As a Sociology Professor myself, I plan on teaching this book this coming fall in my religion course. It follows a small, but in my view, correct trend in the social sciences and humanities, to take spiritual questions seriously. Rather than summarize the book or deliver a "peer" review, I would say instead that the book should appeal to anyone who thinks, or suspects, that natural science can offer only limited insight on religion, mind, and emotions. We have far more and different ways of knowing than the logic of the experiment, or as I call it, the slice and dice methodologies. People are more complex and dynamic than that. Similar books, whose authors also see problems in the sciences (both natural and social sciences) when it comes to religion, would be Landscapes of the Soul by Douglas Porpora, To Have or to Be? by Erich Fromm, and several by Huston Smith. This book also challenges the crude reductionism of people like Rodney Stark (a sociologist), who reduces everything past and present, including religion, to rational choice. If you believe that being human involves more than rational choices and genetic compulsion, this book should prove interesting, even compelling. Lastly, I'm not sure what Peter Fuchs really wants to say about the book in his review, because much of it doesn't make sense, whether he read the book or not.