Hamilton – I disagree with him much more than I agree with him. This book is very much a book about a father and a son. The father is painted as the bad guy, and the son is the good guy, struggling to break free. I don’t accept that interpretation, or that framework of analysis. Nonetheless, Hamilton writes with a verve, an electricity, a passion, that’s rare among academic historians. As a researcher, he’s extraordinary.

I would include among philosophical writings some liberals. For example, John Stuart Mill, even though I disagree with him profoundly — a very resourceful and intelligent thinker.

I like the introduction where she says that ‘the solution does not lie in government regulation or getting men to do more around the house, although that would be nice.’ I disagree with her about government regulation.

That’s where I disagree with her. I don’t actually think happiness is a meaning of life, though lots of people assume that. Still, happiness is something folks care about, and she gives the best discussion I know, of the nature of happiness and the ways that one can practically accomplish it.

I’m prone to overexplaining things –- when my own understanding of them is shaky. The better I know something, the shorter my prose.