CG Trashes Objectivist Defense of American Ideals
My Review was in an early post.
Here is CG Regressive Review posted on Amazon
After reading the first two chapters, I thought this book should be adapted to be a part of children's and young adults' social studies classes. It's facts that are taught in social studies, but the first two chapter state them in such a blunt way, with such a focus on personal liberty. We really need to talk bluntly about freedom.
Unfortunately after Chapter 2, the book devolves into a rant. It takes on the tone of a ranting low-brow political talk show host. Much of what it says is true, but the talk show tone is tiresome. Reading it in book format is even more annoying than hearing political ranting on the radio. There's not much discussion in the book about why the points are true, except for shooting down a few straw men. Occasionally it goes a little deeper. It's mostly about the author's amazement that not everyone agrees with him. On most points I agree with him, but I know it's not as simple as everyone who disagrees with being us either a fool or evil. Even if it were that simple, it doesn't make for interesting reading.
Despite the emphasis on reason and rationality, most chapters mention something about the author's denial of climate change. It does not explain why. It almost seems like he never even considered science. Of course science is always open to new evidence, and we all hope we find new evidence showing climate change won't be as costly as we thought. As of the time of the writing, though, this is a radical claim that you can't just mention casually without explanation. Toward the end of the book where the points are summarized, it almost says flat out we shouldn't rely on science to make policy decisions.
There are definite good points to this book, but it's kind of like being with one of those people are reasonably smart but given to ranting. You can have a reasonable conversation with them, but before long he goes off the rails: "[some politician] is intent on destroying modern civilization!!" They hear politicians and commentators say they're in an epic battle of good vs. evil, and the they buy it.
Here is CG Regressive Review posted on Amazon
After reading the first two chapters, I thought this book should be adapted to be a part of children's and young adults' social studies classes. It's facts that are taught in social studies, but the first two chapter state them in such a blunt way, with such a focus on personal liberty. We really need to talk bluntly about freedom.
Unfortunately after Chapter 2, the book devolves into a rant. It takes on the tone of a ranting low-brow political talk show host. Much of what it says is true, but the talk show tone is tiresome. Reading it in book format is even more annoying than hearing political ranting on the radio. There's not much discussion in the book about why the points are true, except for shooting down a few straw men. Occasionally it goes a little deeper. It's mostly about the author's amazement that not everyone agrees with him. On most points I agree with him, but I know it's not as simple as everyone who disagrees with being us either a fool or evil. Even if it were that simple, it doesn't make for interesting reading.
Despite the emphasis on reason and rationality, most chapters mention something about the author's denial of climate change. It does not explain why. It almost seems like he never even considered science. Of course science is always open to new evidence, and we all hope we find new evidence showing climate change won't be as costly as we thought. As of the time of the writing, though, this is a radical claim that you can't just mention casually without explanation. Toward the end of the book where the points are summarized, it almost says flat out we shouldn't rely on science to make policy decisions.
There are definite good points to this book, but it's kind of like being with one of those people are reasonably smart but given to ranting. You can have a reasonable conversation with them, but before long he goes off the rails: "[some politician] is intent on destroying modern civilization!!" They hear politicians and commentators say they're in an epic battle of good vs. evil, and the they buy it.
