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.

Q: Neither Thrilling, nor Chilling. . I'm scared to death of aliens, and I love nothing more than a good campfire tale, so I was so excited when I found this book.  I expected it to be a collection of great, creepy, true-sounding stories, kind of like urban legends, that you could tell to a group of friends to keep them up at night.  Boy, was I wrong.  It's just a collection of short stories about aliens.  Most of them are more sci-fi like than scary.  I was expecting stories of the traditional "alien encounter" type, but that's not what's in here.  They're not horribly written, just not really what the book promises.      The shape of the book is great, though.  It's got a sturdy cover, and it's made sort of like a field guide.  If it did contain creepy tales to tell around the campfire, it would be perfect to stuff in your backpack.  Too bad.

A: NEG
****
Q: boring, more of the same . This is simply a rehash of Dr. Burns previous writings. If you have read Feeling Good, it is a waste of money to purchase this book. He covers the same material but change the names the scenerios. He is a one trick pony and clearly has done no more recent research , since the prior books

A: NEG
****
Q: Myth under the guise of 'science'- A warning from a professional logician . If you want to read a Classic of Western Mythology, look no further.  This is specious philosophy under the guise of a supposed 'truth' about reality.  The tragedy of all this is noticing other reviewers' comments about how the contents of this book negatively influenced their lives.  Dawkins belief that we are machines created by our genes is a misleading view of reality, and when evolutionary 'science' catches up with evolutionary 'philosophy,' this view will come out false.  This could only be taken seriously by those who are so blinded by the details that they can no longer think straight, so they are not able to figure out where the argument is wrong, let alone realize something IS wrong with it.    What almost everyone doesn't seem to understand, even about VALID arguments is this: ALL a valid argument does is set up a tug of war between the premises being true and the conclusion being false.  If the conclusion is OUTRAGEOUS, you don't, "bite the bullet," "swallow the medicine," and accept the conclusion anyway.  You say there MUST be something wrong with the premises, even if you can't point out where the mistake is.  It took some 2,000 years before someone came up with a solution to why Zeno's argument that 'nothing moves' is incorrect.  But during that period of time, NO ONE (except maybe a few fools here and there- probably 'intellectuals' like this Dawkins character) accepted the conclusion that nothing moves

A:
NEG
****