OYENTE

David James

  • 3
  • opiniones
  • 1
  • voto útil
  • 10
  • calificaciones

Long-winded, out of date

Total
3 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
4 out of 5 stars
Historia
2 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 09-17-24

Skip this book. The core of the book can be best understood via a 30 minute YouTube video. The future predictions were out of date even when they were being made. Somehow Hawkins didn’t know about progress in NLP or the early language models? Yikes.

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Abysmal narration

Total
2 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
1 out of 5 stars
Historia
2 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 01-06-24

The narrator blunders his way through. His frequent and painful mispronunciations warrant a Bingo card. What kind of editors and production team let this level of performance go uncorrected? I'm baffled. Also, the narrator entirely skips over many figures destroying any ability to follow the details e.g. of RSA. Avoid this audiobook at all costs.

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

Severely lacking: stay away

Total
1 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
1 out of 5 stars
Historia
1 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 07-12-23

This might be the worst philosophy book I’ve ever read (out of dozens). Given that this is a philosophy book by a philosophy professor, I expect a certain level of quality. This book fails to meet that bar. Balaguer’s book is dragged down by numerous flaws:

- Free will involves a fascinating web of ideas, but somehow this book squanders the liveliness of the topic.

- It does not introduce the essential basics of quantum physics. This would form a basis for discussing possible connections between free will and QP. Such an intro could be done in a few paragraphs; I’m dumbstruck at this omission.

- Substantively, I find his explanation of torn decisions to be poorly introduced and argued. It comes out of nowhere, and yet is central to his views. But the logic supporting it is dubious. (Even if you agree with Balaguer’s emphasis on torn decisions, I think you will grant his writing gets in his own way.)

- He makes too many off-hand remarks. For example, Balaguer makes wild claims like (paraphrased) ‘the world would not change at all if everyone agreed that there was no free will’. Such a claim is implausible and no support is given for it.

- The style is painful. This is a widespread complaint among the comments here.

- Nitpick: Calling people that deny free will “enemies of free will” is unnecessary, uncharitable, and distracting. Hopefully we’re all trying to seek the truth; someone who denies free will is not an “enemy” of it. This kind of imprecise and annoying writing should not have gotten past the editors.

- The numerous fascinating implications and questions about free will don’t get discussed at all. For example: if free will doesn’t exist, how does this mesh with most peoples lived experience?

Note: I actually listened to this book via Audible. The narrator is a ham, but that’s probably because he wanted to exude the author’s style. So, well done, Mr. Narrator. (Could you imagine a serious, straight-faced narrator reading this book?)

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

adbl_web_global_use_to_activate_webcro768_stickypopup