I bought the second and the third book mentioned and have now started to read both. Both books go into the heart of the matter from the start. I have only read about 10 percent of each of the books, but so far I am very pleased with the content.
The only thing that bothers me is the sense of tunnel-vision that I get from the books. I mean that they restrain themselves too much and seem unwilling to think of new ideas unless they can quote some historical authority. On top of that there seems to be a adversity to using any other than formal language in describing the issues at hand. Maybe that is just my style, but I like a strong metaphor every once in a while to escape from the complex structures built from the theories.
The result is that the books are more rational than I feel is appropriate for the subject. Objectivity need not always be accompanied by "dry language".
I'll give some more in depth feedback when a actually read some more... 
_________________
Kind regards,
-Reinelm"Seeking the Unavoidable"