This book is an excellent alternative or complement to the currently more popular decision-making books like those by Amos Tversky and Kahneman, DanieThis book is an excellent alternative or complement to the currently more popular decision-making books like those by Amos Tversky and Kahneman, Daniel. In the end (literally, in the conclusion and the epilogue), I think Hammond makes a case for also reading those books but he also makes clear that only reading those books is not enough. Hammond makes the case for quasirationality as perhaps better than the narrower road that Kahneman and Tversky often championed, imperfect though it may be.
The book felt a bit confusing at times, I often thought I had figured out the position Hammond was staking out only to have that idea upended a few pages later. Ultimately, the book is a metaphor for quasirationality. To quote Hammond from the conclusion, "Quasirationality is a superior form of cognition that has been the mainstay of our survival, all the while offering us all the negative consequences of an imperfect form of reasoning.” There is very rarely certainty in the situations considered here and, as a result, we should not expect certainty in our decisions, only the best we can muster....more
I have also read and enjoyed The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism and this book seems to be right in line with that one. Oreskes does aI have also read and enjoyed The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism and this book seems to be right in line with that one. Oreskes does an amazingly thorough job of tracing back the origins of how American society's understanding of climate change got to be where it is. It isn't as simple as a single issue, it is a long history that traverses several other scientific "controversies". It would be understandable to consider such a hypothesis to be borderline conspiracy theory and I suspect that Oreskes knew that going it. As a result, the book is detailed almost to the point of pedantry. Rather than view the detail as negative, I framed it as necessary to prove the hypothesis put forth. Great claims require great evidence as it were. It felt like this was a police procedural on steroids, where every aspect of the investigation is laid bare so that conclusions cannot be questioned even if motives are. Oreskes mentions that the authors were attacked in the media for their work and it serves to reinforce the point that personal attacks are part of the intricate game that has been played on various fields and in various forms since the 60s. As has been said, history doesn't repeat itself but it does rhyme....more
I feel that this book is part of the larger discussion from Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health but important enough I feel that this book is part of the larger discussion from Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health but important enough that it warrants its own book. Nestle lays out all the facts and figures that a reader can handle through the first section of the book and then gets down to the task of explaining how Big Soda and the general public interpret, manipulate, ignore, and are impacted by that information.
While the book certainly has its place, it does feel a bit redundant for readers of Food Politics. Nonetheless, there is much new information that would have been pedantic had it been included there. By making this into a separate book, Nestle is able to draw some comparisons that would have been out of place or incorrect if brought up in Food Politics.
The book includes activist ideas at the end of chapters, which is where the "and Winning" in the title comes from. Nestle includes many ideas here that range from easy to Quixote-esque but they are certainly interesting to contemplate for those of us who have not graduated to full-blown activism.
The parts of the book that discussed how Big Soda has affected minorities and the poor definitely left me feeling conflicted. I leave it to future readers to decide for themselves if they want to be on Nestle's side, against her, or somewhere uncomfortably in the middle....more
This book is a fittingly dense tome that recounts the history (political and otherwise) of healthcare prior to and through the passage of the AffordabThis book is a fittingly dense tome that recounts the history (political and otherwise) of healthcare prior to and through the passage of the Affordable Care Act. There's so much background to cover, both in medicine and politics, that this book can't help but be long. Brill does an excellent job of getting us up to speed on all that had brought us to that time as well as helping us understand all the interactions in politics and business that shaped the outcomes that we saw reported on the news. Brill understands that there are many people, places, and organizations to keep track of so he frequently reminds us of what acronyms stand and who certain occasional characters are so we can keep it all straight.
Brill's reportage is excellent and I felt that he does his best to divorce himself from the story so that the reader can draw their own conclusions about each part of the process as well as the overall recounting. I think that there is plenty here to infuriate and/or confound readers from any political background. I think that it is hard to look back on all that has happened in the American healthcare system without finding fault on all sides and numerous places where politics and/or business have taken precedence over the common good.
In the end, I didn't feel anger so much as resignation. This is the beast that we have created. This is what we deserve....more
I now have a better understanding of why "a calorie is not a calorie", that sugar is bad, that I make some poor food choices, and that the food industI now have a better understanding of why "a calorie is not a calorie", that sugar is bad, that I make some poor food choices, and that the food industry is more concerned with my money than my wellbeing. I shouldn't be surprised by any of this but Lustig does such a thorough job in this book that I have no choice but to be surprised.
This book (or, at least, Lustig's body of work) appears to be a primary source for Katie Couric's documentary "Fed Up", which I recommend if this topic interests you.
I simultaneously loved and loathed this book. In fairness, I didn't loathe the book, but what the book says about our government, big business, and thI simultaneously loved and loathed this book. In fairness, I didn't loathe the book, but what the book says about our government, big business, and the general public (including me). Nestle gives you a relentless onslaught of data that illuminates the idea that "diet is a political issue" and that most of the work that is done to affect your food choices happens far from the light of day. Read, pay attention, and prepare to eat differently as a result....more
The highest tribute I can pay to this book is that it is still stuck in my craw days after finishing. I can't get it to resolve, meaning that I embracThe highest tribute I can pay to this book is that it is still stuck in my craw days after finishing. I can't get it to resolve, meaning that I embrace Rauch's ideas and philosophy but I can't create the discussions required in my mind. I have no trouble with Rauch's rules of "no final say" and "no special authority", which I think are excellent. But I must think too poorly either of my fellow humans or of myself because I don't know if I can convince others to abide by those rules when it comes to personally significant matters. This, then, is the ultimate challenge of the book, to hold onto those rules more tightly than one's beliefs. May we be willing to accept that challenge....more
Without judgement, I say that this book is dense and took me a long time to get through. Those comments are not intended to either detract from or enhWithout judgement, I say that this book is dense and took me a long time to get through. Those comments are not intended to either detract from or enhance the book. Scahill has written an immense, thorough account of how the war on terror, as we now know it, came to be. It is an insightful and well-documented screed and it is worth reading and finishing. The book may be far-reaching but the scope is necessary if the reader hopes to ever have an understanding of how the US reached its current stance on covert war, overt war, and drone strikes....more
Maybe I am committing an error by taking pretty much everything a Nobel laureate in economics says as truth, but this book is a sobering look at the eMaybe I am committing an error by taking pretty much everything a Nobel laureate in economics says as truth, but this book is a sobering look at the economic and political situation in America. While the book may appear to have a distinct Democratic slant, I think that it is more a case that Stiglitz is strongly against policies that favor the rich and that stance happens to be echoed by the Democratic Party. If you pay attention, you will see that Stiglitz' observations point out problems with both parties and how they govern but it is true that more of the issues are more easily seen in the Republican Party. It is easy to see how this book would infuriate people on either side of the of the political fence: those on the right saying that Stiglitz is wrong about things like corporate welfare and the those on the left saying that Stiglitz' writings should awaken a rage in the 99%. It seems that a fairly distinct line can be drawn between fans and enemies of these ideas: do you prefer elitism or egalitarianism? Arguments can certainly be made for both sides. Which arguments you choose say a lot about you and about us....more
Excellent. Silver gets you thinking about how we view the world by looking at big issues and subjects that we have some familiarity with. He isn't afrExcellent. Silver gets you thinking about how we view the world by looking at big issues and subjects that we have some familiarity with. He isn't afraid to look in depth at politically charged issues because he views them through a different lens that doesn't rely on spin because it relies on data. He is well aware that viewing things in this way will not please many partisans and he is completely at home with that because he is at home with uncertainty, which many are not. His ultimate lesson to the reader to be at home with uncertainty as well.
"The virtue of thinking probabilistically is that you will force yourself to stop and smell the data - slow down and consider the imperfections in your thinking. Over time, you should find that this makes your decision making better." - Nate Silver, from the conclusion of the book....more
This book makes me rethink everything I see, hear, and read about international relations between the US and other countries. It makes me rethink everThis book makes me rethink everything I see, hear, and read about international relations between the US and other countries. It makes me rethink everything about how our government conducts the war on terror. It is unsettling to think that our intelligence is so tenuous so often. It is even more unsettling to see how certain we are in our actions based on such tenuous information. I am certain that the job the CIA is asked to do is supremely difficult but Weiner makes it clear that agency has not come within leagues of doing the job acceptably....more
An interesting book that, in the end, creates more questions than it answers. Is there any escape from the "system" that has existed? Is such a systemAn interesting book that, in the end, creates more questions than it answers. Is there any escape from the "system" that has existed? Is such a system inherent in any culture? The authors vaguely hint towards the end that it is black and white, either there is total central control or there is a free market to manage the culture/counterculture duality. That seems to suggest that they believe that there is no society without this duality.
The explanation of this system and how it has changed over time is fascinating and the pop culture references are telling, even when they are perhaps too philosophical or read too much into the meaning of those references.
The book is enlightening and far-reaching, even if it has moments when it acts too enlightened or far-reaching for its own good....more
How can a book feel simultaneously so desolate and yet so hopeful? This is the question that I can't answer but what makes this b"Ad astra per aspera"
How can a book feel simultaneously so desolate and yet so hopeful? This is the question that I can't answer but what makes this book so successful. Suskind's most engaging characters are in difficulty but looking at the stars and Suskind does an amazing job of making their struggles palpable and vital. His genius lies in making their struggles and wishes subtly, painfully obvious without having to state them.
I should probably be more frightened of nuclear terrorism based on what I read here but Suskind puts me at ease by showing that there are experts working tirelessly on the issue. Suskind has earned my trust in them to keep me safe. My feeling after reading his book is like seeing the bat signal in Gotham and feeling safer knowing that Batman is out there rather than more scared because there is evil out there as well.
I greatly enjoyed his tales of Usman and Ibrahim, which gave me greater insight into what it means to live as a sometimes-scared Muslim in a world that is more scared of them than they are of us.
Suskind creates a beautiful microcosm, one that embraces the terror and uncertainty with pragmatism and will and simultaneously embraces the fragility and nobility of our humanity with great love and optimism....more
Because this book is a collection of essays written for magazine publication, it does come across as a bit disjointed, even though there is a common tBecause this book is a collection of essays written for magazine publication, it does come across as a bit disjointed, even though there is a common theme running throughout. This did not deter from my enjoyment of the book.
While I did not enjoy it as much as The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine, it was still a very good read. I felt that there was more levity and wit in this book than in The Big Short. Perhaps it was that Lewis was writing for a slightly different audience. Maybe it was easier to tell the stories without the same sense of outrage and horror. Maybe I am making all of this up. Regardless of the reasons (if any), I had an easier time laughing at what was going on in the book and I felt that Lewis helped me do so by the tone of his narrative.
Not my favorite Lewis book nor my favorite book about the economic crisis but an excellent book in its own right....more
Loading...
