because of the gimmick-y nature of the "one hundred" thought experiments, the book is shallow and repetitive. baggini also often forces his own opinions as the only reasonable conclusion, particularly when he suggests that "If God is good, it is because God is and chooses to do what is already good God doesn't make something good by choosing it; he chooses it because it is good." well, descartes would disagree. i also thought it kinda screwy that baggini didn't distinguish between sources and influences ("Readers should therefore assume that these sources [cited in the thought experiment] provide no more than the inspiration for the scenarios in this book.") when several of the thought experiments are lifted wholesale from the source.