TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: Post-modern science fiction . Maybe I'm just not the right demographic for this novel, but I hated the beginning, tolerated the middle and put it down permanently near the end. The model is the Canterbury Tales of Chaucer, but I don't think it works. I just never got interested in the characters enough to care what happened to them and for me, the story--stories, really--never came into focus. I guess the New York Times Book Review should have tipped me off because they compare it to Frank Herbert's Dune and the Foundation series of Asimov, both of which, in my opinion have aged really badly. I never realized how bad Dune was until I saw the awful movie of it. The fundamental metaphors operating in Hyperion seem to be backwards living. Well, ok, but I just don't see what it is a metaphor for. Nor, by page 473 where I finally gave up, did I care

SOLUTION: NEG

PROBLEM: This is a great book! . This books makes the cutest models and manipulative things! If you make lapbooks, or notebooks for your units this would be the thing to get. There are things here I have seen nowhere else. It is adaptable up or down to the grade level it shows. Perfect for homeschooling. I have used some of it in a group as well

SOLUTION: POS

PROBLEM: Most obstinate denial of the most obvious . The author fancies himself a Copernicus, by, similarly to the reversal of the notion that the sun revolves around the earth, rendering the notion of consciousness an "illusion" (last word, p.178). His ego is indeed enormous, my knowing of no other author quoting (p.45) and incessantly citing his own writing. The notion of the sun revolving is an inference, from observing its change of position relative to the earth, and motion indeed is considered relative. But consciousness is not an inference. It is the most immediate phenomenon by which everything we know, or imagine, is manifested. Dennett persistently investigates distinctions in our brains, from dispositions to memories, often couching them in esoteric or otherwise unfamiliar terms, while sidestepping the simple fact that whatever the detailed particulars, all is presented to us through the medium of consciousness. He puts great emphasis on the third-person approach, like questioning a subject about his perceptions, so as to discover misunderstandings about the inner workings of the mind, forgetting that all of these, whether actual perceptions or beliefs or else, are ingredients of consciousness. This his "scientific method", compared to first-person introspection, is the only approved one. It is shared by others. Like Patricia Churchland, he has contempt for "folk" psychology, pitting it against favored "academic" (p.35). They also share a derogatory attitude toward dissenters, regarding them as reactionaries (p.8) or naysayers. The views are admittedly materialist, holding Cartesian dualism of mind and body "bankrupt" or a "disaster", as does John Searle. Why? Descartes is not in line with their assumed all-inclusive scientific method, embraced also by philosophers, who traditionally delved deeper into issues of knowledge. I do so newly in my book and here wish to note that however physical inquiry progresses, consciousness, via which the inquiry is made, remains a distinct phenomenon.

SOLUTION:
NEG