Each year, I stack all of the books from the previous year’s reading list next to me and reminisce over the reading year. It’s one of my favorite yearly podcast episodes and it’s a great way for you to hear about some books to add to your reading list.

2025 was an incredible year of reading. I continued on in the third year of my Immortal Books project. The main focus was on Greek Tragedies, Comedies, History, and Philosophy.

In this episode, I cover the year as a whole, some of my favorite works, and some best of lists.

Here are some of my favorite podcast episodes from 2025:

The Braveheart film has had an outsized impact on my life. It first sparked a deep interest in the country of Scotland, that try as I might, I cannot shake. It inspired me to purchase a set of bagpipes and then learn how to play them. But it also had deeper implications in the areas of faith and living.

In this book, the author of both the novel Braveheart as well as the screenplay that became the famous film, Randall Wallace, provides an autobiography that shows a close connection between his life and the Braveheart story. It’s an exploration of fatherhood, faith, and truth. And I loved it.

The two pillars of this reading project are to read more books and to remember what I read. To that end, I’ve experimented with a variety of practices to attempt to assist with memory. I’m always on the hunt for new ideas.

That’s how I came across Rhetorica Ad Herennium by [Cicero]. Cicero is in brackets because it’s not certain that he is the author. So, author unknown, but content exceptional. This is the oldest surviving work we have about ways to remember what you hear and learn.

This was written around 90BC and the techniques are still used today. The main idea is to place an intermediary background between your memory and the thing you are trying to remember. I always just go right to the thing. If I want to memorize a poem, I brute force my way into my memory bank by reading it over and over again. I never thought to place that poem against a background to enhance the likelihood of remembrance.

In this episode, I cover a very short 10-page section of this larger work that deals with memory. I share how Cicero or not-Cicero suggests creating a background or room in which to place images that relate to words or subject matter. The more striking and odd the image, the more likely it will be remembered.

This practice is not natural to me and it actually seems counterintuitive. But, if it’s worked for 2,000+ years, there’s something to it. I’m going to give it a try.

Book Version - Loeb Classical Library book 403 - Rhetorica Ad Herennium

I started reading through the complete dialogues of Plato this year. I came to a point where I realized that Plato was referencing philosophers who came before him and I didn’t know anything about them or their ideas. I took a break from Plato to consider these philosophers who gave the seeds to Plato’s philosophy.

These philosophers are called the Presocratics and the Sophists. They are Pre-Socrates in that their ideas precede Socrates, not necessarily that they preceded him historically. The Presocratic philosophers discussed in this podcast episode lived between 600 - 400BC. Socrates lived between 469 - 399BC.

I read The First Philosophers with a translation and introduction by Robin Waterfield. In the introduction, Waterfield says “Presocratic thought was holistic : it was an attempt to give a systematic account of the whole known universe and all its major features.” They cover ideas such as the soul, happiness, and the makeup of things. You can see not only their intellectual method but also their ideas in the dialogues of Plato.

In this episode, I cover four of my favorite Presocratic philosophers (Heraclitus, Parmenides, Pythagoras, and Empedocles) and some of their ideas. I also share the one thing that stuck out to me the most about these fathers of philosophy.

An introduction to this reading project for anyone new to Books of Titans. I started this in 2017 as an attempt to read more books and experiment with ways to help me remember what I read. It’s morphed into a lifelong reading project that I now expect to last until I die as I slowly make my way through The Immortal Books. Give this episode a listen to learn more and then give my wife Stephanie’s music a listen as well!

“The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato.”

~ Alfred North Whitehead

I’ve been enjoying my Plato Project where I’ve decided to read through the Complete Works of Plato. I’ve read 9 dialogues so far and realized I needed to take a step back and learn more about the philosopher himself. This was the perfect book for that endeavor.

Robin Waterfield covers the basic known facts about the life of Plato, his friendships, his practical application of philosophy, especially with the king of Syracuse, and the Academy he started in Athens. It is a fascinating look at how Plato’s life fed into his philosophy.

In this episode, I cover the main things I learned about Plato and share the One Thing that stuck out the most.

Enjoy!

I’m making the wild assumption that you like books. Perhaps that’s because you like what’s inside of books - the stories, ideas, information, history. But do you ever just stop and think about the book itself? The physical book that you hold in your hand?

Joel J Miller has a book coming out this Tuesday, November 18th, 2025 called The Idea Machine: How Books Built Our World and Shape Our Future. It’s a book about the book. It’s a richly researched account of the history of the book through the ages, how Christians played a large role in its eventual format, and how the organization and categorization of ancient and moderns libraries led to the A.I. tools of today.

I read an advance copy of the book a few months back and absolutely loved it. It gave me a new appreciation for book, the perfect idea transfer technology. In this podcast episode, I share some of my favorite ideas from the book and tie in some things Joel spoke about during a book event I attended on Thursday evening, November 13th.

If you live in the Nashville area, Joel will be at Landmark Booksellers on the book’s release date of Tuesday, November 18th at 6pm. Jeff Goins will conduct the interview.

You can also order a signed copy of the book from Landmark Booksellers. I think you’ll enjoy it.

The goal of this dialogue is to define the Sophist. We’ve seen the Sophist pop up in Greek Tragedy and Comedy and it’s never a pretty picture. They are often contrasted with the Philosopher, the true lover of wisdom, and are denigrated as those who have the appearance of wisdom. They are known for charging money to teach their students how to argue a point, irrespective of its truth.

In attempting to define the Sophist, Plato must overcome a snag put forward by the philosopher Parmenides. Parmenides has stated that false statements are impossible:

“This should not ever prevail in your thought: that the things that are not, are; rather do you keep your mind well shut off from just this way of searching.”

Basically, don’t think or talk about things that have no being; things that don’t exist. However, if that is the case, there is nothing false and everything a person says is true. Everything is relative.

In order to define the Sophist, Plato must show that something that is not, is. He does this by saying that the false is something other than or different from the true. Plato’s Forms must be true. Do things that are false also have Forms? No, they are simply other than or different from Forms.

Therefore, the Sophist is one who makes false imitations of true things. He is not a philosopher.

This dialogue hurt by brain. I read it three times using different translations in an attempt to struggle through it and try and understand it. I share what I learned in this episode and I hope the work makes it so that you see the dialogue in a fresh way. As always, if I’ve gotten anything incorrect, please help me learn by commenting below.

Show Notes:

Book Versions I Read:

* Plato Complete Works - edited by John M. Cooper - translated by Nicholas P. White

* Plato: Collected Dialogues - edited by Edith Hamilton & Huntington Cairns - translated by F.M. Cornford

* Plato Sophist: The Professor of Wisdom by Eva Brann, Peter Kalkavage, Eric Salem

The Division Thicket (from the introduction in Plato Sophist: The Professor of Wisdom):

The goal of this dialogue is the definition of a statesman. Can Plato show us the essence or nature of the statesman? This dialogue is a sequel to Sophist. In each dialogue, an attempt at a definition is sought through the method of division. For example, Statesman begins with Knowledge, which is divided into practical and theoretical knowledge. The statesman would be on the theoretical side.

This division occurs until the discussion partners Visitor from Elea and Socrates the Younger describe the statesman as a shepherd or herder of humans. That doesn’t work, and so a Deus Ex Machina of sorts jumps in through the telling of a myth. In the myth, the ages of Cronus and Zeus are contrasted and the dialog is set on a different path. That path leads to a definition or essence of the statesman as more of a weaver of disparate parts.

The dialogue then gets into different types of governments and the role of law within each set. It posits the best form of government (rule by statesman through special, expert knowledge) but admits that such a person is unlikely. The next best thing is the rule by imitator (Sophist?) who rules by the existing set of laws, despite the likelihood of injustice.

I loved this dialogue. The surprise appearance of the myth was so delightful and the discussion about law, types of government, courage, and governance utterly fascinating. In this episode, In this episode, I give an overview of the arguments and take a look at the myth and it’s relation to the definition of the statesman.

Show Notes:

* Want to discuss White Nights by Fyodor Dostoevsky? Simply become a paid subscriber here on the Books of Titans Substack and you’ll receive details about our November 12th Zoom call to discuss this short novel.

I finished reading Man’s Search for Meaning as the fireworks announced the start of 2018. I was closing out my first year of this reading project with my final book of the year and was trying to finish it before the clock struck 12. I didn’t make it, but I was close.

That book ended up being my favorite for many years. Here was a man claiming that it was possible to develop a spiritual life amidst hell on earth. Amidst hunger, torture, unbearable loss, and despair. There was a flicker of hope.

Last week, I led a reading group through Man’s Search for Meaning. It was my first time re-reading it since late 2017. It was startling to see how I’ve changed in that time, both personally and in my reading life. I mark up my books and use different color pens on re-reads, so it was clear what stuck out the first time and what stuck out these 8 years later.

I’ve also read a number of books I hadn’t read before my first Frankl reading. Those books have impacted me, have deepened my convictions, and have perhaps provided another angle on Frankl. One of those books, The Gulag Archipelago by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, was life-altering. I read that one late 2019. In re-reading Man’s Search for Meaning, I see a number of similarities between these two books.

In this podcast episode, I share some things that stuck out to 2025 Erik that didn’t stick out as much to 2017 Erik. I also share some important similarities between Man’s Search for Meaning and The Gulag Archipelago.

If you’d like to listen to the original podcast episode after the 2017 reading of the book, you can do so here: