be prescient. The impact of a liberal-backed, radically subjectivized morality has turned from a stream in 1995 to a torrent in 2015as seen in the legalization of gay marriage and the continuing erosion of traditional values.

Johnsons clear reasoning and vivid illustrations from legal and educational history make his book a delight to read, but probably only for those who agree with his assumption that God is fundamental reality. While Reason in the Balance will almost certainly fail to persuade adherents of naturalistic Darwinism to become Christian theists (such an endeavor is beyond the scope of this book anyway), it at least ably demonstrates the thesis that naturalism is the dominant force in academia and elite culture, and why metaphysical naturalists have strong motivation to marginalize theistic dissent.
3071890
This is one long sweeping account of how human languages might have originated from and built upon more primitive forms.  The author presents a load of convincing evidence that animals harbor "abstract concepts" even though they do not possess any language.  If a group of objects or events consistently produce a fixed type of neurological activity, then conceivably concepts can form.  Animals do have concepts pertaining to "permanance" of objects; memories of things and past events; ability to perform logical procedures; and capability to handle several (viz. around four) concepts at the same time.  These are elements needed for language to originate, develop, and evolve.

Meanwhile, co-operation is likely to confer benefits to individuals, particularly pertaining to their survival and reproduction.  If co-operation is mandatory, then it becomes useful and advantageous for individuals to communicate amongst each other, because communication is essentially a form of co-operation.  Speculatively, this probably is the basis for the origin of language.

A lot of topics are covered, involving linguistics, neuroscience, zoology, game theory and evolutionary theory - rendering the book truly inter-disciplinary as promised.

A genuinely riveting treatise - four stars.
1135092
This book brings a useful perspective to controversies surrounding scientific vs. theistic perspectives on cosmology, biology, chemistry, and evolution. It covers the generally-unacknowledged influence of Hermeticism on the scientific theories of Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Newton, and more. By revealing the source (or at least a major influence) for much of these early pioneers' thought, it puts their advances into a context that complicates the simplistic distinction of "authoritarian Church teachings vs. scientific enlightenment". It turns out the history is not so black and white.

The authors also deserve credit for making clear the influence of Giordano Bruno on later developments, both as a model for freethinkers up to the current time, and as an example of how the establishment of any era tends to deal with challenges to their illegitimate authority. Today he would probably be disowned by the religious, scientific, and political mainstream, which of course wouldn't make him wrong.
2313758
A very good assessment of the various arguments for and against the existence of free will.  The material was very up to date at the time of publication.  The philosophical, religious, and scientific views are all addressed in an even handed way.  The best feature was the willingness of the author to point out the flaws or weaknesses in various arguments.  The book is easy to read and engaging, but not trivial.
4111640
Ordering Power presents a well-articulated and precise theory to explain the different experiences of Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, and other Southeast Asian leviathans. Tying together concepts from public finance and dominant tools in comparative politics, this book provides a convincing framework for explaining the region's diverse authoritarian routes.

In under 300 pages Slater lays out a type of recipe for a successful coercive (Asian) leviathan.  Importantly, the type of conflict, rather than the extent, is the crux for explaining state variation. Nominal regional conflict do little to drive states toward authoritarianism, unlike redistributive class politics that penetrate urban, industrial centers. As comparative scholars like James Scott have noted, rural movements are far easier for communal elites to manage than all-out urban class upheavals. Particularly potent are  conflicts that leave lasting, violent imprints within communities, or those that have the appearance of being "endemic and unmanageable."

Most interesting and novel is Slater's focus on taxes and elite collective action in sustaining authoritarian states. Contentious, endemic community and class conflict enable the state to centralize its authority, consolidate, and --importantly--impose direct taxes on threatened elites. However, it is not enough to merely dole out the rewards of state centralization amongst patrons--it must protect them from the contentious forces that had incited elite collective action in the first place. Thus, Slater suggests that contentious politics must drive a state to both "provide and protect."

Slater offers a lively-written and well researched tour of authoritarian Asia. While not as vast and complete as some classics of state building, Ordering Power presents a tightly argued story that maps quite well onto different political regimes, though relying much on the context of outside comparative research.  Political economists and scholars of comparative politics will have much to sink their teeth into. Asian Studies scholars may have less to gain, but may appreciate Slater's framework nonetheless. Oddly enough, as an economics person I found this much more gratifying than other dominant quantitative studies out there.
3559947
The authors make a convincing case for a pre-deluge, navigational civilization that had its base in tropical Central America.  They do a great job of citing to well-published archeologists and demonstrating, like Graham Hancock does, the ethno-centrism and ego underlying their hypotheses and their myopic view of world history.  I like this book for the boldness with which it challenges the academic establishment, and how it shows that an interdisciplinary study of ancient history debunks many of the commonly held assumptions about the origins of human civilization and culture.
On the other hand, the authors tend to overstate their case by being very repetitive, and they don't need to.  The material is so provocative, it doesn't need rehashing ad nauseum.  Additionally, the countless typos are a huge distraction.  Taken together, the repetitiveness and the typos undermined what could be a very open and shut case.
Nonetheless, it's a well-conceived work, and solidly grounded in common sense.  You won't find any fantastic, Von Daniken-esque intergalactic flights of fancy here. If ever there was a case for Occam's Razor in the case for, rather than against Atlantis, this would be it.
3304528
In Population Wars, Dr. Greg Graffin explores interactions among populations of all varieties, from the microscopic to the human, from the beginning of life on Earth to the present day.  One of the books central arguments is that it is equilibrium and symbiosis, not survival of the fittest, that ultimately settles conflicts between species in nature.  Accordingly, the author explains, social Darwinism and far-right American libertarianism are flawed and misguided extensions of evolutionary theory.  Instead of engaging in cutthroat competition, modern human societies should strive for greater empathy and populational and environmental balance.  This argument is persuasive and well-presented, and it offers hope that humanity can have a long and peaceful future.

Graffins writing style is casual and easy-going, and easy to read as well.  He draws from his own life experiences to illustrate some of the points he makes, drawing the reader into a somewhat intimate conversation.  There is some repetition here and there, and some sections could have been condensed a bit, but generally, the writing is well-paced.

Chapters 4-6 delve into scientific topics, mainly biology and geology, the authors areas of scientific expertise.  Given the nature of the subject matter, it is extremely well-presented, and simplified where necessary.  An engaged reader should find these chapters fairly easy to follow, as long as s/he can keep up with the terminology.  The material is actually basic, one could argue, and if you don't know it already, you should.

Chapter 7 discusses the Revolutionary War history of the Finger Lakes region, where Graffin usually resides.  While the conflicts and their contexts are woven into the main theme fairly well, this is the only place where my attention flagged, and I was tempted to skim.  History buffs may find this chapter more interesting.

Perhaps Graffins most problematic argument in this book is his denial of the existence of free will.  This is an unpopular and disturbing idea that inspires automatic resistance from most people.  Graffin never precisely defines what he means by free will, but it seems to be the extreme idea of self-determination popular among libertarians and right-wing conservatives in the U.S.  Most people, in my experience, understand free will in a more nuanced way, and they recognize how environment, society, and sheer luck influence their decisions.  Graffin, however, seems to argue one extreme against another (no free will vs. unlimited free will) without allowing for anything in between.  I also do not quite understand how the author sees free will as distinct from conscious agency, which he himself says is a uniquely human capability that we must exercise to ensure our survival as a species.

All in all, I highly recommend this book, especially to readers interested in biology and sociology and how these relate to each other.  Graffins message is an urgent one that everyone needs to hear and understand if we hope to save ourselvesall ourselvesfrom extinction.  How you act on this message, he leaves up to you.