"But anywho...I think Lord of the Rings. Can't stand those books."
Tsk tsk =)
Lord of the Rings is an acquired taste, I suppose. I dunno how far you got with it, but once you reach a good battle scene, you either make it or break it. It's at a Tolkien-described battle scene that you fully realize if you hate or love the series.
I took a class on LOTR, and actually LOVED the trilogy, as well as The Hobbit. My final essay was on Tom Bombadil, whom I was saddened to see not included in the movie (though it's pretty justifiable).
To stay on-topic however, I would say that philosophy texts that are heavily based on logic and logical equations (F2 the M* b = Valid, or something along those lines). Philosophy professors are pretty straightforward, and thus remove any irrelevancies or unimportant phrases from their work, so you get a text that is really, really dense and hard to rapid read, let alone, SR+Dip. Activating classic philosophers like Descartes isn't bad, but stuff from Hume or Kant gets tricky. The hardest is contemporary guys, who see fit to write their papers using many, MANY equations (If a+b1=c, and b1+d=C2...).
Besides that, I have little problem activating anything else.
-Ramon http://razor.ramon.com
