In this task, you are given books product reviews in English language. The goal is to classify the review as "POS" if the overall sentiment of the review is positive or as "NEG" if the overall sentiment of the review is negative.

[EX Q]: Macromedia Flash MX ActionScript Bible . I find this book very well writen. Info is complete and correct.  This is however on an old version of flash. As long as your looking for a flash 6 book this is the best text I have found. Works great as a refrence as well
[EX A]: POS

[EX Q]: Poor excuse for a thriller . Rising Sun was a terrible read.  Crichton uses one device throughout:  the old hand knows everything an hour before the young guy and slowly reveals it to him.  It's tiring and monotonous.  Never mind the even more monotonous lectures on the differences between American and Japanese business cultures.
[EX A]: NEG

[EX Q]: McGrath's Agnosticism??? . Reading some reviews and the blurbs for this book one could be forgiven for thinking that McGrath has dealt a crushing blow to Dawkins. Far from it. What we actually have is a Christian Theologian basically answering Dawkins with 'Not in MY religion.' It is a defense of his own personal Christian beliefs and there is virtually no mention of other religions nor recognition of differences within Christianity itself.     McGrath makes an argument that we can only be agnostic yet only applies this to atheists and clearly not to himself and other Christians. He does not say what he believes about the many other gods and spirits etc humans believe or believed in though it is only possible to conclude that he must be an atheist where they are concerned.    There is a valid point he makes about the correlation between religious belief and health and well-being but this does not mean that religious belief is the cause of the health. If religious belief caused good health and well-being then, as the vast majority of people who have ever lived have had one religious belief or another, we would expect the world have always been overflowing with health etc. This is obvously not the case.    The only evidence offered for God is how nature makes us feel - nature being the pointer towards the beauty of God. He conveniently avoids telling us what parasites, diseases, predation, tsunamis etc etc tell us about God.     McGrath says that the question of God's existence is not a scientific question. 'It's more like the question of whether democracy is better than totalitarianism.' PRECISELY! Religions are the products of (almost exclusively) male minds. They are linked to self-interested tribal identity both to bond and identify 'us' and distinguish us from 'them'. And this is where Dawkins is lost on McGrath - Dawkins' writings undermine the very foundations for divisions and hierarchies not only of humans but of all life. Dawkins' frustration no doubt partly comes from the fact that evolved human tribalism is as ingrained as it so unfortunately is. McGrath himself knows and says that religious belief is about identity and status.    Finally, McGrath never touches on the most obvious point of religion - the promise of immortality. If this is not self-interested narcissism, a need to believe oneself so special that one cannot die and will reap great rewards in heaven, then I don't know what is. The dangers involved in this thinking are not addressed.    If McGrath truly believes we can all only be agnostic then he should be trying to persuade his fellow believers and not just atheists. If religious people worldwide adopted agnosticism it may dampen the flames of divisive, tribal religious fervor and increase general humility to everyone's benefit.    In the meantime I'm looking forward to reading Dawkins' 'The God Delusion'
[EX A]:
NEG