"Through his [journal] account, [Marco Polo] led both East and West into the future. It was not a peaceful prospect ... it was as pagan as it was pious, but it was recognizably human; it was a world in which people reached across geographic, religious, and political boundaries to connect.

"Unlike the isolation imposed by the harsh conditions of the Middle Ages, Marco’s vision of the future required constant travel, endless trading, and ceaseless communication in many languages. It was a world in which Christians traded with Muslims, with "idolaters," with anyone who grasped the rudiments of trade — and in which an entire regime, such as the Yuan dynasty, incorporated individuals from an astonishing variety of cultures, all in the service of an ideal.

"It was blended and heterodox, ultimately unified not by a government, or a system of belief, but by a force Marco believed to be even more universal, and thus more powerful: the impulse to trade." Thanks to both you and your team for providing us with incredible programming that is both thought-provoking and inspiring.

This was a thoroughly enlightening interview, and Mr. Nasr seems to have a clear and scholarly picture of many important Middle Eastern and world issues. However, the really big takeaway from this interview is the following unanswered question by Mr. Nasr:

"And we have to really ask not why Islam is ascendant, not what is wrong with Muslims, but what is wrong with secularism. Why is secularism sick? Why is it waning? Particularly in the most advanced country in the world, the United States. Why is secularism under siege?"

I waited breathlessly for Mr. Nasr's answer to this brilliant question (most brilliant questions are a wise reframing of the issue from an alternative viewpoint), but the conversation moved on without a pause for consideration. I wonder if secularism is under siege for similar reasons to the US free market global capitalist economy being under siege? Perhaps there is something really important missing from both of the se ideologies, and maybe these two legs of European global domination are starting to buckle under the weight of their own limitations?

As we ponder the collapsing mountains of debt that were the fuel for realizing our dream of true globalism, let us also consider the changes in social behavior that consumer secularism has programmed into each succeeding generation of Americans and ask ourselves if we are headed in the right direction as a civilization?

I am an atheist, and I listen to your program "religiously!" It generally proves that religion has blindfolded the potential of the human mind. No better proof than the most eloquent interview with Vali Nasr on Iran, who I thought was brilliant on the basis of presenting the ideological Sunni-Shia Muslim conflict map and illustrating how any fundamentalism, Muslim or Christian, completely misses the point that reality calls for respect for our differences and cooperation on our practical and intellectual goals.

I think it would be good if more people in the United States had a better understanding of the total picture in the Middle East. Is there a way that I can read the comments that have been submitted by other listeners in response to the programs? I would guess that that are probably a lot of meaningless comments submitted but there would likely be some concepts expressed that would be very valuable and meaningful. I believe that in the mind of the general public there is a wealth of wisdom that never gets expressed. I hope that there is a way to bring this to the surface. I think if you listen carefully that sometimes good knowledge can come from very unlikely sources.

This week's excellent discussion with Vali Nasr about the complexity of the Sunni-Shia divide and the implications for America's intervention in Iraq needs to reach a much wider audience. I am hopeful that your insightful series will gain more recognition as a new administration more curious about foreign customs and realities assumes the American pulpit.

The interview on today's show with the Professor Vali Nasr was very interesting. It was disturbing to learn that the professor feels that most people are moving towards a religious view of the world and that only the US and Europe are secular regions.

I am not a Marxist, but Marx was correct when he stated "religion is the opiate of the masses." However, he did not go far enough. Religion inspires the masses towards militant proselytizing. Every religious group eventually wants to exert dominance over every other religious group.

There must be a better way. The Communists made dedication to the State a religion. The US has adopted consumerism as its religion (because Christianity clearly is not practiced.) Clearly, we need a new idea.

I kept thinking as I listened your learned Islamic guest discuss the crucial Sunni/Shia divide in Iraq: of all the other religious divides that would seem so absurd to an extra-terrestrial intelligence, or, perhaps, to an angel.

The Thirty Years' War, for instance, between Protestants and Catholics. Or the slaughter of the so-called Cathar Heretics in Southern France by the Papal forces. Or the destruction of so many innocent lives by the Inquisition, from England, to Mexico, to Spain, to Italy.

If most human beings did not always genuflect inwardly, whenever the words "god" and "faith" and "religion" are mentioned, we could perhaps grow up and face the music — as dreadful secular Europe has done. What modern science and common sense strongly suggests is that there is no god, there is no future state, and that religion therefore is superstition.

Furthermore, it is a superstition that protects its real estate through bigotry and violence, and murder. The better way is the life of reason, for which no human being has ever been burned at the stake or decapitated, so far as I know.

The interview with Vali Nasr helped me understand the sources of violence that occurred after the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the mistakes the US made in not preparing for the aftermath of this invasion. I also appreciated Professor Nasr's comments about how little the US can really do to effect the large historical changes sin the Shia/Sunni Islamic worlds.