Scan barcode
mistypane's review against another edition
4.0
I like the way Stephen Law writes. I've been following his blog for a while now, but this is the first of his books I've read. Love that it made me laugh as well as being spot on. One of my favourite lines 'God does answer petitionary prayers, just not under controlled experimental conditions.'
iggymcmuffin's review against another edition
4.0
Not a bad review of some common errors in reasoning. I was a bit surprised by the heavy focus on religious claims and would have preferred a bit more variety. Generally good though, if a bit basic.
brussel777sprouts777's review against another edition
4.0
Not at all what I was expecting. The author's writing style was hard for me to get through, but I believe the book accomplishes what it sets out to do: How does one identify when someone is professing baloney. And that is to arm the reader with a framework by which he or she can identify and reason with unreasonable belief systems.
The first two chapters were intellectually complex with philosophical and logical reasoning. This was a partial turn off, but I found it very interesting for this and one other reason. The second being the way that fundamental and/or evangelical Christianity promotes its beliefs are identified and discussed. If I got it correctly, basic scientific reasoning can be used to argue against "young earth creationism". Do not underestimate the simplicity of how I have stated this; he goes into vastly more detail in analyzing and arguing the questions about what is 'true'.
Be forewarned, I sense the author has a thing against religion in general.
The last few chapters are more straightforward. In one later chapter he talks about how cults use a system of five techniques to "brainwash" individuals with "isolation, control, uncertainty, repetition and emotion." I do not remember having these techniques spelled out for me previously, but it was fascinating and horrifying to read in his "Tapescrew Letters" (yes, it is a takeoff on C.S. Lewis' Screwtape Letters) how religious organizations often try to take control of someone's life. I have had friends that got sucked into cults before, and I believe we should all be aware of the techniques that are used here! I am thinking of my children and yours too.
I used this framework twice yesterday. Once when two Jehovah's witnesses came to the door yesterday and tried to pry into my emotional state, and again later on when I heard an analyst on the radio talking about how every abortion prevents the net gain of $500,000 in the overall GDP. (Because of course this helps put people to work and pays down the national debt. Right.)
A lot of what this book has to state is common sense for many, so it may not be worth your time. If you find yourself interested in the verity in belief systems in religion, politics, and other issues in which there is no obvious consensus, the framework Stephen Law sets out may be useful for you.
The first two chapters were intellectually complex with philosophical and logical reasoning. This was a partial turn off, but I found it very interesting for this and one other reason. The second being the way that fundamental and/or evangelical Christianity promotes its beliefs are identified and discussed. If I got it correctly, basic scientific reasoning can be used to argue against "young earth creationism". Do not underestimate the simplicity of how I have stated this; he goes into vastly more detail in analyzing and arguing the questions about what is 'true'.
Be forewarned, I sense the author has a thing against religion in general.
The last few chapters are more straightforward. In one later chapter he talks about how cults use a system of five techniques to "brainwash" individuals with "isolation, control, uncertainty, repetition and emotion." I do not remember having these techniques spelled out for me previously, but it was fascinating and horrifying to read in his "Tapescrew Letters" (yes, it is a takeoff on C.S. Lewis' Screwtape Letters) how religious organizations often try to take control of someone's life. I have had friends that got sucked into cults before, and I believe we should all be aware of the techniques that are used here! I am thinking of my children and yours too.
I used this framework twice yesterday. Once when two Jehovah's witnesses came to the door yesterday and tried to pry into my emotional state, and again later on when I heard an analyst on the radio talking about how every abortion prevents the net gain of $500,000 in the overall GDP. (Because of course this helps put people to work and pays down the national debt. Right.)
A lot of what this book has to state is common sense for many, so it may not be worth your time. If you find yourself interested in the verity in belief systems in religion, politics, and other issues in which there is no obvious consensus, the framework Stephen Law sets out may be useful for you.
oedipa_maas's review against another edition
3.0
A good primer on what to expect when debating/talking to someone deeply indoctrinated in a belief that is nonsense. Law focuses heavily on religion, which is fine, but I was really hoping for more on pseudoscience, cults, and garden-variety conspiracy nuts. Probably didn't help that I just finished Godless by Dan Barker and a lot of the same arguments were in that one.
dujyt's review against another edition
4.0
An easy to follow explanation of various "intellectual black holes" and how to craft an argument against the psuedo-thinking that creates them in the first place.
mapetiteliseuse's review against another edition
2.0
I thought I'd misread the blurb of this book until I read some other reviews. It seems I wasn't the only one that felt it was a bit too heavily focused on religion as a source of bullshit artists. True, there are some excellent religious examples for some of the 'intellectual black holes' outlined; but it became very dogmatic and dull even though the principles of bullshit were good.
I'd recommend 'You are not so smart' over this book, it's far superior. But if you're writing or researching religious cults or fanaticism you'll probably find this more stimulating than I did.
I'd recommend 'You are not so smart' over this book, it's far superior. But if you're writing or researching religious cults or fanaticism you'll probably find this more stimulating than I did.
iggymcmuffin's review
5.0
Not a bad review of some common errors in reasoning. I was a bit surprised by the heavy focus on religious claims and would have preferred a bit more variety. Generally good though, if a bit basic.
More...