Alex woke up early and was greeted again by the sign taped to his computer: "Write the book."

The dread he'd felt just a few days ago was long gone. With renewed enthusiasm, he hopped out of bed, removed the sign, and wrote four new words at the top. It now read: "You will research and Write the book." He stuck it back on his computer and viewed the new sign with approval. It was more accurate now. The book was going to be written, and, counting the research he'd done the night before, he'd already made measurable progress. The Scientific Outlook sat on his desk, and he was very excited to begin reading it, but first, he had to have a talk with his mother.

"Oh, good morning, honey. You're up early," Alex's mother said as he walked into the kitchen.

"Yeah, I wanted to catch you before you left today. Ma, I'm probably going to be keeping some pretty late hours over the next few months. I've got a lot of reading to do."

"Oh, that's great. What are you reading?"

Alex was taken off guard by the question. The last thing he wanted was to explain the kind of books he was going to be reading, let alone risk mentioning any of the bizarre details about the project.

"A lot of different stuff, Ma. I'm doing research for the book, and, if I want to do it right, I'm going to have to read a lot of different stuff on different topics."

"Sounds very interesting, honey," she said in an encouraging tone.

"Yeah. So, can you do me a favor?"

"Sure, what is it?"

"Can you not holler down each morning when you leave? Can you wait until you get home to make sure I'm up? That way, if I've been working till four or five in the morning reading and writing, I'll be able to get plenty of rest before starting the next day."

A worried look flashed across her face, reinforcing Alex's suspicions. She probably called down every morning to make sure he hadn't strung himself up. But the look quickly gave way to a proud smile. She could see his enthusiasm. Six months of questioning his state of mind had probably gone on for five months too long.

"You got it! How long do you think it will be before you finish the book? I hope it isn't going to be like some of the other stuff. It isn't going to be violent and scary, is it?"

"No. I don't want to give it away, though," he said, buying some time as he thought about a way to describe the project. "I think it's going to be a book about how the world is versus how the world could be." Alex was pretty happy with this description. It was nice and vague yet still painted enough of a picture to impress his mother even more.

"That sounds wonderful, honey! I can't wait to read it."

"Well, after I get it all ironed out, you'll get one of the first copies."

"Oh, that's great. How long did you say?"

"I don't know. I hope to have a rough copy done within six months. So, hopefully by Christmas."

"That would be a great present. I'll take one of those for under the tree," she said, still smiling.

"OK, I'll see what I can do. I'm going to go back down now; got work to do."

"OK, honey. I love you. See you later."

"Love ya too."

Despite his excitement, Alex hadn't forgotten the disturbing things Howard said the day before. Nor had he forgotten how it reignited old doubts and unsettled questions about what lurked inside of him. As he walked down the stairs, his mood dipped a little as he considered rereading his "Rage and Nightmares" journal, with hope to find some answers. Fortunately, another thought rescued him. He opened to a blank page in the journal, dated it, and wrote:

Maybe I don't want to look over all this crap anymore because I know it isn't going to fix what's wrong. YES, it has helped me a lot over the years, and I'm way better than I used to be. Or at least I was way better until I met Howard. Maybe that's the point. I keep coming up with the same answer: I see "it," I feel it, it's not me, and I don't agree with it. But then something else pops up, and the feelings of helplessness start all over again. What does that say? It says that I obviously haven't solved the problem! I haven't asked the right questions, or I haven't seen it properly. YES, I realize that it could mean that I just don't want to accept reality, as Howard says. But I DO NOT believe that! My gut tells me that there's a good reason for all of this, that if I stay honest and hang in there, I will find out what that reason is. There is no way I'm giving up on who I want to be.

"Who I want to be," Alex repeated, placing special emphasis on "want." His eyes narrowed into a serious gaze, and a liberating thought entered his mind. He was still excited to complete Howard's project. He was definitely excited to receive 500,000 dollars and move on with his life. But any feelings of deference toward Howard were fading fast. Alex could see that despite Howard's intelligence, wealth, and power, he was a failed human being. Worse, he wanted Alex to fail too. He wanted Alex to give up and become just like him. Could it be that Howard was unintentionally helping Alex resolve the long-standing issue of "who he was" by providing a living example of who he'd never want to be?

"Maybe I'm being too hard on him. I haven't heard everything he's had to say," Alex thought. But deep down, he knew better. Alex realized that his emerging perspective could possibly derail the relationship with Howard and maybe even the project itself, but he couldn't ignore it. So, for the moment, he set it aside. "There'll be more time for this later," he assured himself. "Right now, I've got work to do."

Just as Propaganda had done, The Scientific Outlook grabbed Alex's attention within just a few pages. This author was far more technical. He was apparently a scientist, but, fortunately, his writing wasn't too stuffy or dry.

Chapter one began with the story of Galileo and how his critical-thinking skills were frowned upon and punished by the dominant class of his day. The history lesson continued with information about Isaac Newton and Charles Darwin. The underlying message of the stories was that individuals must challenge assumptions if they wish to arrive at the truth; they must employ the scientific method. It was obvious that this author was clearly against argument from authority, and this confused Alex. He logged the confusion in his notebook:

OK, this is interesting. Unlike the last book (Propaganda), this author is clearly speaking in favor of critical thought and he's against argument from authority. He brings up the critical thinker Galileo and the many problems he suffered for challenging the common beliefs of his day.

As an example, the author mentions Galileo's "law of falling bodies," which directly contradicted Aristotle. Aristotle had claimed that a ten-pound object would fall much faster than a one-pound object. This "fact" was still accepted in Galileo's time, nearly two thousand years after Aristotle. The reason? Because nobody ever bothered to verify whether it was true or not. When Galileo argued that it was not true, his fellow professors laughed at him. So, he dropped a one-pound object and a ten-pound object off the tower of Pisa right in front of them. Even though both objects struck the ground at the exact same time, they still refused to accept that Galileo was right. Why? Because if they admitted Galileo was right, they'd have to admit that Aristotle was wrong. That would mean that they, too, were wrong, and what they were teaching their students was wrong. Everyone agreed, that couldn't possibly be true.

The author then goes into how Galileo was persecuted by the church for teaching students that the earth revolved around the sun. Galileo's "theory" challenged the authority of the Bible and the teachings of the dominant class, so he was forced to confess that he was lying to his students and forced to admit that everything the Bible said was true. The documentation of his sentencing and forced confession is amazing. . .unbelievable.

I'm not sure where the author is going with all this or why Howard felt this book helped make the case for his dominant class. It appears, so far, to make the opposite case. The author is pushing the importance of critical thought, not blind obedience. He's saying that the experts can be, and often are, totally wrong.

But almost as soon as Alex finished writing that entry, he was able to guess why Howard had chosen this book. His first hint came when the author described the work of a scientist named Pavlov.

Pavlov conducted experiments on dogs, and, over time, he found that he was able to create totally unnatural conditioned reflexes in the animals. For instance, he conditioned the dogs to involuntarily salivate at the sight of a circular patch, just the same as they'd salivate if he showed them a dish piled high with food. The author was very impressed by the "general law governing animal behavior" that was derived from Pavlov's experiments. Specifically, the general law that showed similar techniques could be applied to humans. Human beings, like dogs, could be conditioned to respond involuntarily to specific triggers chosen by another person.

Alex realized how useful that knowledge would be in the hands of a dominant class. He guessed, correctly, what the difference would be between this book and the last: Whereas Propaganda focused mainly on how gullible the average person is and why they should be dominated, this book would detail the science of domination. This book would show how the dominant class both discovers and then applies their knowledge in the real world.

After Pavlov, the author spent over seventy pages discussing the characteristics and limitations of the scientific method, its origins, the superiority of science over religion for determining truth, etc. It was all relatively benign and, at times, boring. But after properly framing the basics of scientific technique, the author began drawing some very disturbing images of what he called the "scientific society." By the end, he'd painted the perfect picture of an absolute hell on earth.

Alex's eyes and brain ached when he turned the final page at 11:53 p.m. Aside from a few short breaks, he'd spent the entire day reading, writing notes, and making himself "see" the worldwide system that the author described. He visualized the type of men who would create it, the type of men who would enforce it, and the billions of men, women, and children who would be crushed beneath it.

Despite his exhaustion, he spent nearly two more hours going through his notes and summarizing his thoughts. He concluded the notebook with:

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take away from this one. I'll probably have to look everything over a few more times, because I must be missing something. Basically, this guy is some kind of scientist, probably has an IQ of 160, and is obviously very well educated. My problem is, I can't really tell where he stands. I don't think he knows where he stands.

In some places, he seems just fine with using "scientific technique" to do things that are, to say the very least, disturbing. He comes off as extremely cold and arrogant, if not downright insane.

As an example, he describes his desire to "engineer" better human beings. First, he complains that scientific experiments on a fetus are "probably illegal," despite the fact they'd make "valuable additions to our knowledge," then he says they'll eventually do it and get good results, but:

"This result will only be achieved after a number of unsuccessful experiments leading to the birth of idiots or monstrosities. But would this be too high a price to pay for the discovery of a method by which the whole human race could be rendered intelligent?"

He calls education "the second greatest method of public propaganda" and says:

"It is convenient to the government that the citizens can read, and they possess some technical skill for productive work; it is convenient that they possess sufficient moral character to abstain from crime and sufficient intelligence to direct their own lives. But when we pass beyond these elementary requirements, the interests of the individual may often conflict with those of the government. . .so the government does not aim at producing a scientific habit of mind, except in a small minority of experts who are well paid and, as a rule, support the status quo.

Children in school are taught to believe what they are told and are punished if they express disbelief. In this way, a conditioned reflex is established, leading to a belief in anything said authoritatively by persons of importance."

He also talks a lot about scientific technique widening the gap between the dominant few and the inferior many:

"Rulers will provide one kind of education for ordinary men and women and another for those who are to hold scientific power. Ordinary men and women will be expected to be docile, industrious, punctual, thoughtless, and contented. Of these, contentment will probably be considered the most important.

All the boys and girls will learn from an early age to be cooperative and do exactly what everyone else is doing. Initiative will be discouraged in these children, and insubordination will be scientifically trained out of them.

Those children, on the other hand, who are destined to become members of the governing class will have a very different education. . .A sense of his high destiny will be constantly set before him. He will be trained in intelligence, self-command, and command over others. If he should fail in any one of these three, he will suffer the terrible penalty of degradation to the ranks of common workers and will be condemned for the rest of his life to associate with men and woman vastly inferior to himself. . .

There will, however, be limits to intellectual freedom among the governing class. They will not be allowed to question the division of the population into manual workers and experts. It will be their job to improve scientific technique and keep the manual workers contented by means of continual new amusements.

As for the manual workers, they will be discouraged from serious thought. As soon as working hours are over, amusements will be provided to prevent thoughts of discontent, which might cloud their happiness. One may assume that the rulers will be successful in making the manual workers foolish and frivolous.

If embryological methods of improving the breed are applied to the governing class and not the others, the gulf between the two classes, as regards intelligence, may become continually wider and wider. There will come to be an increasing divergence between the two types, making them in the end almost different species."

I'm not going to write out all my notes again. There are plenty more upsetting examples, like where he talks about the government sterilizing 95 percent of all men and 75 percent of all women, ensuring that only the best can breed. Or, for obvious reasons, I was a little upset by this passage:

"On those rare occasions when a boy or girl shows such marked ability as to seem intellectually equal to the rulers, a difficult situation will arise. If the youth is willing to abandon his previous associates and join the rulers, he may, after suitable tests, be promoted, but if he shows any regrettable solidarity with his previous associates, the rulers will reluctantly conclude that there is nothing to be done with him except to kill him before his ill-disciplined intelligence has had time to spread revolt."

Nice. The first question that enters my mind is: Has Howard decided that I should be given a "suitable test"? And if so, what happens if I fail?

Anyway, the point I want to make here is that, especially toward the end, the author DOES acknowledge the problem of concentrating so much power into so few hands. It's like the first part of the book is mostly about how great scientific technique is, then it turns into "but this is, unfortunately, where I think it's all likely to lead."

"No sin will be recognized except insubordination and failure to carry out the purposes of the government.

Perhaps, by means of injections and drugs and chemicals, the population could be induced to bear whatever its scientific masters may decide.

In the desires of the man who seeks power for its own sake, there is something dusty: When he has it, he wants only more power and does not find rest in contemplation of what he already has. . .The seeker after power must be perpetually engaged in some fresh manipulation.

I have not shrunk from depicting the darker features of the world that scientific manipulation might wish to create."

It's almost 2:00 a.m., and I've been at this ALL DAY, so these are my final thoughts (for now): We have here a cold and arrogant crazy person who seems to think it's OK for him and his kind to shape the world as they see fit, up to and including creation of a "new species" of human being. However, at the last minute, he decides it could all go wrong. He issues warnings; he says the scientific dictatorship will "hide behind democratic forms of government." He says that the scientific society, in its purest form, "is incompatible with the pursuit of truth, with love, with art, with every ideal that men have cherished." In short, at the end of his book, he is clearly attacking Howard's view. I'm back to wondering why Howard gave me this to read. It supports his position in some places but opposes it in others.

Alex stretched out on his bed and closed his eyes, but his mind continued to race. Within fifteen minutes, he was back up, in front of his computer, and searching the Internet for more information on the author. Another hour of research and writing notes passed in the blink of an eye.

I lied. . .still up. It's now past 3:00 a.m. Turns out this guy, Bertrand Russell, also wrote a follow-up to The Scientific Outlook called The Impact of Science on Society. At only 120 pages, it's even shorter than the first book, close to the same size as Propaganda. A blogger posted an article with some damning quotes. I found a free PDF of the book online, and the quotes appear to be accurate. I copied the ones that stood out the most.

"Education should aim at destroying free will so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished.

It is to be expected that advances in physiology and psychology will give governments much more control over individual mentality. . .

Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible.

The congenital differences between rulers and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organized insurrection of sheep."

I'm guessing he flip-flops a bit in this book too—from saying the scientific society is "good" to saying the scientific society will be "hell on earth"—but I haven't read enough to get a full perspective. I'll do that later.

I did read one section thoroughly, and it was extremely upsetting. In it, he's bitching about too many people being born and decides the best solution is to create a single world government that controls all the food and then decides who will be fed and who won't, creating famine and starvation on purpose.

Alex didn't fall asleep until after 4:00 a.m. For the first time in over six months, he slept past noon.