Reza writes of Islam the way good people want it to be exercised and applied. No problem there! But he states the aspects of historic Islam - of which radicals use to advance violence - only to arrive at a pathetic attempt to dismiss those historical aspects by means of unsupported and unsound reinterpretation. While the approach is likely welcomed by those who wish to see ONLY good, the approach does absolutely nothing to reduce or weaken the arguments made by violent radicals. Violent radicals get to maintain their credibility by maintaining their historical arguments. Reza is simply expressing a DESIRED interpretation of Islam. He does nothing to weaken the radical arguments, and, therefore, he is simply cloaking the historical Islam as a wholly peaceful religion WHILE providing those violent radicals cover form the open exposure that they deserve.
Strawman arguments - which requires deletion of far more than half the content.
The overview states that Marx has had the greatest impact and " whose work incited far-reaching social and economic change." And... "Accompanied by an insightful introductory essay that puts the included excerpts from his works in context," However, this is simply a glossary of terms beginning at the 3 minute and 17 second time stamp. The intro does not put anything into context and worse, it does not express the failures of the theory or any of the contested points of view. Therefore, this work has no relevancy to today. It only has relevancy to a failed theory.
A written glossary would have been far more valuable! Why record a glossary of terms?
No clear argument. So ideological that he can't even see that it is ideological. Dworkin takes it for granted that his perspective is correct simply because it is his. He does not seek arguments against his position and therefore makes no sound argument FOR his position. Considering he titled the book with a question, one expects a deliberated, clear and supported argument. I can't find it without extreme efforts toward bypassing his ideology to get to the meat.
Mr. Kramer did a good narration EXCEPT for way too much hissing on his "s" sounds. For those who are affected by such white noise the way I am, he just puts you to sleep.
No chapter or section breaks. Audio only! No text available to aid in establishing structure or organizing content. No way to interrelate content.
In defense to the narrator - it is a good effort at being calming and serene. However, the style, while appropriate for the content, is not appropriate for all of the content TOGETHER. A wise person would have designated 2 narrators to establish some change-up and reduce monotony. But again, this is not on the narrator. This is the producer and writer's responsibility to see the work through to a good end product.
NONE - good content is not retrievable. It lacks structure to make what could be otherwise retrievable into useable content. Unredeemable!
Only Liberals, Progressives and Leftists that are intellectually dishonest idealogues who demonstrate that they are incapable of tolerating diversity would like this book.
Instead of lampooning Buckley with ideological bias he could have stated the case from Buckley's side and then stated the case from his own bias view; and with that he could have showed how he was right. As it stands however, Mr. Bogus is simply advancing unsound ideology against a well respected man who has sadly passed. The content will only aid those on the left who want to follow as mind-numb robots regurgitating unsupported ideologic rhetoric.
Report Inappropriate Content
If you find this review inappropriate and think it should be removed from our site, let us know. This report will be reviewed by Audible and we will take appropriate action.