C

Devoid of the basic knowledge common to a college sophmore.

Revisado: 05-24-24

The book's thrust hinges on an imaginary economy not troubled by the basic realities of biology, sociology, psychology, criminology, chemistry, history, geography, and most importantly economics.
If you read this demagoguery and found it appealing - here, in the style of the author, is your reality check:
There's an island of 20 people, as no society of 3 would likely persist long enough to mean anything (biology). Around the island are various fishing holes, some are exceptionally productive, i.e. a scarce resource, while others are not (economics and ecology). Because the world starts with scarce resources as a factor, there is conflict from word go (economics, sociology, biology, history, ecology). A minority, who's predominate virtue is to be of exceptional in the delivery of violence takes control of the best fishing holes. They and their progeny enjoy plenty of good nutrition, health, and leisure. The less fortunate scrape out a lesser living with lesser results - malnutrition and frustration leads to meanness and unfortunate children for some while plenty breeds a class of "royalty". (do I have to keep referencing basic concepts of present and historical reality and the fields that support them?)
Over time the royalty produce less capable offspring by simple chance (science, math - again). However the advantage of royalty existed long enough, and has and is/was used to devise nets. No one who devised or produced the first nets ever went hungry or went without, though nonsensical myths of a noble "two marshmallow child" abound. These myths of sacrifice and superiority are used to rationalize using the nets to take all of the fish. Rights to take the fish are secured by using pre-existing wealth to employ knights/lieutenants/police who protect the 'natural' order and the 'rights' of the nobilty. The plebiscite competes to be fed by the nobility - offering more and more work for less and less fish. The nobilty call them complacent and pathetic because they are deluded and in part to rationalize their violation of basic inborn human ethics, or in large in part because they have only a shadow of the intellect of their forebearers. If the plebiscite tries to make nets they are beaten, and if necessary killed for stealing the intellectual property of their betters. Leaving the island is difficult to survive, if not impossible. Some try anyway. most fail. they are also used as examples to maintain the status quo. Even loss can be useful.
The cycle continues. Soon the brightest of the plebiscite is employed to invent things for the royalty for the same meager living they have always had. The royalty gain even more wealth and control. The best of the plebes remain in their place despite clear intellectual, moral, and even physcial superiority to the 'nobles' because a long proven system of incentives and punishments, and a system of exponentially growing disparity.
The best plebes always receive a little more than somebody else to increase their compliance and support delusions that society is just. The threat of violence and starvation is ever present and quite severe, ensuring that 'self interest' means that the plebiscite does not try to better their own lot unless they are exceptionally irrational. These plebes do happen, rarely. They are used as a tool to say the game isn't rigged, and are thereby the perfect tool, hence why they persist in popping up. They aren't numerous enough to be a threat thanks to simple math, and they buttress an illusion of justice for those ignorant of history, sociology, psychology, biology, economics and the rest of human knowledge.
The story of history procedes rather predictably right up until some self-superior ego maniac of some kind writes a book so ignorant it beffudles anyone gifted with perception beyond their own ego.
A society in a vacuum, that always rewarded effective work, would be lovely. Nothing close to that has ever, ever existed, nor even has its approximation. This is the result of basic pre existing conditions. Such a society could exist, but it surely won't by perpetuating the narcissistic fantasy of some exceptionally fortunate fool that it already does, or has, anywhere on earth.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

interesting, over reaching

Revisado: 07-14-23

Positives about the work:
Interesting interpretations
Relatively fluid
Enthusiastic reading
Ostensibly data driven (though what working person could fact check such an endless stream of claims???)

Negatives about the work:
Breathless Arrogance
Riddled with huge assumptions
The reading can be a bit obnoxious
We get treated to views that are racist, agist and/or generally jingoist from yet another apparent uber mensch

To the author, or any other member of Gen X with popularly agist views, do watch swimming with the sharks - a movie where Boomer Kevin Spacey rips into his Gen X employee and the entire entitled, impatient, lazy, over sensitive and stupid generation that is GenX.
Ignorance and agism is popular in every cycle. Although, with any luck, in 10 years there won't be nearly so many millennial authors spouting so much insipid, mealy mouthed garbage about Gen Z. There have been ignorant people in every generation, but hey, fingers crossed.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

courage, passion, honesty, intelligence

Revisado: 05-16-23

Douglas Murray's work is representative of the academic class people assume they have, rather than the one that has evolved. I don't agree with everything I read, but I respect all the arguments I heard, as they were crafted with data and reason. I will be thinking much on what I found. Would that all our academics were like this, rather than what so many have become. I wouldn't worry a whit about our future if it were so.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Not a science book

Revisado: 04-30-23

I really wanted to know about the author's scientific research. I did not want to read the author's stab at poetry and prose. I do not like poetry all that much. This book is poetry more than it is science. I hope he writes a book that details and explains his medical work, not his take poetic take on the Neanderthal experience or other such diversions. I would love to buy it.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Redundant, with a healthy dose of prattling

Revisado: 03-01-23

Ray Dalio is clearly a smart person, and clever investor. I find his work on macro economic shifts very interesting and helpful.
This book does a lot of postulating on general human behavior, and has a bad habit of making sweeping statements - many of which contradict each other. If I was to guess, this book suffered the hippo treatment. I get the impression that Ray Dalio would have taken the constructive criticism that would have made this book better. My belief is that as a hippo - he never got it.
Ray, you almost certainly don't read these, but if by chance you see this: choose more truthful and thoughtful reviewers next time you take on something so broad and nuanced.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Well put together

Revisado: 01-15-23

Though what the author has to say will undoubtedly offend many, his command of history and ability to communicate facts are not in question. Regardless of you prerogative, this book is worth your time if you genuinely believe yourself a student of history, rather than yet another armchair demogag. One can argue his interpretations, but the facts within are well curated, as well as hard to find elsewhere. That alone makes the book worthwhile.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

much to like

Revisado: 01-06-23

There is a lot of well outlined research here. The work does step on its own thoughts from one chapter to the next some. I think this is when the author's world view interjects. I suspect that few to none of the reviewers leaned anything other than left, much like the author clearly does. An artifact of the bias that has developed in the educated of America. Blessedly closer to center than so much of the work in this field, the dogma is in fact, reduced. The conventional and easy assumptions are less. Certainly worth one's time to read.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Uninformative

Revisado: 12-20-22

Is a monologue of one man's journey in life. I was looking for more useful insights about the mind, as informed by science. What is here is subjective anecdotes and magical thinking. That you are sure to be told it was written by a neurosurgeon is misleading. Is pretty standard self help whatnot. I don't care that his background is in medicine, this has little to do with that.

I forced myself to finish.... had to give it a chance to get informative. In my opinion, it didn't ever get there.

Writing is a lot of work and takes courage. Congrats to the author for that.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Good for the uninitiated. OK for the initiated.

Revisado: 05-13-21

Been reading books of this kind for the last 5 years or so. pretty much nothing in here that I hadn't read or inferred from other books from several years back. good overview if you are wholly unfamilar.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

some interesting bits. some not so much. t

Revisado: 06-04-18

There are several sections where the authors spin quite a yarn of speculation that is not really all that helpful or educational. the parts that are informative are nice though.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña