Anónimo

The boredom is even nearer.

Revisado: 08-15-23

The book is terrible:
1) the author's reasoning is full of flaws, the gist of the argument is "because everything will happen as I say". There is enough details to convince an average reader but as soon as there is any difficulty in the line of reasoning, author will happily say the future will solve it, so... there is no difficulty. All the technical predictions are off by miles - I don't blame the author here, predicting future is a tough job but it doesn't make the GNR chapters any better. Removing the details would make the book shorter and more convincing.
2) The writing style is the worst I've read in a long time. The same lines and thoughts are repeated through the book like a mantra. If the writer was decent, the book could be shorter by half with the same content. Now it sounds like a tv commercial about a new exciting product vthat will change your kitchen into an Italian restaurant.

The second star is for the ending, where author at least tried to be objective. In fact the ending repeats most of the book in shorter form, so I would recommend to ignore all but the last two chapters

As for the performance, the reader was fine, very well matched to the book. No complaints here.

If somebody wants to read something decent in the same domain, Bostrom is much better thinker and writer.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Disappointing

Revisado: 03-07-23

I hold a very high opinion of Russell as a mathematician. This is first time I've his works on other topics and it's... disappointing and shallow. Author is overconfident and ignorant. Never met your heroes.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Very good lecture for believers

Revisado: 01-25-23

While the lecture was very enjoyable to me (I am a Christian) I think it may require too much faith and knowledge from a person not belonging to the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 2 personas

Very uneven

Revisado: 11-17-22

The second part of the book concerning various practical topics was quite interesting and insightful. Author was connecting practical considerations with theoretical fundaments. Solid 4 stars.

On the other hand the first, more theoretical part, was terrible both in tone and contents. It involves lot of handwaving every time the topic becomes difficult to argue for the author. Also there was nothing novel for the modern reader. Solid 2 stars.

In average 3 stars - quite good book but not groundbreaking. Would give 3.5, if it was possible.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Excellent course

Revisado: 11-12-22

Teacher has found a perfect level and range of details for this type of lecture. He tried (and in my opinion succeeded as much as it is possible - one can guess that he is probably catholic but there is only a slight bias) to be as objective by presenting three vastly different point of views on the topic. Highly recommended!

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Not much content

Revisado: 10-30-22

This is the worst great course I've listened to so far. The main issue is just sheer lack of content, the whole course could fit into 6 lectures - so much of it are just repeating fillers. The course is very politically correct and compared to corresponding courses on Jewish and Christian religions it lacks any critical/scientific analysis of the presented topics.

It was interesting though to listen to the Qur'an recitations in Arabic. Plus for that.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

A bit chaotic

Revisado: 09-19-22

This is a quite valuable course on history of USA, but I've found it too chaotic for my taste. I believe it was created for American citizens already introduced to the subject during they basic education. Many topics aren't well explained, author assumes the reader will be familiar with them already. The nonlinear approach doesn't help.

Also in the first lecture teacher tells that Europe has basically two families of languages: Germanic and Romanic. Given that Slavic language have more native speakers than any of the mentioned, I've found this statement at least misleading. In the same paragraph the teacher states that Persian and Hindi are Germanic languages, which is obviously false and undermines trust in the teacher education and competences. I find it amazing that a college professor may believe such statements. I want to trust that his knowledge on American history is more substantial and listening to him was worth my time.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Misleading title

Revisado: 09-12-22

I found the title of this course quite misleading:
- it covers 2WW mostly from the American point of view, the European arena is described only enough to explain the US situation
- the "social" part is less than 10% of the course and is focused only on the sources of the conflict (Germany) and then in the end a bit on US to justify some controversial decisions...

The Eastern front is rather neglected and I was surprised (in a bad way) that the lecturer repeated old USSR propaganda about Polish cavalry charging at the German tanks. Such blunders undermine trust in the teacher's knowledge.

Other than that the course is pretty standard and non-controversial, trying to be objective. It's the worst great course I have listened to till now but still I would recommend it to all people not aware of the 2WW history - it's infinitely much better than the inexcusable ignorance.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

A good (shallow) introduction

Revisado: 09-08-22

This course provides good introduction ti the easter Europe history for the western listeners. For people already knowing a bit about the topic, or interested in more detailed account, it will be definitely too shallow.

The presentation is very engaging and pleasure to listen.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Some valuable insights but still disappointing

Revisado: 09-05-22

The title is misleading: book doesn't present any positive theory of consciousness (as in the "hard" problem of consciousness) — author just tries to shift the burden of proof on his philosophical opponents... that's it. Ergo: qualia don't exist, they just "seem" to exist until other people prove they exist. Therefore author has explained them (away). Author builds straw men and wins imagined discussions with them like a kind of philosophical "mary sue". So, at this front it is a total disappointment and given the introduction (author claims that if his theory fails, then it's an argument for the impossibility of a physicalist theory of consciousness) I would say this book is a great argument for the impossibility of a physicalist theory of consciousness ;)

As for the "easy" problem of consciousness, the book is more interesting but tad a bit out-of-date and there is a lot of hand-waiving. It's no wonder and I wouldn't hold it against the author — 30 years can change everything in science.

Other than that, the book is a quite nice catalogue of various (medical, thought and other) experiments that all people interested in the field should know of. The other useful insight is the critique of using thought experiments as proofs. Author is even frank enough to tell the reader that his thought experiments also may be wrong (however, his experiments are still better, because are less defeatist).

The writing style is engaging but very convoluted — author doesn't present his ideas clearly. Instead he writes a single sentence about the "theory" and then lists examples / experiments / stories that should supposedly explain and give evidence for it. The effect is that reader has to infer what the "theory" is about and why it's important to the topic. The careful reader will finally grasp the idea, but only after many chapters. I believe it's a main reason why the book is found to be difficult in other reviews. I understand that author wants to build an intuition but still it would much better if he could spell out his thesis beforehand.

Performance was more than ok, suits the contents. The perfomer is clearly an experienced professional

PS Given 2 stars for the story as "it's okay". Would give 2,5 if it was possible.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona