Scan barcode
A review by theonionboy
The Magic of Reality: How We Know What's Really True by Richard Dawkins
4.0
This comes across as if it were meant to be "explain science to me like I am five years old." I don’t know if that was the writer’s intent or not. Listening to it, especially with the authors’ strong accents, makes it ride right on the fine line between explaining simply and clearly, and coming across as very condescending.
If you get past that feeling, it is very informative. You can enjoy the simple explanations of the things you already know, realizing that it is building a foundation for further parts of the book. And you can learn from simple explanations of the parts you didn’t already know.
One thing stood out. At the end of an early chapter, the author got in a big jab against religion. It didn’t bother me personally, because I totally agree with what he said, and I have no use for religion. But the comment felt very much out of place at that point in the book. It came across as personal feelings that had been kept in check, but built up and burst out. Otherwise he was doing a great job letting the facts speak for themselves and let the reader draw the conclusion for themselves. It seems he couldn’t resist the fear that readers might miss is, and had to ram it home.
I don’t read other reviews before writing my own. But it would surprise me if others readers don’t find it very condescending.
The book started out explaining various aspects of science. It set a good foundation and built upon it well. But at the end it appears the topics were picked for the sole purpose of supporting the non-religious world view, rather than simply explaining science. A significant portion of the book was dedicated to giving examples of world mythology, to show how ridiculous they are. And always, Judeo-Christian stories are cited to make the point that they are just as ridiculous as the rest. Again, that does not bother me, because I actually agree with it. But it still seemed to detract from the experience of the book. And if I felt that way, I suppose religious believers will think that even more so. I don't think this is the best approach to get believers to open their minds.
If you get past that feeling, it is very informative. You can enjoy the simple explanations of the things you already know, realizing that it is building a foundation for further parts of the book. And you can learn from simple explanations of the parts you didn’t already know.
One thing stood out. At the end of an early chapter, the author got in a big jab against religion. It didn’t bother me personally, because I totally agree with what he said, and I have no use for religion. But the comment felt very much out of place at that point in the book. It came across as personal feelings that had been kept in check, but built up and burst out. Otherwise he was doing a great job letting the facts speak for themselves and let the reader draw the conclusion for themselves. It seems he couldn’t resist the fear that readers might miss is, and had to ram it home.
I don’t read other reviews before writing my own. But it would surprise me if others readers don’t find it very condescending.
The book started out explaining various aspects of science. It set a good foundation and built upon it well. But at the end it appears the topics were picked for the sole purpose of supporting the non-religious world view, rather than simply explaining science. A significant portion of the book was dedicated to giving examples of world mythology, to show how ridiculous they are. And always, Judeo-Christian stories are cited to make the point that they are just as ridiculous as the rest. Again, that does not bother me, because I actually agree with it. But it still seemed to detract from the experience of the book. And if I felt that way, I suppose religious believers will think that even more so. I don't think this is the best approach to get believers to open their minds.