Are we all born an Atheist?

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

Jklint wrote: June 17th, 2019, 6:40 pm
GaryLouisSmith wrote: June 17th, 2019, 5:52 pm

When you say "investment" I presume you mean "investiture". Presumably, you are a priest in the dark hole of the empty god (or goddess). Call in the accountants!! Holy Writ!!
No! I mean return on investment. Nothing to do with investiture! Arguably I don't like wasting time on empty set concepts which yields nothing upon examination.
Are you speaking about the return of Jesus. Will you yield on examination? Such wasted time. Do you not think the empty set exists? It arguably does. And doesn't. I like talking to priests. They're so corrupt.
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

Sculptor1 wrote: June 17th, 2019, 6:02 pm
GaryLouisSmith wrote: June 17th, 2019, 5:43 pm Yes, I am not that guy, ...

Anal sex is gloriously without purpose.
Okay - my error.

As for anal sex being "unnatural" its irrelevant . Blow jobs are might seem without purpose too, but I not be happy to live without mine.
Anal sex, blow jobs, and even wanking - are all very purposeful indeed. Since when was sex just about getting pregnant anyway?
Bonobos and humans love to do it. I love to do it. I'm just through doing it, and I'm ready to do it again. I have one child. God only knows how many times I've had sex.
I'm no fan of anal, but a hole is a hole.
You seem to be comfortably ensconced in this world without a need for metaphysical rebellion. If that's what you are, I really don't care. I understand that quick turn-around. Everything always comes again.
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by Sculptor1 »

GaryLouisSmith wrote: June 17th, 2019, 7:12 pm
Sculptor1 wrote: June 17th, 2019, 6:02 pm

Okay - my error.

As for anal sex being "unnatural" its irrelevant . Blow jobs are might seem without purpose too, but I not be happy to live without mine.
Anal sex, blow jobs, and even wanking - are all very purposeful indeed. Since when was sex just about getting pregnant anyway?
Bonobos and humans love to do it. I love to do it. I'm just through doing it, and I'm ready to do it again. I have one child. God only knows how many times I've had sex.
I'm no fan of anal, but a hole is a hole.
You seem to be comfortably ensconced in this world without a need for metaphysical rebellion. If that's what you are, I really don't care. I understand that quick turn-around. Everything always comes again.
I've no idea what you are talking about here.
Is this supposed to be a response to the above, or did you misplace your post?

Have you ever had sex?
User avatar
Newme
Posts: 1401
Joined: December 13th, 2011, 1:21 am

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by Newme »

Sculptor1 wrote: June 15th, 2019, 2:18 pm
Newme wrote: June 15th, 2019, 10:28 am “Delusion on the other hand, is a false belief that is maintained even if it is contradicted.”
Ah yes, like your delusion about homosexuality
Actually, the definition of delusion fits those who deny anatomical facts, as some do when claiming a man dressed as a woman is a woman, or being in denial about consequences of anal sex - like anal fissures, colon rupture and bacterial infection.

Homosexual propaganda is anti-truth, thus delusional. And what’s funny is they call others “homophobic or haters” for stating facts they fear or hate.
“Empty is the argument of the philosopher which does not relieve any human suffering.” - Epicurus
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14997
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by Sy Borg »

Only NewMe could turn a thread about the intrinsic or conditioned nature of religious belief into a study of his/her apparent primary focus - anal sex.

Could we please at least move within the vague area of the topic?
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by Sculptor1 »

Newme wrote: June 19th, 2019, 7:35 pm
Sculptor1 wrote: June 15th, 2019, 2:18 pm

Ah yes, like your delusion about homosexuality
Actually, the definition of delusion fits those who deny anatomical facts, as some do when claiming a man dressed as a woman is a woman, or being in denial about consequences of anal sex - like anal fissures, colon rupture and bacterial infection.

Homosexual propaganda is anti-truth, thus delusional. And what’s funny is they call others “homophobic or haters” for stating facts they fear or hate.
Try to tell that to the many species that have already been identified as having homosexual behavior,
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_a ... l_behavior]
and the 3.6 million of of human homosexuals living in the UK, and the 9 million in the USA.

Gay lions and penguins are not susceptible to "gay propaganda".

Why are you so scared? Are you in the closet. They say most people have some gay feelings some of the time. Maybe it is time for you to come out of your closet?
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by Sculptor1 »

Greta wrote: June 20th, 2019, 2:25 am Only NewMe could turn a thread about the intrinsic or conditioned nature of religious belief into a study of his/her apparent primary focus - anal sex.
NewMe does seem to have a prurient interest here.

LOL
Karpel Tunnel
Posts: 948
Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by Karpel Tunnel »

GaryLouisSmith wrote: June 17th, 2019, 5:43 pm Yes, I am not that guy, but I might say that anal sex is unnatural.
I don't want to take away any pleasurable frisson that might add for you, but since some humans have done it going as far back as we know (not a pun) and since various mammals do it, and not just in domination or rape situations, and heck, even then, I can't see any reason to call it unnatural. It happens in nature.
Hang on, I’m going to talk metaphysics. I did say that it was a match made in heaven, which makes it supernatural.
I believe in all sorts of things that get classed as supernatural, but I think the word is not useful. To me if ghosts are real, well, their natural, for exmaple.

The natural vs artificial distinction I think can be useful.
The nature vs. nurture distinction I think can be useful.
I don't think the natural vs. supernatural is useful.

And natural or nature would mean different things in each dichotomy.
I guess the supernatural is also the unnatural. In the natural world everything has a function and a purpose. Everything works for the preservation of the individual, the species, the selfish gene or whatever. That seems to be the current idea in evolution theory.
a lot of people seem to take it that way, but actually there can be all sorts of surplus or neutrality. IOW if a mutation does not make something go extinct, well, its fine. Perhaps some creature gets a tiny red dot on the back of its skull and it neither helps nor hurts. Well, there it is.
In the natural world you are trapped. You have to go along. A dark spirit calls you. You must pro-create. That is the vision of Naturphilosophie and the Hegelian Spirit. My supernaturalism is a rebellion against all that. If you want, if you’re in rut, you can go stick your genes in the dark hole of Nature, but I’m outta here.
I don't see much of my day increasing the chances my genes will go anywhere. I will not have any children in the future. Yet, I merrily go along with a wide variety of activites: some would even be called supernatural, some natural. I see nothing wrong with any of them, though I wish I surfed online less.
Anal sex is gloriously without purpose. It is contemplative. (I do have experience with that.) It is worship of visible Form, not the hidden urges. I am a supernaturalist all the way. Now if you are itchin’ to say “Gibberish”, go for it.
I don't seem to be itching.
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

Karpel Tunnel wrote: June 20th, 2019, 5:50 am
GaryLouisSmith wrote: June 17th, 2019, 5:43 pm
I don't think the natural vs. supernatural is useful.

II'm not sure what the point of your comments was but it was fun to read. Let me try and show a distinction between the natural and the supernatural.

A rationalist (which I think you probably are) thinks that there is one objective reality out there. And we are able to make clear, unambiguous sentences that describe that. If they match the reality out there then they are true. We are able to think true sentences. So given that, we can say that there are true and untrue sentences. And that what is real, what is objectively real, is absolutely different from what is unreal or only imagined. A rationalist draws sharp lines. Real vs. unreal. True vs. false. His world is ordered along that line of demarcation. That is the natural way of looking at things.

So now the supernatural. Imagine that demarcation line becoming porous. The imagined leaks into the real. The real becomes at times the imagined. You read something in a piece of fiction. Later you see that something you read has escaped from those pages and is right there in reality. Or you dream that such and such is happening – it’s only a dream – then it happens. Your dream was a pre-cognition of what will happen. The line separating now from then is broken. Or someone dies and later that one comes to visit you and stays for tea. The line between the living and the dead is crossed. The supernatural violates the critical line of demarcation. It is an in-between thing.

Rational naturalism has lines that cannot be crossed or become porous. That is natural law. The Supernatural violates that law. A rationalist, a naturalist, will always say that the law is never, it cannot be, violated. The Supernaturalist does not believe in one objective reality, one truth. He brings on chaos, lost order. His sentences are ambiguous and maddening.
Karpel Tunnel
Posts: 948
Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by Karpel Tunnel »

GaryLouisSmith wrote: June 20th, 2019, 7:05 am II'm not sure what the point of your comments was but it was fun to read. Let me try and show a distinction between the natural and the supernatural.
A rationalist (which I think you probably are) thinks that there is one objective reality out there.
I don't think reality is 'out there' or that 'in here' and out there don't have all sorts of overlap and are actually same, though they are also different, and more.
And we are able to make clear, unambiguous sentences that describe that.
Maybe sometimes about some stuff, sure. Unambigious statements can be useful, if distorting.
If they match the reality out there then they are true. We are able to think true sentences. So given that, we can say that there are true and untrue sentences. And that what is real, what is objectively real, is absolutely different from what is unreal or only imagined.
I do think some people are deluded and some poeple are more in connection with 'things'. I'll bet you think some people have blinders, too.
A rationalist draws sharp lines. Real vs. unreal. True vs. false. His world is ordered along that line of demarcation. That is the natural way of looking at things.
I don't like the law of identity, let alone the law of the excluded middle. So, no. I do communicate, sometimes, as if I use those, often because others do, so me undermining, but also because I don't see a good reason to exclude that kind of communication.
So now the supernatural. Imagine that demarcation line becoming porous. The imagined leaks into the real.
Yeah, that's the nature of things, sometimes....
The real becomes at times the imagined. You read something in a piece of fiction. Later you see that something you read has escaped from those pages and is right there in reality. Or you dream that such and such is happening – it’s only a dream – then it happens. Your dream was a pre-cognition of what will happen. The line separating now from then is broken. Or someone dies and later that one comes to visit you and stays for tea. The line between the living and the dead is crossed. The supernatural violates the critical line of demarcation. It is an in-between thing.
I don't believe in laws, I think there are habits. Sort of Sheldrake taken to the enth degree. He's more of a traditional naturalist who has noticed anomolies and is focusing on demonstrating stuff to his peers who don't think he is a peer. But I don't believe in laws. I do see patterns. Out there, in here.

Rational naturalism has lines that cannot be crossed or become porous. That is natural law. The Supernatural violates that law.
I actually see the rational naturalism as violating the full range of life. It is a useful bag of tricks that is trying to take over all of ontology. Kinda pisses me off.
A rationalist, a naturalist, will always say that the law is never, it cannot be, violated. The Supernaturalist does not believe in one objective reality, one truth. He brings on chaos, lost order. His sentences are ambiguous and maddening.
Well, not in this post. This seemed like a pretty rationalist argument/description of a metaphysics.

I still don't get anything out of calling ghosts supernatural. I mean, I don't call them natural either in my practical life. It's a bit like a multiverse with different rules in one place. But the rationalists (or what i would call the 'reasonists' to make it clear I am not talking about Rationalists like Descartes, say), get a lot of milage out of using deductioin on the term supernatural while making it seem like they are arguing on empirical grounds against the existence of some X. I don't see how the term helps. It may be useful for you, though your use seems to presume rules and anomoloies and a kind of dualism that I don't think is necessary. I don't see why I should put, say, telepathy and communicating with someone directly in the way mainstream science acknowledges as phenomena from two different categories. Or ghosts or past lives or multiverse like stuff or, like the kinds of stuff that get bagged under the Mandella effect. I have what I am dealing with. I know it's not universally dealt with. I am not hard and fast about inside verses outside. But supernatural seems to me like some concession to a metaphysics (scientific physicalism) that, even in its own limited epistemology, is still confirming new phenomena and slowly changing and expanding its own ontology (with its adherents often not admitting or even noticing this).

To say a ghost is not natural doesn't make sense to me. I can see where it might to someone else. I am not big on proselytizing unless I am cornered, which is fortunately rare these days.
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

Karpel Tunnel wrote: June 20th, 2019, 9:35 am Well, not in this post. This seemed like a pretty rationalist argument/description of a metaphysics.

Your posts are always a pleasure to read, but I always come away wondering where you stand. All my life I have studied Logical Analysis, the type of philosophy that came out of Cambridge a little over a hundred years ago. I also like the Phenomenology that came out of Vienna. It's all very rational. So I am a rationalist that far. I become an irrationalist when I approach the limits of analysis. Then everything breaks down. All philosophy at its extreme fails. It crashes and the philosopher has to put up with that. I do believe that eventually every philosophy becomes paradoxical. So does logic. Cantor and Goedel showed that. And then they went mad. I now think that if a philosopher is going to describe what happens at the extreme, where a philosophy is carried to its logical conclusion, then he is going to have to resort to poetry. And religion. Then philosophy becomes a scandal. Criminality and immorality and pathology are all about. You walk in the demi-monde. I have written it up extensively for many years. Reason in extremis. The disreputable. The incorrigible. A god who is your trick for the night.
Karpel Tunnel
Posts: 948
Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by Karpel Tunnel »

GaryLouisSmith wrote: June 20th, 2019, 9:59 am Your posts are always a pleasure to read, but I always come away wondering where you stand.
Thank you and, I can understand that it is not clear where i stand. I tend to reveal a stance since in a philosophical forum that becomes something I must defend. I've asserted then a position, and so I suddenly have an onus to justify it such that rational people, theoretically, should agree. But since I think that one's beliefs are very dependent on experience, including practices, I feel like words on a screen are not really what people need to test out my beliefs or any beliefs for that matter. So I use philosophy forums to probe other worldviews and other minds. And often worldviews that dominate 'out there' and still harry me 'in here'.
All my life I have studied Logical Analysis, the type of philosophy that came out of Cambridge a little over a hundred years ago. I also like the Phenomenology that came out of Vienna. It's all very rational. So I am a rationalist that far. I become an irrationalist when I approach the limits of analysis. Then everything breaks down. All philosophy at its extreme fails. It crashes and the philosopher has to put up with that. I do believe that eventually every philosophy becomes paradoxical. So does logic. Cantor and Goedel showed that. And then they went mad.
Thanks for letting me know Gödel went mad. Pattern recognition and paranoia have a lot in common and I think a very rational life is a kind of madness. I love him for his incompleteness theorum(s) but never looked at the man. Love that he was a Christian, not that I am a fan of the Abrahamic religions, but that he is not a positivist, a pernicious group to my mind. A lot of people think they are only rational and never base their beliefs, in part or in the whole, on intuition. I could cry about how ludicrous this is a thing to think. His theorum cuts to the heart of that and now I see this may have been more connected to his life than I realized. Cantor also. Got to get out of the verbal logical head more than these guys probably allowed themselves to do.
I now think that if a philosopher is going to describe what happens at the extreme, where a philosophy is carried to its logical conclusion, then he is going to have to resort to poetry. And religion. Then philosophy becomes a scandal. Criminality and immorality and pathology are all about. You walk in the demi-monde. I have written it up extensively for many years. Reason in extremis. The disreputable. The incorrigible. A god who is your trick for the night.
I'd have to mull on that. I don't identify as a philosopher. You seem to engage in activities that use epistemologies different form the typical and even atypical philosophers. It's all well and good to require philosophers to learn Germand and/or French if they are coming from English, say. But how much better to demand they take hallucinogens or form a complex bond with a member of another species that they have not before or that they must move to a significantly different culture and live there for a time or....give them a real outside perspective on all their assumptions. Otherwise philosophers are just word pushers.
Karpel Tunnel
Posts: 948
Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by Karpel Tunnel »

GaryLouisSmith wrote: June 20th, 2019, 9:59 am Your posts are always a pleasure to read, but I always come away wondering where you stand. A
I should have said 'I tend not to reveal my stance(s)...' above.
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

Karpel Tunnel wrote: June 21st, 2019, 1:58 am
GaryLouisSmith wrote: June 20th, 2019, 9:59 am Your posts are always a pleasure to read, but I always come away wondering where you stand. A
I should have said 'I tend not to reveal my stance(s)...' above.
Yes, I understand the desire to change what I have posted. I wish I knew how. I'm sending you some quotes by Borges and Emerson. https://archive.vcu.edu/english/engweb/ ... alist.html .

For the last two and a half millennia those philosophers who have been aligned with Plato have been more of an artistic nature, while those aligned with Aristotle has had a scientific bent to their thinking. I am a Platonic Realist, not an Aristotelian nominalist.

Jorge Luis Borges is one of my favorite writers. He was an anti-realist, but he very well describes the strangeness of the Real.

From From Allegories to Novels -

In the arduous schools of the Middle Ages, everyone invokes Aristotle, master of human reason; but the nominalists are Aristotle, the realists, Plato. George Henry Lewes has opined that the only medieval debate of some philosophical value is between nominalism and realism; the opinion is somewhat rash, but it underscores the importance of this tenacious controversy, provoked, at the beginning of the ninth century, by a sentence from Porphyry, translated and commented upon by Boethius; sustained, toward the end of the eleventh, by Anselm and Roscelin; and revived by William of Occam in the fourteenth.

As one would suppose, the intermediate positions and nuances multiplied ad infinitum over those many years; yet it can be stated that, for realism, universals (Plato would call them ideas, forms; we would call them abstract concepts) were the essential; for nominalism, individuals. The history of philosophy is not a useless museum of distractions and wordplay; the two hypotheses correspond, in all likelihood, to two ways of intuiting reality. Maurice de Wulf writes: "Ultra-realism garnered the first adherents. The chronicler Heriman (eleventh century) gives the name 'antiqui doctores' to those who teach dialectics in re; Abelard speaks of it as an 'antique doctrine' , and until the end of the twelfth century; the name moderni is applied to its adversaries." A hypothesis that is now inconceivable seemed obvious in the ninth century, and lasted in some form into the fourteenth. Nominalism, once the novelty of a few, today encompasses everyone; its victory is so vast and fundamental that its name is useless, no one declares himself a nominalist because no one is anything else. Let us try to understand, nevertheless, that for the men of the Middle Ages the fundamental thing was not men but humanity, not individuals but the species, not the species but the genus, not the genera but God. From such concepts (whose clearest manifestation is perhaps the quadruple system of Erigena) allegorical literature, as I understand it, derived. Allegory is a fable of abstractions, as the novel is a fable of individuals. The abstractions are personified; there is something of the novel in every allegory. The individuals that novelists present aspire to be generic; there is an element of allegory in novel.

The passage from allegory to novel, from species to individual, from realism to nominalism, required several centuries, but I shall have the temerity to suggest an ideal date: the day in 1382 when Geoffrey Chaucer, who may not have believed himself to be a nominalist, set out to translate into English a line by Boccaccio – "E con gli occulti ferri Tradimenti" (And Betrayal with hidden weapons) – and repeated it as "The smyler with the knyf under the cloke." The original is in the seventh book of the Teseide; the English version, in "The night's Tale."

The last paragraph of The Total Library by Borges –

One of the habits of the mind is the invention of horrible imaginings. The mind has invented Hell, it has invented predestination to Hell, it has imagined the Platonic Ideas, the chimera, the sphinx, abnormal transfinite numbers (whose parts are no smaller than the whole), masks, mirrors. Operas, the teratological Trinity: the Father, the Son, and the unresolvable Ghost, articulated into a single organism … I have tried to rescue from oblivion a subaltern horror: the vast, contradictory Library, whose vertical wildernesses of books run the incessant risk of changing into others that affirm, deny, and confuse everything like a delirious god.

From A History of Eternity by Borges –

The ideal universe to which Plotinus summons us is less intent on variety than on plenitude; it is a select repertory, tolerating neither repetition nor pleonasm: the motionless and terrible museum of the Platonic archetypes. I do not know if mortal eyes ever saw it (outside of oracular vision or nightmare), or if the remote Greek who devised it ever made its acquaintance, but I sense something of the museum in it: still, monstrous, and classified …

And a footnote from the same –

I do not wish to bid farewell to Platonism (which seems icily remote) without making the following observation, in the hope that others may pursue and justify it: The generic can be more intense than the concrete. There is no lack of examples to illustrate this. During the boyhood summers I spent in the north of the province of Buenos Aires, I was intrigued by the rounded plain and the men who were butchering in the kitchen, but awful indeed was my delight when I learned that the circular space was the "pampa" and those men "gauchos". The same is true of the imaginative man who falls in love. The generic (the repeated name, the type, the fatherland, the tantalizing destiny invested in it) takes priority over individual features, which are tolerated only because of their prior genre. The extreme example – the person who falls in love by word of mouth – is very common in the literatures of Persia and Arabia.
Karpel Tunnel
Posts: 948
Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am

Re: Are we all born an Atheist?

Post by Karpel Tunnel »

GaryLouisSmith wrote: June 21st, 2019, 3:53 am Yes, I understand the desire to change what I have posted. I wish I knew how.
There is no way to do it. I asked after I joined. I only correct things that I think will be very confusing. I'll read the rest of your post later.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021