5 of 49 people found the following review helpful
shocking ignorance and inability to see beyond obivious,
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: To Save Everything, Click Here: Technology, Solutionism, and the Urge to Fix Problems that Don't Exist (Hardcover)
Have to admit, I have had a chance to talk to the author in addition to having read the book, to his credit he accepted at least one of the claims he made was wrong. Shocked by ignorance which is reflected in the book, assumptions made while making sweeping statements assumes others are as ignorant as the author, e.g "correlation vs causality". Overall tries to depict that the author has read quite a large number of books/papers by recognized authors, but this does not remedy authors lack of deeper understanding of areas.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-7 of 7 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 1 Apr 2013 23:35:56 BDT
Last edited by the author on 1 Apr 2013 23:36:32 BDT
Never ever read a review as off mark and bloody biased as this one. Don't want to sound rude, but I really wonder if the reviewer actually read the book. I'm afraid that here the one who lacks "deeper understanding of areas" is not the author. Just check some other reviews on amazon.com to get some more reliable opinions on this engrossing book...
In reply to an earlier post on 2 Apr 2013 01:44:44 BDT
M. Anish says:
Posted on 7 Apr 2013 11:53:30 BDT
Last edited by the author on 7 Apr 2013 11:54:30 BDT
You speak of a major factual error in the book, yet don't mention what it is, so we can judge.
You cite ignorance because of "sweeping statements" and something about "correlation vs. causality", again without explaining your point or argument. Sounds like a sweeping statement to me.
And finally, you write a literary review, with poor punctuation, grammar and spelling.
To say this has not been useful, is an understatement. You're pretty much wasting space here.
In reply to an earlier post on 29 May 2015 09:14:14 BDT
Michael Wood says:
I have read the book, and did so with an open mind, and was very disappointed in how the author (I've never met him) creates a general idea that "The Internet" is a series of technologies and not a single advancement (which is a convincing case) and then spends much of the rest of book attacking "The Internet" as if it were a single advancement.
He goes to great lengths to put modern technology in the context of the telegraph, the telephone etc and then having established that "The Internet" is not an end point he goes on to criticise it as if it were, or criticise the people who may think it is, as if the former were not self contradiction and the latter not personal.
So I as disappointed.
Posted on 7 Aug 2015 21:20:39 BDT
D. Murphy says:
This would read better if you explain why you feel there is ignorance and what that ignorance is; also the assumptions and sweeping generalisations.
Posted on 25 Aug 2015 16:45:07 BDT
Robert John says:
You have simply not explained why you think this book is so poor. I would give your review one star.
Posted on 2 Jan 2016 19:51:38 GMT
Modern Primate says:
"I have read the book, and did so with an open mind, and was very disappointed in how the author (I've never met him) creates a general idea that "The Internet" is a series of technologies and not a single advancement (which is a convincing case) and then spends much of the rest of book attacking "The Internet" as if it were a single advancement."
Exactly Michael Wood. And notice how he routinely tries to portray such discrepencies as somehow adding to his argument. The height of pseudointellectualism, lumping a few concepts together and then acting like they somehow add to your argument.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›