LeGault talks about:
Far from perpetuating the stereotype of the complacent American, LeGault maintains that Americans are abundantly gifted with the ability to fulfill our nation's greatest potential starting today but we need smart teachers, health care workers, sales representatives, students, mechanics, and leaders to make it happen. A bracing wake-up call to America, Think! delivers a no-holds-barred prescription for reversing the erosion of American civilization.
©2006 Michael R. LeGault; (P)2006 Simon & Schuster, Inc. SOUND IDEAS is an imprint of Simon & Schuster Audio Divison, Simon & Schuster Inc.
This book starts off with some great points - the world needs more critical thinking. I couldn't agree more.
However LeGault doesn't even take his own advice. The majority of the book is composed of several rants on a range of issues, most of which can be refuted rather easily with a bit of critical thinking.
He spends a great deal of time asserting that the jury is still out on global warming, that we shouldn't take the issue seriously. However he doesn't offer any studies or other evidence to back his claim. He must be using the popular press for his sources, because it is virtually impossible to find a single peer reviewed scientific paper that refutes the urgency of the climate crises. Take a look at the Union of Concerned Scientists (a group of 49 Nobel laureates, 63 National Medal of Science recipients, and 175 members of the National Academies) for more information.
LeGault takes many similar stances that are easy to refute: "The desires of the advertising industry have little impact on the direction of media corporations". It doesn't take much critical thinking skill to question that statement.
Or his absolute certainty that Male and Female brains are fundamentally different in a physical and inherent way. Given that our knowledge of the brain is at most limited, I question his certainty. There are many studies suggesting that these differences may, or may not, be statistically insignificant. And to state that these differences could not possibly have been a result of socialization is absurd. In an area of study where there is so much uncertainty why would he take such an extreme position?
Given the above examples (and there are others), I can only conclude that LeGault's intention for this book is not to promote critical thinking, but rather it is a platform for him to rant on his extreme viewpoints.
There may have been one or two good points in this book...I can't remember because the author's seething repetitive rant against feminists and environmentalists overshadowed any valid content he might have had. His insistance that climate change is non-existant destroyed any credibilty. The narration will put you to sleep.
I was suspicious of "Blink" when I read parts of it briefly in a bookstore and the author here gives us good reason to be suspicious. As you might expect from the title, the book is about the need for all of us to think more critically about matters in life. As a former college professor, I can attest that whatever we can do to encourage critical thinking, and careful thinking in general, is worthwhile. One small critique of this audio book would be that I think this is a case of where not having the author read his/her work would be a good thing. The author reads a little slowly and I would have wanted a little more energy in the voice. Professional voice talent might have been nice. Other than that, interesting and worthwhile listening.
It starts off bashing the book called "Blink" but once he gets beyond that waste of time he covers some very useful and relevant issues. His centeral theme provides the reader with a good basis for promoting the use of Critical Thinking and an understanding of why not to use the first gut reaction that comes by.
I found it to be very easy to listen to.
This is really one of the best books I've read in a great deal of time. It challenges the knee-jerk reaction and emotional thinking that has grown to be extremely common. The book points to political special interests that immediately challenge any proposals from an administration they don't like, and the crowds that follow -- illustrating that ideology, emotions, and "blink" like judgments have made critical thinking rare. He does take some shots at Michael Moore in the book, and it's to point out how a) people have become so busy (or lazy) they allow other people to think for them and b) how easy it is to distort the truth through what we call perception. He challenges environmental myths, distortions of the truth, political special interests, Gladwell, corporate bureaucracy, group think, and anything that goes against good old fashioned investigative thinking and critical thinking. As I read this book, I had countless incidents that I just stopped and said, "That happened because of a pure lack of critical thinking." I highly recommend the book! I only caution that if you are not a critical thinker, you will be offended.
I thought this book was awfull. I read it right after reading Blink. He has no real material or evedence to back up his claims. the whole book feels like it was whipped up becuase of the Blink success and he spends much of the book defending his ideas against the material in Blink. The auther also has a terible reading voice in my opinion and tries to come off as well read and intelegent by using large uncommon words to wow the reader. I was not wowed i was disapointed.
That it contained almost no critical thinking. The author used the cover of sound critical thinking to make a case for his political views.
It wasn't his performance that was the issue. It was his lack of balanced thought.
No--but I will use it in my critical thinking class as an example of dogma posing as balanced thought.
Very disappointing. A missed opportunity.
This is a prime example of why the new art of narration should be left to the professionals. Excellent material, however, he sounds like the teacher from Ferris Bueller's day off. The material is definitely interesting, however, he is putting me to sleep.
The audiobook was enjoyable. However, LeGault does not seem to understand the fundamental argument being made in Blink. This book comes off as a Libertarian rant mixed with a curmudgeonly old timer outlook. One of the most disappointing things was that he slams the "Blink" scientists for citing correlational research, then he continuously does it himself. He does the same thing with case studies. Overall, his argument makes sense, but misses the point.
I bought this book expecting a stimulating debate to counter some of Malcolm Gladwell’s positions in “BLINK” & “Outliers”, instead I got this disappointing collection of subjective ramblings (in a dull voice to boot) that really refuted it all & nothing.
Mediocre at best, in my opinion several leagues below Mr. Gladwell’s works.
Report Inappropriate Content