General Reading Tastes

Click on the links above to see lists of the books that I've read and reviewed.

Sci-fi

My science fiction tastes are best summarized by the authors that I like.

Frank Herbert: Herbert is the best sci-fi author around. Dune (and its sequels) are absolutely fantastic. His other books are also quite good.
David Brin: Brin is the best living sci-fi author. I really like his Uplift Series and Earth.
Gregory Benford: Benford does some pretty good writing. I highly recomend The Heard of the Comet written with Brin. I'm currently working through his Galatic Center novels.
Larry Niven: At one time I enjoyed Niven a lot especially his novels written with Jerry Pournelle (nothing beats The Mote in God's Eye). I haven't cared for much of his recent output.
Robert A. Heinlein: I think Heinlein was an over-opinionated, self-important author, but I like his stories in spite of that. I'm really confused, actually, why I like Heinlein.
Isaac Asimov: This is where my sci-fi interest began. I read some books by Asimov in sixth grade, and I haven't stopped since.
Stephen R. Donaldson: Donaldson's Thomas Covenant series was quite good, and I also recomend his Gap Series.
C. S. Lewis: It's difficult to beat Lewis' Narnia books. I also enjoyed his Space Trilogy, especially That Hideous Strength.
Madeline L'Engle: L'Engle's Wrinkle in Time and its sequels aren't merely children's stories. I keep discovering sequels to this series that I never knew existed.
Ursula L'Guin: L'Guin's Earthsea series is absolutely fantastic except for the fourth book which (as I understand it) was to deconstruct the first three books.
Arthur C. Clarke: Clarke can be very good. I liked 2001, 3001, and Rendezvous with Rama. But the Rama sequels progressively got worse and worse. (Rama Revealed is one of my most disliked novels of all time.)
Joan D. Vinge: Vinge is a very good author, although I've only read her Snow Queen series. I thought The Snow Queen and World's End were great books, but The Summer Queen seemed to be more of a soap opera. Nothing particularly wrong with that, just less impressive.

History

I have a strange fascination with the Roman Empire. I took Latin in high school, and I enjoy reading about Rome. I've enjoyed Colleen McCullough's series very much as well as Robert Grave's Claudius books.

Philosophy & Religion

As for philosophy and religion books, I have read and I plan to read books about Christianity, specifically relating to Calvinism and Reformed Theology, since I am a Reformed Christian. I also want to read more about other religions, especially Eastern religions to broaden my horizons.

My philosophy reading has been spotty so far. One of these days I'm going to start tackling Aristotle, Nietzsche, and Sartre. Not today. (Of course, I've been saying this for a very long time now.)

Science

I'm interested in quantum physics, chaos theory, evolution theory, linguistics, and skepticism (see the next section). However, due to research and teaching, my science reading is usually limitted to my monthly issue of Scientific American.

Skepticism

I am also interested in skepticism. For a long time I was a believer in UFOs and other paranormal phenomena. I thought it would be exciting if it were true, so I read a lot of material that tended to support these things reinforcing my beliefs.

In the mid 1990s I read an article by Douglas Hofstadter in his Metamagical Themas about The Skeptical Inquirer. At the time I was still very curious in paranormal phenomena, and so I wanted to believe it was all true. It wasn't until the end of the 90s that I tried out an issue.

I found that I liked the magazine a lot. I had slowly become somewhat skeptical on my own, and I was impressed with the level of scholarship in the magazine. It presents real evidence against paranormal phenomena (broadly defined to include spontaneous compustion and UFOs). A few months after subscribing to The Skeptical Inquirer I came across an issue of Skeptic at a Barnes & Noble. I bought it, liked it, and subscribed to it, too.

What I appreciate most about these magazines (and their respective organizations) is that they don't attack religious beliefs, never as a matter of course. Occasionally there will be a letter to the editor that calls religious people idiots, but this attitude is not presented in the articles. The magazines are skeptical of religions; they ask that religious people not overstep their bounds. They, in return, do not make religious claims.