It isn’t enough to have just a valid point. You also need to have a sound argument.
There is a point of diminishing returns with being interdisciplinary. I thing this book may have missed that point.
This book is more a typology of weird things believed than an explanation as to why they believe them.
I told some friends I would read anything, pretty indiscriminately. For some reason they though this would be a challenge of some sort.
Oliver Sacks books are always interesting, but there is little new to say about one versus another.
Oliver Sacks’ “An Anthropologist on Mars” handles a terrifying subject matter in a way that is nothing but fascinating.
Most of us are silly enough to believe that were WE to suffer from Trauma, we would know what to do.
Bright future ahead? I mean, maybe. It could also be rather bleak. Max Tegmark thinks that it all depends on what we prepare for.
Steven Pinker wants to prove that things are not so bad right now., and will even get better if we focus on the correct things.
How do you feel about the dead? Would you like to have them a little more around? That actually is an option of sorts…