Click through here to browse and order Books, DVD's, etc.
Religious Books -- Not Fundamentalist!
The Fundamentalist Xtians should not be allowed to hijack the language of Christianity. They are at least as much heretics to Christianity as the Arians and Gnostics of early Christian days.
Biblical inerrancy is not possible.
The books both above and below show the limitations of language and the impossibility of Biblical Inerrancy.
How can language be misused? Using General Semantics, this book was Written to explain Nazi propaganda and still used as a textbook
Books - Popular Math, Post Enlightenment & Science
This book explains why the above books on Christian Fundamentalism are politically important in America today.
Modern Society measures risk & predicts possible futures. The book below is a higly readable history of insurance, statistics and modern financial instruments.
Compare this to religion, in which it is presumed that the perfect society was known in the past and all that is necessary to do is to return to that perfect society.
Fascinating, highly readable and fun book on modern mathematics and its limitations. If you are interested in ideas, this is your book!
This is a collection of Hofstader's Scientific American articles. Again, a very fascinationg and highly readable book, requiring no mathematical background. (Buy it used - it is one of the books that will keep disappearing.)
Older, very fascinating book on mathematical ideas. Did you know there are three kinds of infinity?
The discussion is around the idea of how we think and argue politically. It begins with Jonathon Haidt describing how humans do not take an idea in, rationally analyze it and decide whether to accept it or not, then explain the rational decision to others. Psychology has established that we make our decisions for reasons other than rational ones, then develop a rationale which we present to others to convince them we are right.
That sounds like it throws rational science into a cocked hat, but it doesn't. What happens is that others take the rational idea presented, analyze that, then others make a decision which is probably more rational than the first person's decision was. It sounds to me as though rational decision making is more of a group process than an individual process.
Watch this clip and see if they don't offer a convincing argument.