Sh*t My Dad Says, by Justin Halpern

Mr. Halpern's dad is a foul mouthed, insensitive, and hilarious father. This collection of really horrible things he said to young Mr. Halpern made me occasionally laugh out loud, and feel better about my own parenting.

Growing Up Amish: A Memoir, by Ira Wagler

This was an interesting memoir of Mr. Wagler's troubled childhood, a rebellious young man who was never quite comfortable with the structure of his Amish community, and never quite comfortable outside of it. Unfortunately, the memoir misses a punchline: how did it end up, what's he doing now, etc. That defect, in my view, makes it not worth reading the book at all.

Shaken, by Tim Tebow

I like Mr. Tebow, because he seems authentic and decent. The NFL doesn't seem to mind hiring thugs, felons, and drug users, and I like that Mr. Tebow appears unlikely to ever be any of those things. Then again, he's also unlikely to ever again play in the NFL.

Still, a likable guy about whom I only ever see good reports: helping special needs kids, helping kids with serious illnesses. So when I saw his book, I thought, why not?

And it was an enjoyable read. I'd recommend it to some folks. But even as I was reading, I found myself wondering what the book is really about. At the end, there was no unifying theme or message. Or maybe there was, about Mr. Tebow's faith, that I just wasn't resonating with.

So all-in-all, for me it was a donut: tasty but not really filling. Your mileage may vary.

Beat the Crowd, by Ken Fisher

Mr. Fisher is a good writer. I enjoyed reading this short book until I finished it and asked myself what I had learned. At that point it was clear to me: this book is a donut: fun to eat, but not nutritious.

Trend Following, by Michael Covel

I got suckered into buying the 2017 5th edition of Mr. Covel's book, primarily because I listen to some of his podcasts and I thought I'd learn from it. Clearly, I should have done more diligent research first. Then I'd have known that much of this painfully long (688 page) text is articles from other authors. Since it wasn't marketed as an edited collection, I didn't expect that.

Perhaps the problem is that this was the extra advanced version of the class and I need the entry level overview course. It was okay in that I did learn a few things. But it was painful, tedious, and not an efficient use of my time.

The Laws of Wealth, by Daniel Crosby

The full title is, "The Laws of Wealth: Psychology and the secret to investing success." Dr. Crosby is a behavioral psychologist, and this is his take on how investors can avoid being their own worst enemy. The material is not new nor groundbreaking. Rather, this is a compendium of materials on the topic. For example, advice to not try to forecast the markets, and to avoid getting emotionally excited about market events.

This is an interesting book for folks who have a particular interest in the topic. But for the typical individual investor, I'd recommend Peter Mallouk's, "The 5 Mistakes Every Investor Makes and How to Avoid Them," and then Wes Gray and Jack Vogel's, "DIY Financial Advisor," instead.

Tools of Titans, by Tim Ferriss

The full title of this book is, "Tools of Titans: The Tactics, Routines, and Habits of Billionaires, Icons, and World-Class Performers." Mr. Ferriss hosts a very popular podcast and this is an edited and annotated collection of interview comments from his successful guests.

On the plus side, there are tons of interesting thoughts to be found.
On the negative, if someone reads this with the expectation of finding a formula to help them succeed, they're in for a tough time. Not because there aren't great ideas and solid advice, but because there's too much.

Probably better indexing would help the reader seeking an "answer."
The happy reader will either enjoy all the comments from Mr. Ferriss' very interesting guests, or if they are pursuing a self-improvement goal, will pick and choose a crisp clear path, and be willing to leave many great ideas on the side lest they be a distraction.

As for me, I don't want self-help advice. I don't seek out entrepreneurial ideas. But I really enjoy reading this stuff and looking for leads to new ideas or practices, and cool twitter feeds or web sites that I've not heard of. So for me, this was a very enjoyable read.

Living with a SEAL, by Jesse Itzler

This is a terrific, fast -reading book. The background is that Mr. Itzler (a successful, wealthy entrepreneur who is also a distance runner) entered a team race where runners take turns over a 24 hour period. He saw an individual running the race as a one-man team, doing over 100  miles, and was intrigued. (It turns out this person is a Navy Seal who doesn't want his name used, so Mr. Itzler refers to him only as SEAL throughout the book.) Net is, Mr. Itzler hired SEAL to train him for a month, living with Itzler and his family.

This book documents the training. Wait! Don't go -- this isn't a fitness training book! It is more of a journal, a peek into the life of a billionaire family through this experience. But it really isn't that either, it isn't really voyeuristic at all. I guess I don't know how to describe it except to say that I laughed out loud five times while reading. That's a lot for a 251 page book about doing pushups and running.

I recommend this for anyone, athlete or not, because it was just plain amusing. Oh, language warning: there is some foul language used, but no other concerns about reading it aloud to your toddler at bedtime.

They Call Me Supermensch, by Shep Gordon

Mr. Gordon is an entertainment manager who got his start handling Alice Cooper, and is also known for representing famous chefs. In this auto-biography, he emphasizes his notion of treating people well, striving for win-win deals, and paying back kindness.

The book is very engaging and it was great fun to read. But I have one complaint, something that nagged at me about this book until I finally figured out exactly what it is.

Mr. Gordon, a lifelong cannabis user, talks quite nonchalantly about his pot (and other drug) use in his book. The thing is, in many parts of the US, including Hawaii where Mr. Gordon lives, its (non-medical) use is illegal.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not opposed to cannabis. I just find it very upsetting that wealthy or famous folks like Mr. Gordon can flaunt their use of cannabis when literally millions of Americans are arrested for the same thing. For example, according to the ACLU, "Despite roughly equal usage rates, Blacks are 3.73 times more likely than whites to be arrested for marijuana." [www.aclu.org/gallery/marijuana-arrests-numbers]

It seems as though a privileged class of elites, like Mr. Gordon, Snoop Dogg, Willy Nelson, and the like, can be quite public about their use of cannabis and flat out ignore the laws, but millions of normal folks who use cannabis risk incarceration and even felony prosecution.

This imbalance seems unfair. Whichever way the public pushes on legislation, I'd just like to see fairness and equity in the enforcement of the law. So, if you're anti -cannabis, then insist on equal prosecution of Hollywood types. And if you're pro -cannabis, then fight against the current laws that lead to so many arrests: 8.2 million according to the ACLU, between 2000 and 2010, which were 52% of all drug arrests, and of which 88% were for simple possession. [www.aclu.org/gallery/marijuana-arrests-numbers]

If Mr. Gordon wrote about all the sit ins or protests or lobbying efforts he'd organized to correct this imbalance, I'd feel a whole lot more impressed by him. Reading about him smoking a joint in his hot tub to help him come to inventive new ideas wasn't all that sympathetic.

Is this a big deal? According to 2013 FBI data; in Texas alone, 70,000 people were arrested for marijuana possession. As Texas State Representative Joe Moody says [http://krwg.org/post/97-texas-marijuana-convictions-are-possession], these arrests can destroy young people's' futures. "... if you had a financial aid grants those could be off the table for you, federal student aid is definitely off the table, getting a job is going to be extremely difficult because those criminal background checks are going to show up... Renting an apartment. Anything a young person is needing to be doing to kind of get on their feet to get their life going, all those things can be derailed by a minor conviction.”

My over-reaction to this political topic affected my view of what was otherwise a very good book, which I still recommend.

The ONE Thing, by Gary Keller

I read this book to evaluate it: would it make a useful holiday gift for some young person just starting their career? It isn't a clear winner, but I'm leaning towards saying it is.

The bad news is the good news here - the book is essentially a long motivational speech from a credible and interesting presenter. The net net is foreshadowed by the title: pick the most important thing and do it relentlessly. There's plenty more advice, albeit at an overview level, on how to execute.

If you're just starting out, or if you're not but find yourself frustrated by career, or work-life tradeoffs, or you're just looking for an edge, then this may be a good choice.

How Not to Die, by Michael Greger

This is a terrific book, albeit at times a bit overwhelming. Dr. Greger's gig is medical research into the potential to improve health and /or reduce disease through nutrition. His website, nutritionfacts.org is a phenomenal resource with brief and amusing videos that summarize research on a variety of topics.

This book summarizes years of research and review into two sections: how to minimize your risk of a variety of diseases, and how to adjust your lifestyle to maximize health and minimize risk.

To be clear, Dr. Greger, like a few other medical leaders (I'm thinking folks like Dr. Alan Goldhamer, Dr. John McDougall, Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn, Dr. Dean Ornish), is disruptive, pushing the current medical norms to recognize the potential of nutrition on disease.

Dr. Greger quotes Dean Ornish on this: "[he] realized reimbursement is a much more powerful determinant of medical practice than research."

Fighting consensus thinking doesn't make these folks wack-jobs: think about the history of medicine. I'll give you a couple of examples just in case you're skeptical:

In the 1700s, one woman in six died of fever after childbirth. That's a lot of dead moms. In 1795, Alexander Gordon said the fevers were infectious and could be cured. Consensus thinking said he was a fool. In 1843, Oliver Wendell Holmes said similar, with evidence. Ignored. Most disturbing, in 1849, Ignatz Semmelweiss showed that sanitation (physicians dipping their hands in a disinfectant between the autopsy room and the delivery room) eliminated puerperal fever entirely. You'd think that was heroic. The consensus said he was mad, not to mention a Jew, and fired him from his job. (He died in an insane asylum.)  It took until the start of the 20th century (Dr. Lister was presumably a better politician) for doctors to accept this information. There are plenty of other examples, like pellagra. But you get the idea. Just because something is "normative" in medicine doesn't mean it is best for the patients.

Of course, just because something is fringe doesn't make it good either: the key is evidence based analysis, where one accounts for motives (e.g., was a study funded by an industry with billions at stake?) and quality (e.g., was the study well run?). This is precisely Dr. Greger's specialty.

In part two of his book, Dr. Greger presents his "daily dozen:"  beans, berries, other fruits, cruciferous vegetables, greens, other vegetables, flax seeds, nuts, spices, whole grains, beverages, and exercise.

Really though, this section is a bit much. I might just not be ready to run my daily menu through a checklist.

One other complaint about Dr. Greger's work: he tends towards reduction-ism. As T. Colin Campbell points out, current research gets so engaged looking for the magic chemical (that a pharmaceutical firm can market at profit) that it forgets the holistic nature of unprocessed plant based foods. To this end, Dr. Campbell points out that researchers might notice that apples seem like healthy eating.  They notice there's vitamin A in an apple.  So they look at the health effects of vitamin A, with a goal of making a vitamin A pill that will provide the healthy effects.  Presumably without the hassle of eating the apple.  But, unfortunately, all sorts of systems get in the way of this working out the way a pill lover might like.

All in all though, this is worth reading. If nothing else, for the preface and introductory chapter.

Quantitative Momentum, by Wes Gray and Jack Vogel

This is a terrific book. As good as "DIY Financial Advisor," which was also great.

I did, however, manage to get myself all sorts of confused about which approach to measuring momentum the authors use in the book. I believe this would not have been a problem for me if two approaches to measurement hadn't been laid out early on, on page 11.


There, the authors start out saying they're going to outline what they mean by stock selection momentum. Then they define two approaches to measure momentum, time-series versus relative strength. The explanation is clear. Although the conclusion is puzzling to me, as on page 12 they say that these two approaches are often used in market-timing or asset-class selection, neither of which is the focus of the book.


But surely in this book they do measure momentum, and presumably with one or both of the two methods they just defined. So which is it? I was hoping for a summary line like this: "When we talk about measuring momentum in the rest of this book, we'll be using the {choose one of: time-series / relative strength}approach." Or, we'll use both and use words like "trend following when we use relative strength" and "generic when we use absolute," or whatever would be accurate.


I figured this would become obvious as I kept reading but I didn't come across a clear rule. Yet it must matter, since the authors bothered to define the terms. I find myself wondering, perhaps this is an OCD trigger issue for me. You're no doubt wondering the same.


On page 49, it sounds like relative strength is the approach. On page 77, the authors introduce the phrase "generic momentum" as a time-series approach. Since they earlier spent a page defining time-series and relative strength, I was really hoping they'd come back to those terms again. Now I have three terms, but I feel pretty confident that I can reduce them to two, with time-series and generic as roughly equivalent.  This was supported by "How to calculate generic momentum" on page 80. I'm not super confident though, because I kind of feel that if they wanted me to consider generic as isomorphic to absolute, they'd have said so back on pages 11/12.


Things sort of come together on page 122, where my sense is that the authors calculate generic momentum (time-series) and then use those scores to do relative strength measures against the universe of stocks. Well, whether or not that's what they meant, that's what I took out of it. Since I wasn't clear on the fundamentals from page 11 to page 122, I'm not confident that I have it right now either. And on page 172 they specifically mention time-series, but that may be to clarify the method used by the reference for that particular analysis.


In fairness, I am so much not the target audience of professional investment quants that I'm clearly not a good test subject for the readability of this minor detail within this book. But if the authors ever do another edition, in deference to the slower students, they really should consider changing the summary section on page 12 to something like this:


"You'll find that we also use the term 'generic momentum' as a synonym for time-series or absolute momentum. As you progress in this book, you'll find that we use a combination of the two (time-series and relative strength), using a time-series sort first, and then comparing the outcomes to the universe of stocks to get relative strength as the secondary measure."  [Unless this is dead wrong. Sigh.]

I'd also probably delete the sentences on page 12 that say these usually only matter to market-timing or asset-class selection which aren't the subjects of this book -- because it feels like the authors are telling the reader that they've wasted their time understanding a description of time-series and relative strength when it isn't even relevant to the book they are reading. And lead them to wonder what the authors do use.


Okay, barring that, I really loved the book!  Well written, very clear, and good examples.

The Art of Learning, by Josh Waitzkin

Mr. Waitzkin was a chess prodigy, about whom a book, Searching for Bobby Fisher, was written by his dad in 1988. It became a movie in 1993. As a young adult, Mr. Waitzkin moved from chess to martial arts, competing in Tai Chi's push hands tournaments (a large part of this book), and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.

The conceit of this book is that Mr. Waitzkin can extrapolate from his experiences as a world class chess player and world class martial arts competitor to provide lessons about learning. Hence the title.

As an auto-biography, it is interesting although rather repetitive. As an instructional text, it is so far from useful as to be a zero.

So if you're curious about Mr. Waitzkin, then by all means read this (preferably by borrowing it from a free public library). If you want to learn about learning techniques, how to gain excellence in a field, etc., just cross this title off your list now. (The latter was my motivation for reading the book, and the reason for my poor reaction to it.)

Presto!: How I Made Over 100 Pounds Disappear and Other Magical Tales, by Penn Jillette

Mr. Jillette is best known as a fabulous magician in his show with Teller. This autobiography focuses on his realization that poor health -- in his case, really scary bad poor health -- was due to his obesity and his embrace of the Standard American Diet.

With help from Ray Cronise (who is referred to as CrayRay, as in crazy, i.e., cray-cray), Mr. Jillette jump starts his weight loss by first breaking his addiction to sugar, oil, and salt, by eating only potatoes. Eventually, he adds the components of a whole food plant based diet free of sugar, oil, and salt. Essentially everything folks like Dr. Alan Goldhamer, Dr. John McDougall, Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn, Dr. Dean Ornish, and many others have been writing and speaking about for years. Mr. Jillette didn't look to them, but rather to a hobbyist (no offense to Mr. Cronise). Fortunately, the hobbyist was on a solid base to give advice.

An important note: Mr. Jillette can't make it through a paragraph without some level of profanity. If that bothers you, don't even open the book. Also, he makes it pretty clear that he's on Withings payroll - a maker of wifi attached scales that garner mixed reviews on Amazon. Consequently, he pushes them hard.

But all that can be forgiven in this very entertaining book.

Oh, when you get to recipes, keep going. They are tucked into the middle of the book; back to the narrative in just a few pages.

The Pleasure Trap, by Doug Lisle

This is a must-read book for anyone who has read a headline about an "obesity epidemic" and wondered why. It has its flaws -- in particular, it is a bit on the wordy side, even though it is a thin book. But still worth reading.

The authors start by explaining that all creatures are motivated to reproduce, gain pleasure, and avoid exertion. Then they explain satiety: the notion that how much an animal eats is automatically regulated by fullness indicators. This includes humans of course. With this simple and clear background under our belts, we move to the really interesting part.

It turns out that our response to certain foods precisely mimics our response to addictive drugs. An aside: the absolute best way to understand Dr. Lisle's point here is to watch one of his videos; I suggest his 2012 TEDxFremont talk at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX2btaDOBK8.

Whether you see yourself reading this book or not, that video is really worthwhile. Watch it. Its discussion is actually much clearer (at least to me) than the book's.

An interesting comment in the book about the addictive nature of some food components (e.g., salt, sugar, fat): "Most people think that if they were to consume a diet of whole natural foods, they would not enjoy their food - or their lives. Indeed, most believe that they would suffer if they consumed a health-promoting diet. Like those addicted to drugs, they cannot imagine a better life, free from the drug-like effects of magic food."

Let's imagine this book convinced you to change your food composition to one less unhealthy. How would you deal with the skepticism of colleagues, friends, and family? The authors provide strategies to help deal with this effectively and kindly. (There's also another video from Dr. Lisle on social disapproval.)

They also address what they call the "myth of moderation." I guess you wouldn't tell a chain smoker to only smoke a couple of packs on the weekend. Or a drug addict to only get high on Saturdays. Their model of addiction to specific food components motivates these analogies.

Bottom line: great book. Also search for Dr. Lisle's videos online; they're usually interesting and amusing.

Investing at Level3, by James Cloonan

James B. Cloonan is the founder and chairman of AAII, a nonprofit organization providing support, education and information to individuals who manage their own investments or who wish to more closely oversee their advisers.

In "Investing at Level3," Cloonan rails against virtually all the beliefs of current theory and practice, claiming that: 

• It is very possible to exceed the average market returns.
• Volatility is not an appropriate measure of risk for the long-term investor.
• Much of asset allocation and diversification is not a 'free lunch' and is overdone at great expense. His book is, at this time, available only through the AAII website.

As to his points, I agree with him on volatility. If you're a "buy and hold" investor with a time frame of 10 years or longer, then the markets ups and downs don't really matter. Risk is defined as the likelihood you'll have the capital you expect when you want it (at some future long term date), not as the perturbations of the market that won't cause you to sell anyways.

I also could imagine agreeing on diversification: the price you pay for adding bonds to an equity portfolio is that you lower the total yield. People do this for the relative lack of volatility in bonds or for the predictable income stream. But if you believe that in the long haul equities will outperform bonds, then Dr. Cloonan is correct. In the US, from 1926 through 2015, stocks gained 9.9%/year and bonds 5.2%. The volatility measure that Dr. Cloonan disdains was 19%/year for stocks and 6% for bonds. Further, the peak to trough draw down in stocks hit 80% and bonds only 16%.

Yet there have been periods of time when bonds have outperformed equities. In the 20 year period 1929 to 1949, and the 40 year period 1969 to 2009, stocks under-performed bonds. Dr. Cloonan doesn't discuss this.

The tough part for me is the first claim, of out-performance, and that is entirely because of the numbers he throws around. Dr. Cloonan claims you can expect a 12% annual return with his passive strategy, and perhaps 17% with his active approach. Further, his expectation of "safe" investments as a mix-in, including Treauries or CDs, is 4% annual return. Credibility shot, on the ground, not able to move.

As of this writing, the definition of risk free return, US 10 year Treasuries, pay 1.57%. CDs can provide a touch more, perhaps 1.6%. Far from 4%. If Dr. Cloonan had provided a bridge between real market conditions and his claim, then perhaps things would make sense. He didn't.

Okay, so in spite of Dr. Cloonan's distinguished background, he set himself up for less credibility than even the inane talking heads on cable financial news shows. Does he have anything to offer?

• Individual investors with a long term (10+ year) horizon may safely ignore the volatility of the market, and are psychologically better off doing that.
• A market cap weighted approach to ETFs is less useful in the long term than equal weighting, and Dr. Cloonan pushes the Guggenheim S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP), and to a lesser extent the PowerShares Russell 1000 Equal Weight Portfolio (EQAL). In fact the data do support that equal weighting (RSP) outperforms cap weighting (SPY). On the other hand, the amount of draw down is also higher in equal weighting, presumably because small cap stocks are more subject to over-reaction in bear markets. In 2008-2009's bear market, RSP was down more than 10% more than SPY. On the other hand, as Dr. Cloonan points out, so what: hold on and you'll do fine in the long term (recovery).
• Instead of looking at market drops against peak (the definition of "draw down"), Dr. Cloonan suggests one look at drops against expectation. To his example, if your expectation is his 12% return on equities, and the market has run up - giving you a 40% return, and then drops a lot, as long as you're current value is equal to or greater than your expectation line, you're doing great. This seems like a great psychological tool to help people from panic during inevitable draw downs.
• You can make more than 12% annually over the long haul - that's the "passive" approach for lazy investors. But wait a moment: is that even remotely reasonable? Most folks whom I respect (e.g., Meb Faber, but really there are very many) expect 4-5% net growth over the next five+ years. So let's say that's because they are large cap focused (yes, Faber is actually a world view value balanced with trend guy, so he's already optimizing, but let it go for now), they're missing the better performance of small caps. Is it reasonable to expect this kind of doubled performance outcome? Either the folks who expect more moderate long term growth are dead wrong, or Dr. Cloonan is out on a limb. And given the absence of any commentary in his book supporting the big numbers, and already low credibility, well... you know the answer.

So what to make of this? My takeaway is simple: replace some market cap ETF holdings with equal weighted holdings like RSP, because the long term performance might be superior, if one can withstand the impact of an out-sized draw down over time. The rest of it? Might be brilliant, but might be hogwash, and this book doesn't make it easy to discern.

http://www.aaii.com/level3

Unprocessed, by Chef AJ

I bought this book for the recipes; they are SOS free. Which is to say, no sugar, oil, or salt.

Why no sugar? It is addictive, has no nutritional value, and has many calories. That's obvious to everyone. But sugary treats taste good. I'm assured that over time I'll get past the addictive nature of sugar.

Why no salt? It is also addictive, affects blood pressure, and according to Jeff Novick, has been associated with "stomach cancer, osteoporosis, edema, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, headache, angina, left ventricular hypertrophy, arteriosclerosis, and autoimmune problems."

Why no oil? It is extremely calorie dense, and ... well, Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn Jr MD of the Cleveland Clinic says it best in this video.

Anyway, it turns out that before getting to the cookbook, Chef AJ has a brief personal story about her path towards a plant-based whole food approach to eating and cooking, and why she omits sugar, oil, and salt from her recipes. This section was interesting and engaging.

I've yet to try the recipes but having read through a few, I'm optimistic.  Also, the author shares information on her web page, chefajwebsite.com.

Money: Master the Game, by Tony Robbins

Having just watched "I am not your guru" on Netflix (a documentary about a Tony Robbins seminar), when I saw this book at my local public library I thought I'd give it a go. Is Robbins the financial advisor as much the salesman / rah rah / personal consultant type as Robbins the life coach appears to be?

The answer is yes, and more importantly, don't read this book.

It is painfully long, filled with lots of fluff and excitement, little useful information, and too much bad information. You can do so much better than this.

Read this instead: "The 5 mistakes every investor makes and how to avoid them," by Peter Mallouk. This is much more useful, accurate, and credible.

If you are or want to be a "serious" investor, then read "DIY financial advisor," by Wes Gray, Jack Vogel, and David Foulke.  This book is simply outstanding.


     

Living with a dead language, by Ann Patty

Ms. Patty's memoir is about her choice to learn language as an adult; she had retired from the book publishing business and was without a hobby to fully occupy her mind. She wove in auto-biographical stories that transformed the whole: Ms. Patty gave herself purpose, and found new friends and interests. This is a short, enjoyable book.

This would have been a better book had Ms. Patty's editor kept her from a horrible indulgence. Out of nowhere, suddenly on page 165, she says the modern day equivalent of the Abecedarians (who were truly odd and perhaps favored ignorance) are "...Fox News watchers, much of the Republican Party." Holy cow! I'd expect well mannered members of any political party would be annoyed at this sort of random nastiness. Shame on you, Ms. Patty. For me, it took a four star rating down to two stars.

Pilgrim, by Lee Kravitz

Mr. Kravitz yearns for a spiritual life and to be a member of a community of like minded believers. This book outlines his journey across a variety of beliefs (Quaker, Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish).  It was not a great book.

Here's what I learned. His wife Elisabeth comes across as selfish (faced with Mr. Kravitz' allergic reaction to her pets she tells him learn to live with the discomfort or find another girl) and judgmental (she hates all Republicans; heaven forfend they might have a useful thought). Mr. Kravitz's journey treads a narrow path in that he can't include his spouse who is committed to her atheism and seems to look at his quest for spirituality as a behavioral defect.

Mr. Kravitz' desires seem reasonable. It was exhausting that it took him so much effort over such a long time span to figure out what works for him. I'm happy he finally did.

While the book was interesting enough that I kept reading -- in fact, for at least the first half I was trying to figure out what the book was actually about -- my overall view of it is, meh. The subtitle is killer, "risking the life I have to find the faith I seek," but disingenuous, as there was no risk whatsoever. And no real dramatic tension.  My recommendation: do not bother reading this book.