Scan barcode
zkendall's review against another edition
2.0
Ouch. A bit of a slog. Less good plot than the first book. More first person descriptions of mostly irrelevant environmental artifacts like space ship hallways, exhaust, design, etc. More stilted dialog.
I would say only worth reading if you mostly care about science references.
However, still definitely read the first book :D
I would say only worth reading if you mostly care about science references.
However, still definitely read the first book :D
hlarsen's review against another edition
2.0
The prologue grabbed me enough to read the first book before starting this one, but if you go in expecting Space Vampires, you probably won't come out the other side happy.
synoptic_view's review against another edition
4.0
Yeah, I am really into Watts' books, as one can imagine from wolfing down 4 of his books (and one of those twice in a row). He has a knack for portraying thought experiments or concepts that I am familiar with in new ways that provide additional insight. He did this exceptionally well with the Chinese Room thought experiment in Blindsight.
Here, the most striking example was the idea that consciousness might have evolved as a way to adjudicate between conflicting motor impulses, an idea that Watts points out was already present in Dune's gom jabbar (although to be fair to the scientists, relatives of the idea can be found in the psych literature at least as early as Thurstone, 1924 "Mind as Unfinished Conduct"). The entire chapter "Prophet" is full of discussion of the idea, but a choice quote is: "Put your hand in an open flame, and subconscious reflex will snatch it back long before you're even aware of the pain. It is only when some other agenda is in conflict--your hand hurts but you don't want to spill the contents of a hot serving tray all over your clean rug--that the self awakens and decides which impulse to obey."
I have spent a lot of my commuting time over the last few months arguing with an economist who doesn't believe that economic preferences are compatible with free will (he claims that they make us no more than automatons and has further said on multiple occasions that "I have no preferences"). But preferences quickly get into conflict in all but the simplest cases. Perhaps the self does live in these moments of meta-preference.
The Dune references don't end there. See the echoes of Dune's "Arrakis teaches the attitude of the knife -- chopping off what's incomplete and saying: 'Now it's complete because it's ended here'" with the section: "We all start out with heads full of random mush. It's the neural pruning afterward that shapes who we are. It's like sculpture. You start with a block of granite, chip away the bits that don't belong, end up with a work of art." We are all products of evolution's attitude of the knife.
From reading other reviews, it seems like there are at least two camps. If one compares this book to Blindsight, it comes off worse. If one compares it to other SF, it fares much better. I would rate it among my favorite recent SF reads even for just the discussion of neuroscience theories of consciousness plus the Dune references. I have also wanted to read more hard science fiction focused on biology. It is surprisingly rare (Crichton being a bestselling exception that I gobbled up as a kid and Sue Burke's Semiosis being a more recent one that I loved) compared to physics or social science. Watts fills this need so wonderfully.
Here, the most striking example was the idea that consciousness might have evolved as a way to adjudicate between conflicting motor impulses, an idea that Watts points out was already present in Dune's gom jabbar (although to be fair to the scientists, relatives of the idea can be found in the psych literature at least as early as Thurstone, 1924 "Mind as Unfinished Conduct"). The entire chapter "Prophet" is full of discussion of the idea, but a choice quote is: "Put your hand in an open flame, and subconscious reflex will snatch it back long before you're even aware of the pain. It is only when some other agenda is in conflict--your hand hurts but you don't want to spill the contents of a hot serving tray all over your clean rug--that the self awakens and decides which impulse to obey."
I have spent a lot of my commuting time over the last few months arguing with an economist who doesn't believe that economic preferences are compatible with free will (he claims that they make us no more than automatons and has further said on multiple occasions that "I have no preferences"). But preferences quickly get into conflict in all but the simplest cases. Perhaps the self does live in these moments of meta-preference.
The Dune references don't end there. See the echoes of Dune's "Arrakis teaches the attitude of the knife -- chopping off what's incomplete and saying: 'Now it's complete because it's ended here'" with the section: "We all start out with heads full of random mush. It's the neural pruning afterward that shapes who we are. It's like sculpture. You start with a block of granite, chip away the bits that don't belong, end up with a work of art." We are all products of evolution's attitude of the knife.
From reading other reviews, it seems like there are at least two camps. If one compares this book to Blindsight, it comes off worse. If one compares it to other SF, it fares much better. I would rate it among my favorite recent SF reads even for just the discussion of neuroscience theories of consciousness plus the Dune references. I have also wanted to read more hard science fiction focused on biology. It is surprisingly rare (Crichton being a bestselling exception that I gobbled up as a kid and Sue Burke's Semiosis being a more recent one that I loved) compared to physics or social science. Watts fills this need so wonderfully.
roese's review against another edition
3.0
I really liked the ideas in this book. The scope and thought behind it is what made me go with three stars instead of lower. Unfortunately, the plot and characters get lost in the explanation of ideas. There was way too many times I had to go back and reread a part to figure out what just happened to the character because it was not at all clear.
mattswisher's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
tallblondehandsome's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
mysterious
reflective
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
paranoya6's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
informative
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.5
blherrou's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
informative
reflective
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.5
Watts tries here to replicate his success with Blindsight, but with a different theme. Unfortunately, it just doesn't quite land. Echopraxia's musings on the nature of God/existence are less convincing and less impactful than Blindsight's assault on our beliefs about consciousness. And the chief weakness of Blindsight - that it can get quite confusing and difficult to follow - is here in spades.
Still, Echopraxia is an engaging novel with a protagonist we can identify with. It provides some additional development of Blindsight's themes and setting, and I don't regret reading it. Blindsight is an absolute must read if you haven't already. Echopraxia is a good SF book.
Still, Echopraxia is an engaging novel with a protagonist we can identify with. It provides some additional development of Blindsight's themes and setting, and I don't regret reading it. Blindsight is an absolute must read if you haven't already. Echopraxia is a good SF book.
frasersimons's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
informative
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
This is not quite as good as Blindsight, but still has the Watts touch, in terms of weaving in science, immediate at the time of writing, to a plot and concept that spirals out into wider implications, onboarding the reader to the various ramifications of the germination of the core notions. It’s really fun reading just for that. Though, the world is absolutely shot to shit in basically every way possible and it has serious horror undertones. Plus, it clips along nicely. Hard scifi basically never does that.
There are a few darlings though. Vampires. Actual vampires, since this is post humanism, exist. And there is a species gap that is significant. As are the other post human elements, where parts of humanity essentially are no longer human, as they do not experience the world as someone non augmented or altered. And that’s the crux of this novel. The implications of the ways in which technology is already altering us, only rapidly extrapolated into cogent “what ifs”.
But also zombie type people and factions at war, manipulated in a very cyberpunk manner, by machinations they cannot ever perceive, nor will they ever. It’s an idea book, which I think succeeds very well (unlike some Stephenson books I have hated the reading experience of), and I am certainly on the Watts train now. I believe I also have Starfish somewhere.
There are a few darlings though. Vampires. Actual vampires, since this is post humanism, exist. And there is a species gap that is significant. As are the other post human elements, where parts of humanity essentially are no longer human, as they do not experience the world as someone non augmented or altered. And that’s the crux of this novel. The implications of the ways in which technology is already altering us, only rapidly extrapolated into cogent “what ifs”.
But also zombie type people and factions at war, manipulated in a very cyberpunk manner, by machinations they cannot ever perceive, nor will they ever. It’s an idea book, which I think succeeds very well (unlike some Stephenson books I have hated the reading experience of), and I am certainly on the Watts train now. I believe I also have Starfish somewhere.
malnourish's review against another edition
challenging
dark
informative
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
3.0