Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagree?

Discuss the November 2022 Philosophy Book of the Month, In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes.

To post in this forum, you must buy and read the book. After buying the book, please upload a screenshot of your receipt or proof or purchase via OnlineBookClub. Once the moderators approve your purchase at OnlineBookClub, you will then also automatically be given access to post in this forum.
Forum rules
This forum is for discussing the book In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All. Anyone can view the forum and read the post, but only people who purchased the book can post in the forum.

If your purchase has not already been verified (i.e. if you don't already have access to post in this forum), then please upload a screenshot of your receipt or proof or purchase via OnlineBookClub. Once the moderators approve your purchase at OnlineBookClub, you will then also automatically be given access to post in this forum.
Juanita Phelps
Premium Member
Posts: 20
Joined: January 2nd, 2024, 11:47 pm

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by Juanita Phelps »

Juanita Phelps wrote: May 22nd, 2024, 10:40 pm Having just engaged in a discussion on this topic, I am unsure why I was asked to take the survey and answer the question again. However, I lost my copy of the book when my trial of Kindle Unlimited ended and I chose not to continue the subscription. Amazon wiped out my library. I purchased the book this week so now I own it.

Anyway, I originally said that I disagreed with the line “ There is no problem of evil because there is no evil.” (p. 128). You countered by reminding me that the page before included a statement that I should have disagreed with before this one. It says, “Logic tells us that if there is an all-loving god, then there would be no evil. So those who believe in such a god, but then also see evil in the world, find a paradox that they call the problem of evil.”

Having thought some more about this, I see no problem with believing in an all-loving God and also believing in evil. I see no paradox. However, we discussed at great length our definitions of words and concluded that perhaps we do agree in philosphy if not in semantics. :mrgreen:

All of this said, I enjoyed the book,
Juanita Phelps
I am, alas, confusing myself. My quote comes from p. 139, but it is also the heading of the chapter.

On to something else...
I heard someone say, "I am not a human being having a spiritual experience; I am a spiritual being having a human experience."

Assuming evil IS a problem:
In this human state, if an act of evil is committed, is the spiritual self also guilty?
diana lowery
Premium Member
Posts: 15
Joined: January 17th, 2023, 5:44 pm

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by diana lowery »

Like many others here who have been asked to post, I am not a philosopher. Also, even though I have been asked to post a sentence, I am posting something less than a sentence, and there is no page number for the thing that I disagree with; it is on the cover. I do not agree with Scott using a pen name. In the chapter titled "A World of Problems," he states, "Truth is something that can be revealed, not something that can be done." I do not understand how using a fake name can align with that statement.
User avatar
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
The admin formerly known as Scott
Posts: 5906
Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
Contact:

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes »

Shirley Labzentis wrote: May 22nd, 2024, 4:25 pm I disagree with the sentence on Page 122, Paragraph 3. "If heaven exists only in the future, then it does not exist because the future does not exist."
Hi, Shirley Labzentis,

Thank you for your reply.

Can you explain specifically which part of the sentence you disagree with and why?

Can you also confirm that you are sure that is the very first sentence in the book with which you disagree, meaning you agree with every single sentence on pages 1 through 121?

For example, here are a couple sentences from page 71:
In It Together (Page 71) wrote:To elaborate, in spacetime, space is fundamentally indistinguishable from time, at least according to Einstein’s physics. The present that you consciously experience—your conscious present—is as much a here as it is a now and as much a now as a here. In Einstein’s physics, there is no now across all of space, but only infinite relative subjective here-and-nows in a seemingly static unchanging eternal timeless 4D spacetime of infinite presents.
Presumably, you must agree with those, since they appear before the sentence you listed; correct?

Regardless, if these topics interest you (and/or you find some of my statements about them disagreeable or doubtable), I recommend you read and reply to some or all of the following topics:

- Your left is not the left. There is no "the left". Likewise, there is no "the past" or "the future". Time is not real.

- In the same sense leftness is not real, time is not real.

- There is no objective now. If there are subjective nows, there's infinite ones equally existing across all of spacetime.

- 2D Maps of the Earth's Surface Act as Analogy for the Wrongness of Objective Time Theories & Classical/Newtonian Physics

- The beauty and peace of spatiotemporal presence itself will be with you, always, anywhere.

- Would Flat-Land Four-Eyed Freddy Notice a Difference?

- Objective Leftness and Rightness Do Not Exist

- Neither time, time-ness, unconscious here-ness, unconscious now-ness, nor any unconscious presence exist.


I recommend reading some or all of the above topics, not because it's important to me that you agree with my statements on the illusion of time (that's not important to me), but rather because it's interesting and can fun to read about. Moreover, even just taking an hour to get a very brief overview of Einstein's physics and the tenseless block universe model it requires (be it from me or another source) tends to leave one having a much deeper and more confident understanding of the Universe. It tends to feel as if you've been dating the Universe for your entire life, but with only superficial talks and no kissing or such, and then within just that one hour you have taken your relationship with the Universe to the next level with the deepest one-on-one talk of your life and getting at least your first glimpse of it naked. It's so beautiful and revealing.

It's only a quick glimpse because, as I say in the book (on page 133), "the essence is always clothed in form, and the dreamer must dream the mirror before she can see her beautiful but dreamy reflection in it." Even though it's a quick glimpse that is soon to be re-covered and deceptively re-clothed in what Einstein called the "persistent illusion" of time, a quick welcomed single glimpse of its nakedness can forever deepen your relationship, despite its possible unwillingness to ever let you see it naked again. Sometimes all it takes is one quick fleeting glimpse.


With love,
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
a.k.a. Scott




In Einstein's Special Relativity, there is no objective order to events, meaning in one reference frame the order of three events (A, B, and C) can be that event A happens before B and then C happens ( A -> B -> C ), but in another reference frame it could be C first then B then A ( C -> B -> A ), or C first then A then B ( C -> A -> B ), and so on. There can be observers in your present who have your distant future in their past. Likewise, your entire life and death can be in another person's past even if their entire life and death is in your past.
In Einstein's Special Relativity, there is no objective order to events, meaning in one reference frame the order of three events (A, B, and C) can be that event A happens before B and then C happens ( A -> B -> C ), but in another reference frame it could be C first then B then A ( C -> B -> A ), or C first then A then B ( C -> A -> B ), and so on. There can be observers in your present who have your distant future in their past. Likewise, your entire life and death can be in another person's past even if their entire life and death is in your past.
special-relativity.png (2.01 KiB) Viewed 1788 times
My entire political philosophy summed up in one tweet.

"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."

I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
Juanita Phelps
Premium Member
Posts: 20
Joined: January 2nd, 2024, 11:47 pm

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by Juanita Phelps »

diana lowery wrote: May 23rd, 2024, 8:34 am Like many others here who have been asked to post, I am not a philosopher. Also, even though I have been asked to post a sentence, I am posting something less than a sentence, and there is no page number for the thing that I disagree with; it is on the cover. I do not agree with Scott using a pen name. In the chapter titled "A World of Problems," he states, "Truth is something that can be revealed, not something that can be done." I do not understand how using a fake name can align with that statement.
Hello Diana,

I am not a philosopher either, but I do view names as ambiguous things. Think about languages. There is a skillet and a loaf of bread on a table. I have an index card with "PAN" written on it. Where the label goes depends on the language of the person to whom I pass the label.

Human names are labels. I am labeled by a man's last name. In our culture, we get our father's last name. Aha! But some people get their moms' last names. It doesn't matter because somewhere along the way, that last name came from a grandfather...

So, people are not their names. Have you ever heard the old joke, " I don't care what you call me, just as long as you call me in time for dinner"?

Almost all celebrities use stage names. Many kids get nicknames that last through adulthood.

You say toe-MAY-toe; I say toe-MAH-toe. It is still a round red fruit (or green, or yellow).

So, is it dishonest of Scott to use a pen name? I wish we could ask Mark Twain. ;)

Grinning, I am
Suzy Q
Scissor Bill
Carrie
Sissy
Mom
Gree
G-ma
Or Juanita [depending on who you ask]
User avatar
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
The admin formerly known as Scott
Posts: 5906
Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
Contact:

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes »

Juanita Phelps wrote: May 22nd, 2024, 10:40 pm However, we discussed at great length our definitions of words and concluded that perhaps we do agree in philosphy if not in semantics. :mrgreen:

All of this said, I enjoyed the book,
Juanita Phelps
Yes, I believe we agree. :)

What that sentence you quoted means is as follows:

"Logic tells us that if there is an all-loving god, then there would be no should-not-have-ness. So those who believe in such a god, but then also see should-not-have-ness in the world, find a paradox that we can call the problem of should-not-have-ness."

Do you agree with it more confidently when it is written like that?

If so, then I suggest when reading anything I've written where I use the word "evil" just imagine and pretend that I actually wrote 'should-not-have-ness' because that's what I meant.



With love,
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
a.k.a. Scott
My entire political philosophy summed up in one tweet.

"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."

I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
User avatar
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
The admin formerly known as Scott
Posts: 5906
Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
Contact:

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes »

Juanita Phelps wrote: May 23rd, 2024, 2:58 am On to something else...
I heard someone say, "I am not a human being having a spiritual experience; I am a spiritual being having a human experience."

Assuming evil IS a problem:
In this human state, if an act of evil is committed, is the spiritual self also guilty?
Hi, Juanita Phelps,

Thank you for question! :)

Unfortunately, I don't (yet) know what you mean when you use the word 'evil'. Thus, I don't understand what you are meaning to ask.

If I was interpret your question as if you were using the terms in the way I do, then it would mean the following:

"Assuming should-not-have-ness is a problem: In this human state, if an act is committed that shouldn't have been committed, is the spiritual self also guilty?"

I understand that version of the question, but unfortunately even then I cannot answer it for two reasons:

(1) I cannot imagine (or "assume") should-not-have-ness exists. To me, that's like imagining 2 + 2 doesn't equal 4. I can loosely imagine some impossible hypotheticals (e.g. what if you were born a girl in a Canada instead of boy in USA, or what if you had a time machine and could travel back in time, etc.), but when it comes to some things the fact that 2 + 2 equals 4 and the non-existence should-not-have-ness, I just can't eve get my brain to even barely imagine what a world might be like where those eyes-closed truths weren't true. They are just so fundamental and so necessarily true at such a deep fundamental all-encompassing level that I cannot playfully imagine it as a hypothetical.

(2) I'm not completely sure what you mean by the word 'guilty'. For more on that, you may be interested in the following topic of mine:

Letting go of expectation | How clinging to the superstitions of expectation and blame disrupts your inner peace


In most contexts, I don't believe in guilt (or blame or conventional temporal one-way causality).

For one who believes in God, my views on time, causality, and what I typically think of when I think of the word 'guilt' could all be explained by saying this: Imagine the story of the whole universe (including what you see as the distant past and the distant future) is a book, a single unchanging already written eternal timeless book. Imagine that book is all that physically exists. It's all there is, that book and god, nothing else at all. Then, it's just as true to say that god wrote the ending first and the beginning last rather than vice versa. Or you could think of it like he wrote a little bit of the ending than wrote a little bit of the beginning making sure to keep the story consistent without plot holes or contradictions, and then wrote a little more of the ending and then wrote a little bit more of the beginning, and so on, always making sure to keep the story consistent without plot holes or contradictions.

The above paragraph is a decent model that explains my metaphysics, with the understanding that I'm using the word God similar to the philosopher Spinoza did and/or similar to the way Einstein did when he famously said that he believes "God doesn't play dice."

However, to really make it better match my metaphysics (and Spinoza's if I understand his correctly), you'd have to think of God and the book (i.e. the universe) as being one in the same, or at least as if God is in the book and contained by it and living inside of it, even if you still imagine him as somehow still being the writer of the book from within. In that way, it would be more analogous to a dream you have a night where you are simultaneously in the dream and the dreamer who is writing the dream all at the same time, and yet in another sense you are the dream and the dream is you. There's room to construct the metaphor in different and even opposite ways since it is afterall just a metaphor and/or analogy.

Accordingly, even I was an adamant atheist, the above model and description would still be perhaps the best model and description of my metaphysics, just with the understanding that it uses a lot of analogy and/or metaphor to make it so our little minds can take it in and hold onto it.

Needless to say, things aren't ever exactly how we describe them to be because the reality is wonderfully indescribable.


With love,
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
a.k.a. Scott



Science proves there is no objective now. There is no singular now. Objectively speaking, all points in 4D spacetime are equally here-and-now. Subjectively speaking, no two subjects will agree on where is the here-and-now because they all see themselves as being at the center of the 4D universe, meaning they see whatever point in the 4D universe they are at as being here-and-now (i.e. the center).
Science proves there is no objective now. There is no singular now. Objectively speaking, all points in 4D spacetime are equally here-and-now. Subjectively speaking, no two subjects will agree on where is the here-and-now because they all see themselves as being at the center of the 4D universe, meaning they see whatever point in the 4D universe they are at as being here-and-now (i.e. the center).
My entire political philosophy summed up in one tweet.

"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."

I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
Eziokwu960
Premium Member
Posts: 10
Joined: May 23rd, 2024, 9:48 pm

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by Eziokwu960 »

I disagree with this quote "There is no fight you need to win to have content inner peace and spiritual freedom."

Being a spiritual person, I believe and I am almost certain that there are spiritual forces that fights one's inner peace and spiritual freedom. I have seen cases where some spiritual sacrifices had to be done to free one from a bondage spiritually, and this is the reason for my answer.
Juanita Phelps
Premium Member
Posts: 20
Joined: January 2nd, 2024, 11:47 pm

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by Juanita Phelps »

Eckhart Aurelius Hughes wrote: May 23rd, 2024, 2:09 pm
Juanita Phelps wrote: May 23rd, 2024, 2:58 am On to something else...
I heard someone say, "I am not a human being having a spiritual experience; I am a spiritual being having a human experience."

Assuming evil IS a problem:
In this human state, if an act of evil is committed, is the spiritual self also guilty?
Hi, Juanita Phelps,

Thank you for question! :)

Unfortunately, I don't (yet) know what you mean when you use the word 'evil'. Thus, I don't understand what you are meaning to ask.

If I was interpret your question as if you were using the terms in the way I do, then it would mean the following:

"Assuming should-not-have-ness is a problem: In this human state, if an act is committed that shouldn't have been committed, is the spiritual self also guilty?"

I understand that version of the question, but unfortunately even then I cannot answer it for two reasons:

(1) I cannot imagine (or "assume") should-not-have-ness exists. To me, that's like imagining 2 + 2 doesn't equal 4. I can loosely imagine some impossible hypotheticals (e.g. what if you were born a girl in a Canada instead of boy in USA, or what if you had a time machine and could travel back in time, etc.), but when it comes to some things the fact that 2 + 2 equals 4 and the non-existence should-not-have-ness, I just can't eve get my brain to even barely imagine what a world might be like where those eyes-closed truths weren't true. They are just so fundamental and so necessarily true at such a deep fundamental all-encompassing level that I cannot playfully imagine it as a hypothetical.

(2) I'm not completely sure what you mean by the word 'guilty'. For more on that, you may be interested in the following topic of mine:

Letting go of expectation | How clinging to the superstitions of expectation and blame disrupts your inner peace


In most contexts, I don't believe in guilt (or blame or conventional temporal one-way causality).

For one who believes in God, my views on time, causality, and what I typically think of when I think of the word 'guilt' could all be explained by saying this: Imagine the story of the whole universe (including what you see as the distant past and the distant future) is a book, a single unchanging already written eternal timeless book. Imagine that book is all that physically exists. It's all there is, that book and god, nothing else at all. Then, it's just as true to say that god wrote the ending first and the beginning last rather than vice versa. Or you could think of it like he wrote a little bit of the ending than wrote a little bit of the beginning making sure to keep the story consistent without plot holes or contradictions, and then wrote a little more of the ending and then wrote a little bit more of the beginning, and so on, always making sure to keep the story consistent without plot holes or contradictions.

The above paragraph is a decent model that explains my metaphysics, with the understanding that I'm using the word God similar to the philosopher Spinoza did and/or similar to the way Einstein did when he famously said that he believes "God doesn't play dice."

However, to really make it better match my metaphysics (and Spinoza's if I understand his correctly), you'd have to think of God and the book (i.e. the universe) as being one in the same, or at least as if God is in the book and contained by it and living inside of it, even if you still imagine him as somehow still being the writer of the book from within. In that way, it would be more analogous to a dream you have a night where you are simultaneously in the dream and the dreamer who is writing the dream all at the same time, and yet in another sense you are the dream and the dream is you. There's room to construct the metaphor in different and even opposite ways since it is afterall just a metaphor and/or analogy.

Accordingly, even I was an adamant atheist, the above model and description would still be perhaps the best model and description of my metaphysics, just with the understanding that it uses a lot of analogy and/or metaphor to make it so our little minds can take it in and hold onto it.

Needless to say, things aren't ever exactly how we describe them to be because the reality is wonderfully indescribable.


With love,
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
a.k.a. Scott




eternalism-block-time.png
Scott,
I may be going down a rabbit hole on this. But, first to explain my physical deed and my spiritual culpability-- see what I did here? Look, no evil. No guilt. I have since childhood had difficulty understanding the thought that God knows what I will do before I do it. That bumps up against free will in a big way. Yes my mind is running on two tracks.

Full stop. The body is a container that houses the spiritual part or the soul. So, according to the book, what others see is a shell, not the real person. But, by the laws of our society, if a person is convicted of, say, murder, and sent to prison. Which part of that person is culpable for having done the deed?

Or, when a benevolent deed is done, or, a mundane act such as preparing a meal occurs, is God involved? Is the physical human in charge? Or is the free will of the spiritual part in charge? But if free will means I can change my mind, did God know that too? If so, is it fre will or is it written in that book? Are the plot holes the places where people get to surprise God?

With a grin,
Juanita
User avatar
Surabhi Rani
Premium Member
Posts: 123
Joined: November 3rd, 2022, 3:21 am

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by Surabhi Rani »

I finished reading your book, 'In It Together,' for the third time. I agreed with every part of the book theoretically, and I found nothing that I disagreed with. Your philosophiy of life is similar to mine.
User avatar
CrisX
Premium Member
Posts: 15
Joined: February 6th, 2024, 2:56 am

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by CrisX »

One point to discuss is if we can help others, particularly children. We are complex systems, and we may not be the best. We can be motivated by helping others, particularly children. It can be a higher purpose we have.
Juanita Phelps
Premium Member
Posts: 20
Joined: January 2nd, 2024, 11:47 pm

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by Juanita Phelps »

Eckhart Aurelius Hughes wrote: January 19th, 2023, 2:50 pm This is a discussion forum topic for the November 2022 Philosophy Book of the Month, In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All.


Do you agree with everything in the book, In It Together?

If not, what is the very first sentence in the book with which you disagree?

Please copy and paste the sentence in full.

Please explain why you disagree, including any evidence or argument you may have to support your alternate belief.

I love hearing and learning about different viewpoints. So thank you in advance for your honest answers to these questions. :)

I also love friendly, respectful debates, especially philosophical ones. Much like if I choose to invite you to my literal home for a game of chess or to play some sport or game, please note if I seem to want to or choose to question, debate, or argue you about some thing, please do take it as a major compliment and a sign of my respect and admiration for you. I deeply love, value, and respect people who can disagree and explain their side. And generally I don't bother to debate or argue with people unless I think there is a good chance they could win the argument and thereby change my mind.

If you read the whole book already and don't remember the specific sentence, I strongly encourage you to read the book again up to the point of the first disagreement, and highlight the first sentence you find disagreeable, and then come back here as soon as you can to post it here.


The book is available for purchase from all major book retailers in both ebook and hardcover format.
Image
I am unsure how to proceed. We discussed my answer. However, on the Review Team Page, my score for this forum dropped from 10 to zero. The reasons given are that I haven't read the book or completed the survey. The survey link brought me back to this question. Please advise.
With a grin,
Juanita
User avatar
Mounce574
Premium Member
Posts: 164
Joined: October 8th, 2021, 2:24 am
Location: Oklahoma

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by Mounce574 »

"Logic tells us that if there is an all-loving god, then there would be no evil."
However, if you are of the Christian faith, you know that Satan is evil and that he causes the evil that fills the heart of man. So this isn't really logical from my point of view.
"Facts don't care about your feelings." Ben Shapiro
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." NF from Motto
Nicky Rita
Premium Member
Posts: 11
Joined: November 16th, 2023, 7:32 pm

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by Nicky Rita »

I disagree with the quote "There is no problem with evil because there is no evil" because it dismisses the very real existence of harm, suffering, and injustice in the world, and ignores the need to acknowledge and address these issues to create a better society.
diana lowery
Premium Member
Posts: 15
Joined: January 17th, 2023, 5:44 pm

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by diana lowery »

diana lowery wrote: May 26th, 2024, 6:14 pm I am not a philosopher, but I am curious about something. It is not a sentence, so I cannot copy and paste one here.
I do not agree with the use of a pen name on the cover. One of the themes in the book is truth and honesty, and this appears to go against that philosophy. It has been a while since I read the book, but I do not remember that issue being discussed or explained in the book. I am curious about how that decision was made.
I apologize for the multiple posts. It appears there was a glitch because I kept getting a reply that my post was too short, and then it posted all three of them. Also, a similar post that I had submitted a few days ago suddenly appeared after going missing somewhere. Sorry :oops:
Paul Great Grace
Premium Member
Posts: 9
Joined: May 22nd, 2024, 7:03 am

Re: Do you agree with everything in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what is the first sentence with which you disagr

Post by Paul Great Grace »

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree with everything in the book, it's a compelling book indeed. Good job boss.
Post Reply

Return to “Discuss "In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All" by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes”

2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Advent of Time: A Solution to the Problem of Evil...

The Advent of Time: A Solution to the Problem of Evil...
by Indignus Servus
November 2024

Reconceptualizing Mental Illness in the Digital Age

Reconceptualizing Mental Illness in the Digital Age
by Elliott B. Martin, Jr.
October 2024

How is God Involved in Evolution?

How is God Involved in Evolution?
by Joe P. Provenzano, Ron D. Morgan, and Dan R. Provenzano
August 2024

Launchpad Republic: America's Entrepreneurial Edge and Why It Matters

Launchpad Republic: America's Entrepreneurial Edge and Why It Matters
by Howard Wolk
July 2024

Quest: Finding Freddie: Reflections from the Other Side

Quest: Finding Freddie: Reflections from the Other Side
by Thomas Richard Spradlin
June 2024

Neither Safe Nor Effective

Neither Safe Nor Effective
by Dr. Colleen Huber
May 2024

Now or Never

Now or Never
by Mary Wasche
April 2024

Meditations

Meditations
by Marcus Aurelius
March 2024

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

The In-Between: Life in the Micro

The In-Between: Life in the Micro
by Christian Espinosa
January 2024

2023 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

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