What do you think?
Rate this book
The Edge of Reason: A Rational Skeptic in an Irrational World
An urgent defense of reason, the essential method for resolving—or even discussing—divisive issues
Reason, long held as the highest human achievement, is under siege. According to Aristotle, the capacity for reason sets us apart from other animals, yet today it has ceased to be a universally admired faculty. Rationality and reason have become political, disputed concepts, subject to easy dismissal.
Julian Baggini argues eloquently that we must recover our reason and reassess its proper place, neither too highly exalted nor completely maligned. Rationality does not require a sterile, scientistic worldview, it simply involves the application of critical thinking wherever thinking is needed. Addressing such major areas of debate as religion, science, politics, psychology, and economics, the author calls for commitment to the notion of a “community of reason,” where disagreements are settled by debate and discussion, not brute force or political power. Baggini's insightful book celebrates the power of reason, our best hope—indeed our only hope—for dealing with the intractable quagmires of our time.
Reason, long held as the highest human achievement, is under siege. According to Aristotle, the capacity for reason sets us apart from other animals, yet today it has ceased to be a universally admired faculty. Rationality and reason have become political, disputed concepts, subject to easy dismissal.
Julian Baggini argues eloquently that we must recover our reason and reassess its proper place, neither too highly exalted nor completely maligned. Rationality does not require a sterile, scientistic worldview, it simply involves the application of critical thinking wherever thinking is needed. Addressing such major areas of debate as religion, science, politics, psychology, and economics, the author calls for commitment to the notion of a “community of reason,” where disagreements are settled by debate and discussion, not brute force or political power. Baggini's insightful book celebrates the power of reason, our best hope—indeed our only hope—for dealing with the intractable quagmires of our time.
272 pages, Hardcover
First published October 25, 2016
66 people are currently reading
473 people want to read
About the author
Julian Baggini
77 books601 followersJulian Baggini is a British philosopher and the author of several books about philosophy written for a general audience. He is the author of The Pig that Wants to be Eaten and 99 other thought experiments (2005) and is co-founder and editor of The Philosophers' Magazine. He was awarded his Ph.D. in 1996 from University College London for a thesis on the philosophy of personal identity. In addition to his popular philosophy books, Baggini contributes to The Guardian, The Independent, The Observer, and the BBC. He has been a regular guest on BBC Radio 4's In Our Time.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
February 5, 2017
I believe that I'm a rational/reasonable person. I am a Christian, who believes in God, while to some that doesn't accord with reason, I'm comfortable with trying to keep faith and reason together in my life. I offer this up as an introduction to a rather interesting book. The author of "The Edge of Reason" might have a different view of religion than do I, but I found that there is much to be affirmed in this book.
Julian Baggini is a philosopher and writer. He believes in the importance of reason and wishes to reclaim it for an increasingly irrational world. I may not be the skeptic that he claims to be, but when it comes to bringing reason back into our conversation, I'm on board. What is helpful about this book is that Baggini recognizes the limits of reason. At one point he takes apart the claims of Scientism, which suggests that science all the answers.
His purpose in writing the book is to help us "develop a notion of reason which is both sufficiently thin and sufficiently substantive to enable this kind of public dialogue, one which allows for a wide variety of opinions on what is in fact reasonable but is not so permissive as to allow any sincerely held opinion" (p. 5). In other words, there needs to be room for dialogue where we can all bring our views to the table, even as we recognize that not all views have value for the conversation.
The book is divided into four parts. He begins with a discussion of judgment in reason. In other words, even as we seek to offer objective reasons for our views, we bring to the conversation our own judgments, which are influenced by context and beliefs. Interestingly, he starts with the question of God (he's not a believer). In this chapter he also discusses the role of science and logic (logic is good, but it doesn't have all the answers). The point is that reason is important to our lives, but it's not fool-proof.
Part 2 is titled "The Guide," and the point here is that reason should be our guide, but again this has to be qualified, and thus there is a chapter on the challenge of psychology. He concludes that "our rationality is a somewhat messy thing that cannot be captured only in the formal processes of logic" (p. 107). I think that is the point that Dr. McCoy tried to make to Mr. Spock! By suggesting that reason is our guide, he speaks of it being an inner guide that "informs but does not dictate oiur decision making" (p. 109). Since he seeks to be as objective as possible in his thinking, he notes five characteristics of being objective: 1) Comprehensibility (moving from the particular to the general); 2) assessability; 3) defeasability (open to revision or rejection); 4) interest-neutrality (epistemic rationality, believing something after setting aside goals and values); 5) compulsion (it is compelling).
Part 3, titled "The Motivator" examines the motives for reason or rational thinking, looking at morality in two forms (rational and scientific) and then examining the claims of reason. Finally, we reach Part 4, which I think is the key to the book. Titled "The King," this section takes the form of two chapters dealing with the State and politics. The title of the section is taken from Plato's vision, laid out in "The Republic," of the value of the philosopher king. Wouldn't it be great if we were ruled by philosophers? Perhaps not, as Plato's Utopian vision was really rather dystopian. Nonetheless there is need for rationality in government! While principle is important, there is a case for pragmatism, for "politics must be about changing the world for the better and that means it is inherently pragmatic" (p. 194). That is, a principle has little value if it can't be implemented, and thus experience is key. He gives as an example the idea of the redistribution of wealth. While that might be good in itself, the way in which it is redistributed can't be based simply on principle. Experience will demonstrate whether or not this can be done, and how it can be done. It might, he reminds us, have unintended consequences. As an advocate for reason, Bagginni sees value in conservatism, especially the Burkeian kind, which understands conservatism as seeing the need to "preserve the institutions, customs and practices of our society in order for us to flourish in that society" (p. 196). That doesn't mean that there is no room for reform, but reform needs to be undertaken with a degree of caution. In that sense I am a conservative. Even as he lays out that idea, he reveals the problems inherent in communism and anarchism. With regard to communism, he points out the overconfidence that Marxists placed in their ability to derive theories from their observations, so that they had scientific precision.They lacked modesty about the imprecision of their political science. Again, the point here is recognition that reason is essential, but it has limits.
If for no other reason, chapter ten is worth one's attention. It is here that he seeks to connect democracy and reason. He writes that "the only fair and tenable political systems are ones that put deliberative reason at their hearts, since reason is the only justifiable tool for negotiating political differences" (p. 211). In pursuit of this vision, he argues for political pluralism, which seeks to "balance and negotiate between competing claims and demands so as to enable as many compatible goods from different incompatible positions as is possible" (p. 212). In other words, the form of democracy he envisions is not mere majoritarianism. What is the biggest threat to this vision? Populism. Yes, the very political vision that seems on the rise, one that has captivated the American populace. This populism isn't simply grass-roots efforts. It has to do with cultivating an "us versus them" mentality. It is an embrace of the idea that what seems to be true to the common person must be true. Thus, power is gained by rejecting the insights of those defined as the elites. If that sounds familiar, it is because this is our time. This section by itself is deeply insightful, because he notes how politics taps into a political consumerism that involves pandering that undermines the foundations of a democratic, pluralist state. There is much more here, including an argument for a pluralistic vision that allows for all voices to be heard, including religious ones, even we seek a more universal/general perspective.
The book concludes with a 52 point summation of his arguments, which emphasize the importance of reason, but recognizing limits. I love the way he closes the book: "Reason is thin ice on which we have no choice but to skate" (p. 245). Indeed!
As noted earlier, Bagginni and I disagree on religion, but on the importance of reason, I'm in agreement. I believe his final chapters dealing with politics are on target. We face a dangerous future, unless we can return to reason. What is interesting is that I received this book some time in the past. I found it odd that the publisher would send a book by a skeptic to a religiously inclined reader/reviewer. So, I put off reading it. But once I started, I found it not only engaging, but thought-provoking. If only we had read this book before the election cycle had begun, perhaps we would be in a different place today.
.
Julian Baggini is a philosopher and writer. He believes in the importance of reason and wishes to reclaim it for an increasingly irrational world. I may not be the skeptic that he claims to be, but when it comes to bringing reason back into our conversation, I'm on board. What is helpful about this book is that Baggini recognizes the limits of reason. At one point he takes apart the claims of Scientism, which suggests that science all the answers.
His purpose in writing the book is to help us "develop a notion of reason which is both sufficiently thin and sufficiently substantive to enable this kind of public dialogue, one which allows for a wide variety of opinions on what is in fact reasonable but is not so permissive as to allow any sincerely held opinion" (p. 5). In other words, there needs to be room for dialogue where we can all bring our views to the table, even as we recognize that not all views have value for the conversation.
The book is divided into four parts. He begins with a discussion of judgment in reason. In other words, even as we seek to offer objective reasons for our views, we bring to the conversation our own judgments, which are influenced by context and beliefs. Interestingly, he starts with the question of God (he's not a believer). In this chapter he also discusses the role of science and logic (logic is good, but it doesn't have all the answers). The point is that reason is important to our lives, but it's not fool-proof.
Part 2 is titled "The Guide," and the point here is that reason should be our guide, but again this has to be qualified, and thus there is a chapter on the challenge of psychology. He concludes that "our rationality is a somewhat messy thing that cannot be captured only in the formal processes of logic" (p. 107). I think that is the point that Dr. McCoy tried to make to Mr. Spock! By suggesting that reason is our guide, he speaks of it being an inner guide that "informs but does not dictate oiur decision making" (p. 109). Since he seeks to be as objective as possible in his thinking, he notes five characteristics of being objective: 1) Comprehensibility (moving from the particular to the general); 2) assessability; 3) defeasability (open to revision or rejection); 4) interest-neutrality (epistemic rationality, believing something after setting aside goals and values); 5) compulsion (it is compelling).
Part 3, titled "The Motivator" examines the motives for reason or rational thinking, looking at morality in two forms (rational and scientific) and then examining the claims of reason. Finally, we reach Part 4, which I think is the key to the book. Titled "The King," this section takes the form of two chapters dealing with the State and politics. The title of the section is taken from Plato's vision, laid out in "The Republic," of the value of the philosopher king. Wouldn't it be great if we were ruled by philosophers? Perhaps not, as Plato's Utopian vision was really rather dystopian. Nonetheless there is need for rationality in government! While principle is important, there is a case for pragmatism, for "politics must be about changing the world for the better and that means it is inherently pragmatic" (p. 194). That is, a principle has little value if it can't be implemented, and thus experience is key. He gives as an example the idea of the redistribution of wealth. While that might be good in itself, the way in which it is redistributed can't be based simply on principle. Experience will demonstrate whether or not this can be done, and how it can be done. It might, he reminds us, have unintended consequences. As an advocate for reason, Bagginni sees value in conservatism, especially the Burkeian kind, which understands conservatism as seeing the need to "preserve the institutions, customs and practices of our society in order for us to flourish in that society" (p. 196). That doesn't mean that there is no room for reform, but reform needs to be undertaken with a degree of caution. In that sense I am a conservative. Even as he lays out that idea, he reveals the problems inherent in communism and anarchism. With regard to communism, he points out the overconfidence that Marxists placed in their ability to derive theories from their observations, so that they had scientific precision.They lacked modesty about the imprecision of their political science. Again, the point here is recognition that reason is essential, but it has limits.
If for no other reason, chapter ten is worth one's attention. It is here that he seeks to connect democracy and reason. He writes that "the only fair and tenable political systems are ones that put deliberative reason at their hearts, since reason is the only justifiable tool for negotiating political differences" (p. 211). In pursuit of this vision, he argues for political pluralism, which seeks to "balance and negotiate between competing claims and demands so as to enable as many compatible goods from different incompatible positions as is possible" (p. 212). In other words, the form of democracy he envisions is not mere majoritarianism. What is the biggest threat to this vision? Populism. Yes, the very political vision that seems on the rise, one that has captivated the American populace. This populism isn't simply grass-roots efforts. It has to do with cultivating an "us versus them" mentality. It is an embrace of the idea that what seems to be true to the common person must be true. Thus, power is gained by rejecting the insights of those defined as the elites. If that sounds familiar, it is because this is our time. This section by itself is deeply insightful, because he notes how politics taps into a political consumerism that involves pandering that undermines the foundations of a democratic, pluralist state. There is much more here, including an argument for a pluralistic vision that allows for all voices to be heard, including religious ones, even we seek a more universal/general perspective.
The book concludes with a 52 point summation of his arguments, which emphasize the importance of reason, but recognizing limits. I love the way he closes the book: "Reason is thin ice on which we have no choice but to skate" (p. 245). Indeed!
As noted earlier, Bagginni and I disagree on religion, but on the importance of reason, I'm in agreement. I believe his final chapters dealing with politics are on target. We face a dangerous future, unless we can return to reason. What is interesting is that I received this book some time in the past. I found it odd that the publisher would send a book by a skeptic to a religiously inclined reader/reviewer. So, I put off reading it. But once I started, I found it not only engaging, but thought-provoking. If only we had read this book before the election cycle had begun, perhaps we would be in a different place today.
.
January 27, 2019
“It is true that we have in the past often placed too much trust in our capacity to think rationally and that greater recognition of the limits of reason is necessary and welcome. But it is not for nothing that ‘losing your reason’ means to go mad. Reason needs to be put in its place, and if that place is not close to the centre of human life then our minds are left rudderless to float this way and that on the waters of whim, emotion and the influences of others.” – page 2
In The Edge of Reason, Julian Baggini adopts a critical stance on the nuanced concept we refer to as ‘reason’ and pulls it apart to determine just how heavily influenced it is by our emotions, biases and contextual environment. Exploring previous philosophical thought, historical applications and a dominant consideration of our information saturated ‘fake news’ contemporary world, Baggini’s goal is to present a wide-ranging analysis of humanity’s use of reason and how individuals can best go about utilising rationality moving forwards. The key to successfully using reason - or rationality, or whatever you want to call it, Baggini uses the terms interchangeably - is to wholeheartedly accept that it is never one-hundred percent accurate and far from being the cold and emotionally detached mental faculty we have historically and philosophically always been led to believe.
The book has four key focuses – reason in relation to our judgements in religion and science; reason in relation to our personal everyday psychology; reason in relation to our understanding of morality; reason in relation to our political beliefs and institutions. For anyone who has studied philosophy, Baggini covers familiar ground, while updating these previous worldviews in relation to our latest understandings in human psychology and neurological consciousness. In my opinion, the inclusion of the psychology and neuroscience disciplines is what really allows the book to shine because Baggini demonstrates empirically just how emotionally-and-contextually entrenched our application of reason has always been… and will always be.
Additionally, the section on reason and political application is also hugely valuable and timely reading for the world’s current political climate. Baggini goes a long way in arguing for why we need a revised understanding and application of reason now more than ever before!
The Edge of Reason is a very tedious read, but this should not be seen as a negative against the book, as it only demonstrates how masterfully and minutely Baggini dissects reason in relation to previous philosophical thought and in relational to his own original thought experiment applications of emotionally-and-contextually-influenced rationality. The section on reason and political application is also hugely valuable and timely reading for the world’s current political climate. Baggini goes a long way in arguing for why we need a revised understanding and application of reason now more than ever before! In the book’s conclusion, Baggini tops off his revaluation by including a very useful and concise fifty-two point overview of how to go about more effectively using reason. Overall, a very important book for the times we live in!
In The Edge of Reason, Julian Baggini adopts a critical stance on the nuanced concept we refer to as ‘reason’ and pulls it apart to determine just how heavily influenced it is by our emotions, biases and contextual environment. Exploring previous philosophical thought, historical applications and a dominant consideration of our information saturated ‘fake news’ contemporary world, Baggini’s goal is to present a wide-ranging analysis of humanity’s use of reason and how individuals can best go about utilising rationality moving forwards. The key to successfully using reason - or rationality, or whatever you want to call it, Baggini uses the terms interchangeably - is to wholeheartedly accept that it is never one-hundred percent accurate and far from being the cold and emotionally detached mental faculty we have historically and philosophically always been led to believe.
The book has four key focuses – reason in relation to our judgements in religion and science; reason in relation to our personal everyday psychology; reason in relation to our understanding of morality; reason in relation to our political beliefs and institutions. For anyone who has studied philosophy, Baggini covers familiar ground, while updating these previous worldviews in relation to our latest understandings in human psychology and neurological consciousness. In my opinion, the inclusion of the psychology and neuroscience disciplines is what really allows the book to shine because Baggini demonstrates empirically just how emotionally-and-contextually entrenched our application of reason has always been… and will always be.
Additionally, the section on reason and political application is also hugely valuable and timely reading for the world’s current political climate. Baggini goes a long way in arguing for why we need a revised understanding and application of reason now more than ever before!
The Edge of Reason is a very tedious read, but this should not be seen as a negative against the book, as it only demonstrates how masterfully and minutely Baggini dissects reason in relation to previous philosophical thought and in relational to his own original thought experiment applications of emotionally-and-contextually-influenced rationality. The section on reason and political application is also hugely valuable and timely reading for the world’s current political climate. Baggini goes a long way in arguing for why we need a revised understanding and application of reason now more than ever before! In the book’s conclusion, Baggini tops off his revaluation by including a very useful and concise fifty-two point overview of how to go about more effectively using reason. Overall, a very important book for the times we live in!
December 19, 2019
This is an excellent book. The author emphasises the importance of reason, as "Gradually the contemporary West has become more and more dismissive of the power of reason. Caring for it less, we often find we have carelessly left it behind". To those watching the political and social landscape with a critical eye, conspiracy theories, fake news, the rise of populism, our inaptitude to tackle climate change - only to name a few examples - underline this statement, while the restriction to the West has obviously to be given up. But what do we mean by reason? This is the topic the book is about. In the author's view it is not (exclusively) represented by use of classical logic. Rather, as the title of the book suggests, in the end the answer to the question leaves us without a sharp delineation, but gives a clear line of arguments for the use of reason and scepticism.
March 6, 2019
Insightful and practical. It's challenging the notion of how we view rationality and reason per se. On the side note, a working background in philosophy is important. Although the author expanded the term and explanations of philosophical terms and theories applied to religion, science, and politics, there were still some matters discussed that concerns wholly within the field of philosophy alone.
August 27, 2017
I very much enjoyed The Edge of Reason: A Rational Skeptic in an Irrational World. I almost didn't buy the book because the subtitle put me off but I'm glad I read it. I was also skeptical as I started to read the first chapter but my concerns were dispelled as I read. The book reminds me a bit of Nozick's The Nature of Rationality. For me it is reminiscent of the better parts of Robert Pirsig's ideas. This book is one of the more conservative philosophy books that I've read; and I think this is good. The book builds up to a fine chapter about political pluralism as opposed to political consumerism that is our current political populism which is perhaps the greatest threat to our pluralist republic. I appreciate his attempts to put forward a political pluralism in lieu of liberal pluralism. Nothing calls out louder for it than many of today's Western political climate.
My favorite quote from the book: "An appropriate skepticism should make philosophers and others accept that what they do is indeed inherently somewhat speculative and always in danger of collapsing into bullshit. Reason is thin ice on which we have no choice but to skate."
My favorite quote from the book: "An appropriate skepticism should make philosophers and others accept that what they do is indeed inherently somewhat speculative and always in danger of collapsing into bullshit. Reason is thin ice on which we have no choice but to skate."
August 8, 2019
I found many parts a bit unsettling, because very often we get trapped in our own philosophical value judgments or routines, and realize that we haven't really fully reasoned it out. But as the title suggests, we're compelled to explore the edges of it.
This is good reasoning, vis-a-vis the notion that technology is a panacea (p. 196):
What we must not do is start with a blank slate, determining what the ideal society will look like and then attempting to re-order society to be this Utopian vision, irrespective of how society is now. That way lies ruin. Connected with this point is the observation in the 19th century English cleric...that, “It is far more easy to pull down, tend to pull up, and to destroy, then to preserve.“ Society is a product of a long process of gradual evolution. From an objective viewpoint, it may seem hard to see why any particular part of it is necessary…When we destroy these institutions and replace them with something designed by theoreticians, we risk missing the wisdom of history, of our ancestors, and replacing it was something with much shallow roots. But what is more, we are destroying what took years to develop and replacing it with something untried and untested. For conservatives, this is folly and hubris.
This is good reasoning, vis-a-vis the notion that technology is a panacea (p. 196):
What we must not do is start with a blank slate, determining what the ideal society will look like and then attempting to re-order society to be this Utopian vision, irrespective of how society is now. That way lies ruin. Connected with this point is the observation in the 19th century English cleric...that, “It is far more easy to pull down, tend to pull up, and to destroy, then to preserve.“ Society is a product of a long process of gradual evolution. From an objective viewpoint, it may seem hard to see why any particular part of it is necessary…When we destroy these institutions and replace them with something designed by theoreticians, we risk missing the wisdom of history, of our ancestors, and replacing it was something with much shallow roots. But what is more, we are destroying what took years to develop and replacing it with something untried and untested. For conservatives, this is folly and hubris.
August 14, 2019
Splendid. The book contains parts that constitute segments of a wider philosophical debate and friction among different philosophical schools of thought- this fact can render the book a bit heavy for the reader.
Nevertheless, I found the book very illuminating in its effort to praise reason without handing it the keys for everything. Reason always contains a portion of judgement and is developed due to our own life circumstances.
“Objective reason must be comprehensible, assessable, defeasible, interest-neutral and compelling”
“Logic is one of the most powerful tools of reason, but it’s not the essence of rationality itself.”
“As in the purely factual one, the ability to reason morally requires a kind of empathetic cognitive capacity that some lack”.
Nevertheless, I found the book very illuminating in its effort to praise reason without handing it the keys for everything. Reason always contains a portion of judgement and is developed due to our own life circumstances.
“Objective reason must be comprehensible, assessable, defeasible, interest-neutral and compelling”
“Logic is one of the most powerful tools of reason, but it’s not the essence of rationality itself.”
“As in the purely factual one, the ability to reason morally requires a kind of empathetic cognitive capacity that some lack”.
March 30, 2020
Puts "reason" in its place as one of several modes of thinking that are necessary to human beings.
The section on politics seemed naïve ― as if he did a quick look at Wikipedia to get his understanding of communism and anarchism ― and some sections got a little too much into academic philosophy considering the intended audience, but you can skim those if you wish.
I have quite a few stickies marking paragraphs to revisit in the first few chapters but they tailed off towards the end as, although it was applying his ideas to new topics, I'd got the point, I think.
Still, worth reading if you want to read some philosophy that is more practical than the highly academic works that seem more common.
The section on politics seemed naïve ― as if he did a quick look at Wikipedia to get his understanding of communism and anarchism ― and some sections got a little too much into academic philosophy considering the intended audience, but you can skim those if you wish.
I have quite a few stickies marking paragraphs to revisit in the first few chapters but they tailed off towards the end as, although it was applying his ideas to new topics, I'd got the point, I think.
Still, worth reading if you want to read some philosophy that is more practical than the highly academic works that seem more common.
August 3, 2018
Talks about what reason is, and it's limitations. Opened my mind to what philosophy is, which is about using rationality to make critical arguments. Quite a fascinating read, though a little heavy at times.
Some key learnings from the book:
- Judgement is fundamental to rationality, and is required in the entire process of making a rational argument.
- There is no single Scientific method which scientists can agree on.
- Reason has limitations. It is important to know it's limitations in the pursuit of rationality.
Some key learnings from the book:
- Judgement is fundamental to rationality, and is required in the entire process of making a rational argument.
- There is no single Scientific method which scientists can agree on.
- Reason has limitations. It is important to know it's limitations in the pursuit of rationality.
October 2, 2020
To be honest, I only skimmed through the book. I hope to take the time and be able to focus on the book’s content at some future point. Given the state of the world and especially the United States, a promotion of “reason” certainly seems appropriate.
I did pick up a useful aphorism for these times, “However, just as you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink, so you can lead a mind to reason but you cannot make it think.”
I did read the section on “The Eternal God Argument.” I need to focus on the rest of the book when my power of concentration return.
I did pick up a useful aphorism for these times, “However, just as you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink, so you can lead a mind to reason but you cannot make it think.”
I did read the section on “The Eternal God Argument.” I need to focus on the rest of the book when my power of concentration return.
July 23, 2018
This book made me change my mind about my belief in scientism. A bit softer on that now.
August 28, 2018
Informative, exciting, challenging, very readable and above all reasonable.
December 9, 2020
The Catholicism of rational discourse. Without a foundation society cannot find a basis to both order itself and find a way forward to a more complete future.
December 23, 2021
Interesting ideas, but a tad repetitive and sometimes just seems like a bit of academic ranting
September 8, 2016
Very good, fair, wide ranging, very reasonable throughout
Read
December 6, 2017This short book is one everyone needs to read today, when reason is under attack as never before. The author discusses what reason is, why it is necessary for a civilized society, and its limitations.
Read
April 13, 2019Loved it!
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews