Yosei

I studied it in a philosophy of autobiography course. Lots of flowery language, at times a bit disconcerting because he suddenly changes from autobiographer mode to devout praiser mode. What do you think?

Splarnst

I read it years ago when I was a teenager. I don't remember a lot, but I do remember that random switching. I also remember his defining evil as the absence of good (to explain how God could create an imperfect world) and his discussion of a non-literal interpretation of the creation story.

I sold my copy a couple years ago when I deconverted. (I kept some apologetic books out of intellectual honesty, but that book didn't make the cut.)

LoungeHead

I didn't find it particularly interesting. None of its metaphysics was very inspiring. His concepts of time are reflective of the age. His ideas about memory are only of passing interest, in that he took some time to think about where memories might come from. But are ultimately skewed by his religious beliefs... and of course, not his fault, lack of any scientific interest or basis.

Also his reasoning of why faith is superior to reason is, as always when someone trys to argue faith; self-contradictory. I think Augustine 's intellectual work is a detremental influence to Western civilisation.

Stumpjumper

I didn't much care for it. Too dualistic for my taste and kind of hard to get through.

There were some good sections too but overall it's not my favorite...

Cheerful Charlie

Book 11 on Time has to be some of the most excruiciatingly bad prose ever penned. I found much of this book unreadable.

Cheerful Charlie