Scan barcode
pascalibrary's review against another edition
4.0
4/5 Stars. I've seen this book get a lot of criticism, most of which I think is undue or exaggerated.
A lot of what I see people getting angry about in regards to Freakonomics is about the controversial claims, the lack of economics, the condescending tone, and their use of data. Some of these have merit, but I don't think they warrant such bad reviews.
The controversial claims point is the one that I disagree with the most. People generally get outraged at the conclusions reached, particularly regarding abortion and race. Frankly, just because something is controversial doesn't mean it shouldn't be talked about, as long as it has scientific or truth-based merit, which these definitely do. They are made through the use of rigorous data analysis, so you can't just deny them out of hand because of morality. You need to attack the data and his methods. The authors are also careful to not make too many normative claims, relying on mostly facts or what they see the data saying.
The lack of economics is something I can understand to some extent. This book isn't really about the economy or banks or taxes or any of the usual things that spring to mind for economics. However, this book is undoubtedly in the field of economics because it is always related to some core idea behind economic thinking. Incentives, data analysis, unconventional viewpoints and solutions, informational disadvantages, etc. The authors take these concepts and apply them to topics that aren't typical, but are certainly related to those aforementioned conventional economics topics, at least tangentially.
The condescending tone is definitely there, and if you base your rating of Freakonomics purely off of personal enjoyment, I can see why you'd take a star off. A couple pages are just devoted to cultivating a feel of awe and wonder at how smart Levitt is, and it's kind of annoying. I mean, he's the author of the book so clearly he wanted this stuff in there, and it just seems kind of weird and pathetic. But the in-your-face attitude and lack of mercy for 'conventional' ideas doesn't matter to me. It's almost necessary given how much they contradict common sense ideas. To quote the awful, awful Ben Shapiro, "Facts don't care about your feelings."
His use of data is something it's hard for me to comment on since I have neither the drive nor the ability to re-create his calculations. I'm willing to admit that some of his claims were probably a bit too generalized given the data he was working with, but others are pretty fool-proof if we assume that he's not just straight up lying. He usually goes far beyond showing some strong correlation. He attempts to make a case for genuine causation and, in my opinion, is usually successful.
Freakonomics is a great book that gets a lot of undue hate. It's not perfect, but there's no sense in avoiding this kind of data heavy book just because you're scared of disagreement. If anything, it should drive you to read it and dismantle it in the right way. Freakonomics should be of interest to anyone who likes economics, but also to anyone who wants to shift the way they think, or learn something new, basically any open-minded person.
A lot of what I see people getting angry about in regards to Freakonomics is about the controversial claims, the lack of economics, the condescending tone, and their use of data. Some of these have merit, but I don't think they warrant such bad reviews.
The controversial claims point is the one that I disagree with the most. People generally get outraged at the conclusions reached, particularly regarding abortion and race. Frankly, just because something is controversial doesn't mean it shouldn't be talked about, as long as it has scientific or truth-based merit, which these definitely do. They are made through the use of rigorous data analysis, so you can't just deny them out of hand because of morality. You need to attack the data and his methods. The authors are also careful to not make too many normative claims, relying on mostly facts or what they see the data saying.
The lack of economics is something I can understand to some extent. This book isn't really about the economy or banks or taxes or any of the usual things that spring to mind for economics. However, this book is undoubtedly in the field of economics because it is always related to some core idea behind economic thinking. Incentives, data analysis, unconventional viewpoints and solutions, informational disadvantages, etc. The authors take these concepts and apply them to topics that aren't typical, but are certainly related to those aforementioned conventional economics topics, at least tangentially.
The condescending tone is definitely there, and if you base your rating of Freakonomics purely off of personal enjoyment, I can see why you'd take a star off. A couple pages are just devoted to cultivating a feel of awe and wonder at how smart Levitt is, and it's kind of annoying. I mean, he's the author of the book so clearly he wanted this stuff in there, and it just seems kind of weird and pathetic. But the in-your-face attitude and lack of mercy for 'conventional' ideas doesn't matter to me. It's almost necessary given how much they contradict common sense ideas. To quote the awful, awful Ben Shapiro, "Facts don't care about your feelings."
His use of data is something it's hard for me to comment on since I have neither the drive nor the ability to re-create his calculations. I'm willing to admit that some of his claims were probably a bit too generalized given the data he was working with, but others are pretty fool-proof if we assume that he's not just straight up lying. He usually goes far beyond showing some strong correlation. He attempts to make a case for genuine causation and, in my opinion, is usually successful.
Freakonomics is a great book that gets a lot of undue hate. It's not perfect, but there's no sense in avoiding this kind of data heavy book just because you're scared of disagreement. If anything, it should drive you to read it and dismantle it in the right way. Freakonomics should be of interest to anyone who likes economics, but also to anyone who wants to shift the way they think, or learn something new, basically any open-minded person.
lannyn4's review against another edition
3.0
This was a great Economic study that was both entertaining and enlightening. It has some swearing and drug references.
litmiss502's review against another edition
2.0
I really thought I would like this book going in, and for a while of reading, I did. However, somewhere in the middle to end the author just kind of lost my interest. The statistics that were being put out there didn't seem very accurate and the work started to seem a little biased, which pretty much destroyed it for me. I really don't think the researchers did a very good job with the data in front of them.
nachosandcheese's review against another edition
3.0
By the end of the book, you'll have learnt to take everything with a grain of salt, so hopefully that means taking the contents of the book with a grain of salt as well. After all, you're still being told what to believe, it's just that it goes against the conventional knowledge he harps on about.
While this book teaches critical thinking I'm afraid it goes the other direction as well. Skepticism is good but branding experts as selfish bastards and later clarifying that all humans are selfish bastards (wait, just most) an interesting strategy in a world that is rife with antivaxxers and flat-earthers and god knows what else.
While this book teaches critical thinking I'm afraid it goes the other direction as well. Skepticism is good but branding experts as selfish bastards and later clarifying that all humans are selfish bastards (wait, just most) an interesting strategy in a world that is rife with antivaxxers and flat-earthers and god knows what else.
ejkimberley's review against another edition
It's perhaps a bit overly self-assured, in its confidence that it has uncovered the truth about any given thing from among the extremely varied collection of topics it addresses. A slight change in tone might perfect the exercise. That exercise is likely to displease any number of people, in the mean while, for the way it jumps from topic to topic without much in the way of in depth examination. Interesting, but nothing conclusive to be offered.
markproxy's review against another edition
3.0
A fun read with a few mind-expanding ideas that will likely stick with me forever.
rachaellann's review
informative
slow-paced
1.0
man explains concepts that feminists have been saying years before him and it’s somehow ground breaking (and also weirdly racist?????)