The author sent me a "coupon" to read this book for free.
I find the method used to tell this story (the roller coaster ride) to be different, but useful and, to some extent, fun. But since I came into this book blind (in terms of the author's background and intent), I also find it to be questionable.
There are two aspects to this book: evolutionary history and evolution of thought. I have a problem with the evolutionary history aspect because without a solid bibliography, we're left with a tale that is at best a thought provoking piece of fiction (by my own definition) and at worst a piece of blatant plagiarism. I personally demand evidence for any piece of information, even if it's just, "based on this, this, and this, I conclude this". I do not question the validity of evolution based on my own research, but I do not particularly condone any "non-fiction" which does not show it's own train of research since no scholar reaches a conclusion purely through their own abilities.
I do not know what work has been done by others on the evolution of thought, nor do I know how much is philosophical and how much is based on scientific evidence. Since this book lacks a bibliography, I do not know what parts are purely from Smith's own reasoning and what parts come from other research done and that troubles me.
His, I assume, philosophical conclusions are the reason I rate this book so highly. I like the idea of human intellect being metaphorical bridges evolving over time and I like that Smith does build his argument on good foundations...I just wish those foundations had better foundations themselves.
I rank this a 5 for enjoyability and thought provoking conclusions. I rank it a 3 for scholarship.
I find the method used to tell this story (the roller coaster ride) to be different, but useful and, to some extent, fun. But since I came into this book blind (in terms of the author's background and intent), I also find it to be questionable.
There are two aspects to this book: evolutionary history and evolution of thought. I have a problem with the evolutionary history aspect because without a solid bibliography, we're left with a tale that is at best a thought provoking piece of fiction (by my own definition) and at worst a piece of blatant plagiarism. I personally demand evidence for any piece of information, even if it's just, "based on this, this, and this, I conclude this". I do not question the validity of evolution based on my own research, but I do not particularly condone any "non-fiction" which does not show it's own train of research since no scholar reaches a conclusion purely through their own abilities.
I do not know what work has been done by others on the evolution of thought, nor do I know how much is philosophical and how much is based on scientific evidence. Since this book lacks a bibliography, I do not know what parts are purely from Smith's own reasoning and what parts come from other research done and that troubles me.
His, I assume, philosophical conclusions are the reason I rate this book so highly. I like the idea of human intellect being metaphorical bridges evolving over time and I like that Smith does build his argument on good foundations...I just wish those foundations had better foundations themselves.
I rank this a 5 for enjoyability and thought provoking conclusions. I rank it a 3 for scholarship.
Full disclosure: I link to the books below because I'm going to go out on a limb and say that they're very similar to the book I reviewed which at 52 pages (at the link I was provided) seemed like it was a chapter or two from a much longer work, either one or the other or maybe some combination of both. I have no desire at this time to read either book I'm offering links to.
No comments:
Post a Comment