Scan barcode
seonjoon_young's review against another edition
Sanctimonious tone got in the way of a somewhat interesting, but not terribly original, intellectual history.
tbpardue's review against another edition
1.0
Very disappointing. The author unwittingly reviews his own book on page 270. “The characteristics..of an untrustworthy theory are that it is not refutable, that it appeals to authority, that it relies heavily on anecdote,...and that it takes the moral high ground”. The Rational Optimist was very good. This had some interesting points but he gets lost in his libertarian world view way too often (his moral high ground). It felt largely un-researched. Worthy of an editorial maybe, but not a book. Unfortunately I bought it on a whim because of The Rational Optimist.
radbear76's review against another edition
3.0
An interesting read but a little too Libertarian paradise for me at times. However, it does have me thinking about how I approach my job which is traditionally top down driven.
branch_c's review against another edition
3.0
Ridley is a smart guy and a great writer, and I'm willing to accept his arguments about the many aspects of society, including the economy, that are emerging phenomena. By analogy with biological evolution, it's true that some things come about through "human action, but not human design". Global economic growth may indeed show no sign of diminishing, and it does appear that in society, as in biology, change is constant, and any equilibrium is likely only temporary.
There's a lot to agree with in this book - the chapters on the evolution of the mind and on the evolution of personality are brilliantly written, even if they are mostly reporting material from other sources (respectively Sam Harris on free will and Judith Rich Harris on the nurture assumption). In fact, this book is well worth reading for the chapter on religion alone - well, the first part, anyway, in which Ridley states the obvious fact that religion was created by people, and goes on to explain exactly how it likely occurred in the cases of Christianity and Islam.
By the way, I'm also sympathetic to Ridley's views on patents: "A certain amount of intellectual property law is plainly necessary... But it has gone too far." (p. 131)
But there's also a lot that's debatable, and Ridley comes down on the "less government" side of the debate. The chapter on education, for example, argues that public schools do a poor job educating and learning could be better achieved via private means. While there is truth to some of the criticisms of public education, the solution is to address them, not give up on the idea altogether. Ridley's position ignores the downsides to privately funded education.
The chapter on government likewise lists numerous anecdotes from history in which it turned out that private enterprise was a better solution than government incompetence or despotism. The idea that an entity like government cannot have all the knowledge it needs to effectively direct human affairs is a red herring - of course that's true; each participant has individual knowledge and motivation, and taken together, we get a functioning system. But this doesn't mean that government has nothing to contribute. It also doesn't follow that this system maximizes well being for all involved, or that it can continue this way indefinitely.
And in the latter part of the religion chapter, Ridley presents a criticism of climate science as a secular religion, concluding that skepticism is warranted, based mostly, apparently, on the similarities he cites between the behavior of religious believers and "climate change enthusiasts".
This is a bit much to take, and while I admire Ridley's optimism, and his faith in the power of self-evolving bottom-up actions to save society with no need of regulatory interference from the top, I think in some ways he has taken the premise of the book too far.
There's a lot to agree with in this book - the chapters on the evolution of the mind and on the evolution of personality are brilliantly written, even if they are mostly reporting material from other sources (respectively Sam Harris on free will and Judith Rich Harris on the nurture assumption). In fact, this book is well worth reading for the chapter on religion alone - well, the first part, anyway, in which Ridley states the obvious fact that religion was created by people, and goes on to explain exactly how it likely occurred in the cases of Christianity and Islam.
By the way, I'm also sympathetic to Ridley's views on patents: "A certain amount of intellectual property law is plainly necessary... But it has gone too far." (p. 131)
But there's also a lot that's debatable, and Ridley comes down on the "less government" side of the debate. The chapter on education, for example, argues that public schools do a poor job educating and learning could be better achieved via private means. While there is truth to some of the criticisms of public education, the solution is to address them, not give up on the idea altogether. Ridley's position ignores the downsides to privately funded education.
The chapter on government likewise lists numerous anecdotes from history in which it turned out that private enterprise was a better solution than government incompetence or despotism. The idea that an entity like government cannot have all the knowledge it needs to effectively direct human affairs is a red herring - of course that's true; each participant has individual knowledge and motivation, and taken together, we get a functioning system. But this doesn't mean that government has nothing to contribute. It also doesn't follow that this system maximizes well being for all involved, or that it can continue this way indefinitely.
And in the latter part of the religion chapter, Ridley presents a criticism of climate science as a secular religion, concluding that skepticism is warranted, based mostly, apparently, on the similarities he cites between the behavior of religious believers and "climate change enthusiasts".
This is a bit much to take, and while I admire Ridley's optimism, and his faith in the power of self-evolving bottom-up actions to save society with no need of regulatory interference from the top, I think in some ways he has taken the premise of the book too far.
harrydwatts's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
slow-paced
4.0
miansahab's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
fast-paced
4.5
maastaar's review against another edition
adventurous
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
queenvalaska's review
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
Atheism, skepticism, evolution, social biology, eugenics, neurology, politics, history. This book has it all. And I can’t decide if that’s a good thing or bad thing.