All books are a story line biased by it's writer(s.) Otherwise if we did not want to be moved at all, we would just need to buy once a year things like the Farmers Almanac.
Even a mathematical proof [in book form] is a statement of such force that it will convince all readers able to follow it's line of thought. But it is still a line of argument to influence. Most people are not worried about being influenced, but being lied to and being influenced by fanatically one sided views. Most discerning minds know the difference...That is why I find myself equially confortable viewing Michael Moore's "Farenheit 911" and "South Park Conservatives" from one day to the next and possibly agreeing with both! I am not only interested in the truth or falsity of a claim in book form or whatever, but the socialogical reasons for the need of the claim to be made in the first place, to read between the lines...One level of MetaPhysics is enough for me in the human arena (otherwise known as Sociology or Psychology, depending on whether you study society as a whole or the individual), but some people are interested in the MetaPhysics of the MetaPhysics...
While this is a political book and therefore likely to be biased, and while I have not read the whole book, I often get a feel for the voice that it is written in by opening the book to interesting sections and start reading. If the voice of the author is balanced and I learn something from those sections, it entices me to read other sections. If enough sections are being presented in a way that I find suitable for further study and I find the subject matter interesting, I will just buy the damn book and add it to my enourmous pile of things to read.
nitro