Take a photo of a barcode or cover
317 reviews for:
Die erstaunliche Wahrheit über Tiere: Was Mythen und Irrtümer über uns verraten
Lucy Cooke
4.23 AVERAGE
317 reviews for:
Die erstaunliche Wahrheit über Tiere: Was Mythen und Irrtümer über uns verraten
Lucy Cooke
4.23 AVERAGE
funny
informative
medium-paced
The animal information was interesting, but the history aspect was poorly done. The author sacrificed virtually all nuance (and sometimes accuracy) for the sake of making mean-spirited jokes about historical scientists. It was as though she was judging not only their moral decisions but even their scientific knowledge by a completely modern standard.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Animal cruelty
funny
informative
medium-paced
funny
informative
inspiring
reflective
adventurous
funny
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
There are some books that should be articles, and this is definitely one of them. The title of the book should be "The Unexpected Truth About Animal Reproduction." Every chapter follows the same template (more or less) of: look at the crazy things people thought about animals hundreds of years ago (seemingly always quoting the Comte de Buffon) to this is actually the truth about this animal to let me tell you about how they reproduce. Lucy Cooke is undeniably hooked on studying animal reproduction. For these reasons, there were only a few chapters (Sloth, Hyena, Frog, Hippo) that were interesting. These chapters went beyond Cooke's typical template to tell us historical or scientific information that was extra interesting. Make these chapters into articles, and our work is done. Other chapters ranged from just ok to complete duds (the Moose chapter was terrible).
There are several other weaknesses to Lucy Cooke's writing. I'll note 3.
1) Her use of hyperbole. Cooke used hyperbole to set up almost every chapter. At each chapter's outset, she would say "look at the crazy things people incorrectly through about animals" with a snarky, condescending tone. She would then transition to "but the truth is even crazier!" However, her snarky/condescending tone implied general disrespect for the ways people have (sometimes earnestly) misunderstood animals. This made it a hard sell for the reader to have respect for and generate the proper appreciation of the truth.
2) Her understanding of natural philosophy and the history of scientific study. Cooke constantly reminds the reader she was trained by Richard Dawkins, and mirrors his poor understanding of history and ignorance of how faith propelled scientific study. She believes that any time religion mixed with science the results were bad, and this is 100% false. It's easy to see the cracks in her logic, as she will quickly discredit past scientists for their religious associations if their findings were ludicrous. But for monks, priests, religious scholars, etc who contributed positively and appreciably to the field, she'll quickly skip over. That said, towards the end of the book Cooke says that evolution is her god so at least she's wearing her beliefs on her sleeve.
3) Her leveling of the playing field. Cooke constantly criticizes attempts to anthropomorphize animals, which is a good criticism. However, she then takes the stance of "this is everything we humans can learn from animals" and actively breaks down the barrier between man and animals. Her very last sentence asks if there is much difference between humans and chimps. This is sad, as we humans for a variety of philosophical reasons she hasn't really wrestled with have lots of differences from animals. And much of these differences are good.
If you read this far, skip this book. I had high hopes, but was very disappointed.
There are several other weaknesses to Lucy Cooke's writing. I'll note 3.
1) Her use of hyperbole. Cooke used hyperbole to set up almost every chapter. At each chapter's outset, she would say "look at the crazy things people incorrectly through about animals" with a snarky, condescending tone. She would then transition to "but the truth is even crazier!" However, her snarky/condescending tone implied general disrespect for the ways people have (sometimes earnestly) misunderstood animals. This made it a hard sell for the reader to have respect for and generate the proper appreciation of the truth.
2) Her understanding of natural philosophy and the history of scientific study. Cooke constantly reminds the reader she was trained by Richard Dawkins, and mirrors his poor understanding of history and ignorance of how faith propelled scientific study. She believes that any time religion mixed with science the results were bad, and this is 100% false. It's easy to see the cracks in her logic, as she will quickly discredit past scientists for their religious associations if their findings were ludicrous. But for monks, priests, religious scholars, etc who contributed positively and appreciably to the field, she'll quickly skip over. That said, towards the end of the book Cooke says that evolution is her god so at least she's wearing her beliefs on her sleeve.
3) Her leveling of the playing field. Cooke constantly criticizes attempts to anthropomorphize animals, which is a good criticism. However, she then takes the stance of "this is everything we humans can learn from animals" and actively breaks down the barrier between man and animals. Her very last sentence asks if there is much difference between humans and chimps. This is sad, as we humans for a variety of philosophical reasons she hasn't really wrestled with have lots of differences from animals. And much of these differences are good.
If you read this far, skip this book. I had high hopes, but was very disappointed.
informative
funny
informative
medium-paced
adventurous
informative
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
A pretty interesting read. There were some facts that I didn’t know. One star knocked off just because I personally wasn’t super interested in a couple of the animals covered.
adventurous
funny
informative
fast-paced
funny
informative
I learned a lot and I actually laughed at several points. I would have given it an even higher rating but the narrator/author is, like, yelling the entire time?