Community Reviews
The reasoning behind the book relies entirely on 1) knowable, "correct" principles and 2) anecdotes. If you're willing to consent that there could be such a thing as a "correct" principle then this book may not leave you cringing uncontrollably. However, the way he presents anecdotes as proofs will -- and his attempts to redefine words poetically to shape philosophy is unnecessary in the modern world of psychological studies.
This book is not a must-read. I gave it a 2 out of 5 only because some pieces were unintentionally thought-provoking. I'm certain they were unintentional because they had no context -- although lacking context is apparently a central tenant of his writing. The most powerful quotes from the book are the author quoting someone else. You get a second-hand look at psychology that you'd be better off reading from well-written researchers (see Thinking, Fast and Slow). If any ideas were monumental at the time (1989) they are not now and you'll get nothing more from reading them here.
This book is not a must-read. I gave it a 2 out of 5 only because some pieces were unintentionally thought-provoking. I'm certain they were unintentional because they had no context -- although lacking context is apparently a central tenant of his writing. The most powerful quotes from the book are the author quoting someone else. You get a second-hand look at psychology that you'd be better off reading from well-written researchers (see Thinking, Fast and Slow). If any ideas were monumental at the time (1989) they are not now and you'll get nothing more from reading them here.
