Of course, but not based on this one.
Not sure. I simply disagree with how he took the book. It amounts to a disagreement on the definition of "free will" which maybe I can't really hold against the book. I was thoroughly disappointed in the depth of his reasoning and the scope of his thought. The book feels like the first 1/3 was leading to something then you are never taken anywhere special. This book should have been 30% the size it is even though its small to begin with.
The part where the woman stands in front of a target with an apple on her head and...
Whenever an author brings up an example of someone else's opinion you have never heard of to contrast with their own, and doesn't successfully defend his point of view against it, one is left feeling let down (in this case Daniel Dennett). Of course free will is nonsensical as we commonly think of it, but instead of stating that directly and moving on, Sam Harris gets stuck in first gear with simply "we don't have free will".
Excellent way to see the positive side of human progress in standard of living.
The book shows how true progress has been made by the human race. The caveman never had it better, and couldn't, even considering pollution and myths such as the gental caveman or modern increase of cancer rates.
Though climate change is not completely dismissed, some layman falsehoods are introduced at the end of the book after saying more than once that he would "get to climate change in a later chapter" of the book. He also dismisses "science" as the source of "most" improvements in standard of living. This is true socially. But then goes on to describe the process of science (hypothesis and experiment) as the way humans learn and improve technology all while saying that this is not science. His point is much more narrow in intension that what comes accross, which may be guessed to be: science in the academic environment rarely leads to improvements in standard of living. This he proves well and I agree with but doesn't explain well.
No. This is neither child brain candy (i.e. Harry Potter) nor does it contain adult content (i.e. A Song of Fire and Ice). Zzzzzzzz...
Seems a good fit for this. Not very good at characterizing a variety of characters.
Take a nap.
This is a reflection of pop-culture Fantasy not anything original.
Report Inappropriate Content