Book Reviews – 2024

“Cultish: The Language of Fanaticism” by Amanda Montell tackles, with intelligence and humor, the heavy and fascinating topic of the world of cult language – much of the power of cults derives from the language they use in specific ways, and unpacking those strategies is a great way of seeing through the façade.

Montell examines the linguistic techniques used by cult leaders to control their followers. One of the most powerful concepts introduced in the book is that of the “thought-terminating cliché” – a phrase or slogan that is designed to stop critical thinking in its tracks. These clichés, such as “It’s all in God’s hands”, “Everything happens for a reason”, and “Trust the plan” are effective at alleviating cognitive dissonance and preventing followers from questioning the cult’s beliefs.

Other techniques come into play, too; us-versus-them labels and loaded language being the other critical tools of cultish organisations. How, exactly, these linguistic strategies work however is interesting – it’s not so much that the language is used to ‘brainwash’ people than reshaping a person’s reality only when they are in an ideological place where that reshaping is welcome. Once that process gets going, other steps come into play, such as easing the members into the cult’s ideologies, and introducing the inevitable special vernacular bit by bit.

The “-ish” part of the title becomes apparent when the book talks about corporate cults or fitness communities, and when some of the conditioning we all live with in our society is discussed – such as the conditioning to automatically trust the voices of middle-aged white men. One of the many key takeaways from the book is the importance of logic and judicious questioning, especially when it comes to groups that demand unquestioning obedience. As cult expert Steve Hassan notes, “The most important thing to remember is that if something is legitimate, it will stand up to scrutiny”. In the words of Nietzsche “Truth doesn’t mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged.”

“Cultish” is a must-read for anyone interested in the power of language and the dangers of unchecked fanaticism. The book is a sobering reminder of the need for critical thinking and healthy skepticism in an age of increasing polarization, misinformation, and conspiracy-driven cults like QAnon. A cult – or a cultish organization – is probably closer to you than you think. You could be under the influence of a cultish organization without knowing it, and learning more about them and how they work is one key way of uncovering them.

* Rating: 4.5 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 3.7
* Who is it for: Anyone interested in the power of language, the psychology of cults, or the dangers of unchecked fanaticism.

If there’s one pragmatic, sensible, prolific, and insightful guide into working with our new interns that are Generative AI, it’s Ethan Mollick. He has long been, and continues to be, a powerhouse of insights when it comes to Generative AI, so his book “Co-Intelligence” was at the top of my list of things to read when it came out earlier this month.

Co-Intelligence is an excellent, thoughtful introduction to what these systems are and more importantly, how we might approach them from a very pragmatic perspective.

It’s also an interesting hybrid – it is an in-depth introduction, but is also a quick read at ~200 spaciously laid out pages; it is not a prompt engineering guide, but it will teach you some useful principles; it does not offer a comprehensive vision of the future, but it lays out four high-level paths forward; it is not a typical How-To per se, but comes with lots of useful anecdotes and suggested approaches; it is also not simply a collection of Ethan’s posts from his great One Useful Thing blog, but certainly a lot of the stuff will be familiar to people who read that.

I’m not entirely sure I can do an objective review of Co-Intelligence because so much of my thinking on GenAI has been shaped and influenced by Ethan’s approach. Not that I agree on everything with him; for example, I disagree with the notion that it would be “costless to skim [ideas] to see if they inspire better ideas” – it is low-cost, but it’s not costless. In fact, the sheer volume of ideas AI can generate in seconds can become a problem as long as humans need to triage them. What’s more, for a pessi….I mean realist like me, some of the challenges Ethan does acknowledge are nevertheless subsequently glossed over very lightly. There is a clear bias for optimism; this may not be a bad thing, but just so you know it’s there.

This may be another sign of my bias, but I feel like this is a topic everyone needs to learn about. I have seen a lot of technology trends in my life, and everyone who knows me knows that I am not easily roped into becoming their supporter – but I think GenAI is genuinely different. At present, there is no better book that _everyone_ can understand than Co-Intelligence; for that alone, I would highly recommend it. Acknowledging the challenges of writing an up-to-date book about a tremendously fast-moving field such as GenAI, it should be pointed out this book is not out of date – not yet anyway. More than that, it offers durable lessons and food for thought which will not expire with the next frontier model.

* Rating: 4.5 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 8.8
* Who is it for: those looking for a concise understanding on how we can coexist and collaborate with GenAI systems.

https://www.amazon.com.au/Co-Intelligence-Living-Working-Ethan-Mollick/dp/0753560771/

Many people go through life without thinking much about how everything is structured; less why it’s structured the way it is; and even less how some fundamental things could be different. Interestingly, most ordinary citizens admit that most aspects, even some fundamentals, of our current societal system have serious flaws, but they still instinctively dismiss alternatives as “not feasible in the real world”.

It is this attitude that Kristen Ghodsee’s “Everyday Utopia: In praise of radical alternatives to the traditional family home” takes on. In similar ways to Joseph Henrich’s “The weirdest people in the world”, Kristen shows us that there are many different ways to organize our societies, some potentially much better than our current western myopic focus on nuclear families – which, Ghodsee explains, extends all the way to architecture and the physical structures of our cities & communities.

Everyday Utopia covers how a whole range of experiments throughout history have sought to re-imagine domesticity, gender roles, and child-rearing practices. Many of them challenge the nuclear family and invite us to consider more cooperative approaches to parenting and domestic life.

Ghodsee writes with clarity and conviction, weaving together examples and research to challenge readers’ preconceptions about family, child-rearing, and domestic life. Her analysis is both rigorous and humane, as she invites us to imagine alternative ways of organizing our most intimate relationships and spaces.

I found it endearing that she draws from and refers to Star Trek frequently – I share the view that Star Trek is the most compelling future world vision we have built, and one that offers the most practical hope for humanity among the future worlds.

Ghodsee is careful not to romanticize utopian experiments, acknowledging their limitations and challenges, while still finding value in their aspirations and insights. Some readers will find the ideas radical or even unsettling – while I disagree with her point that works like 1984 would have a message of suppressing change, inability or unwillingness to think things could be both different and better does run deep in our societies.

There are no clear one-size-fits-all answers in the book (because there aren’t any), but there are questions we should be thinking about and experiments we should allow and encourage, and an important reminder that “the stability of the world around us is a fiction we all accept so we can go about our daily lives.”

As it’s clear the coming decades are going to be ones of above-average change, we owe it to ourselves and the society to expand our personal & collective Overton windows – as Ghodsee puts it, “the most important elsewhere is the temporal one”.

* Rating: 4 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 10
* Who is it for: 1) dreamers who dare to re-imagine society; 2) the realists willing to question foundational norms; 3) those who are adamant the current way is the best one.
https://www.amazon.com.au/Everyday-Utopia-Radical-Alternatives-Traditional/dp/1847927173/

Anyone who knows me moderately well knows I have this tiny little interest in aviation. One of the related topics of keen interest of mine are the lessons that other industries can learn from aviation’s decades-long experience with automation-driven skill degradation.

It’s a core thesis of mine that the aviation industry’s past, present, and future in handling this challenge holds valuable insights for the world at large, especially as we face the looming prospect of widespread skill degradation due to increasing automation. Add to that my involvement in various AI and automation-related initiatives of the Royal Aeronautical Society, and it’s obvious I’m constantly seeking out articles and books that delve into this fascinating subject.

Jack Hersch’s book “The Dangers of Automation in Airliners: Accidents Waiting to Happen” fits this theme perfectly. It provides a comprehensive introduction to the topic, covering the history and key aspects of automation in aviation, such as situational awareness, basics of flight, control surfaces, and avionics, in fascinating detail. The book is highly accessible to readers without an aviation background, bringing them up to speed on critical concepts – a rare feat for a book of this nature.

The book looks at a number of accidents and incidents in gripping but accurate detail. Many of these cases will be familiar to industry aficionados, but there are likely to be some new details for most people.

Most people who read this book will rightfully grow to be skeptical of the various industry initiatives pushing for more automation. Where historically automation has played a key role in improving safety, it is interesting to note that the new trench of eMCO (Extended Minimum-Crew Operations), SPO (Single-Pilot Operations) or entirely autonomous flight are not even attempted to be sold on them improving safety. It’s all an efficiency play, which should raise some alarm bells.

In aviation, as in many other industries, we are currently living in a precarious moment where over-reliance on automation can lead to the degradation of human skills that once surpassed the capabilities of automation. The end result is a system that is less safe, even though the initial introduction of automation improved safety. The Dangers of Automation in Airliners provides a great understanding of these issues in the aviation industry. It is my hope that broader awareness of these challenges can help steer us away from maladaptive adoption of automation in other sectors, preventing potential catastrophic consequences.

* Rating: 4.5 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 5.8
* Who is it for: Realistically, you’re going to need to be at least a little bit interested in human factors, aviation, aircraft, or automation to find this book engaging. If you are, however, you will find it’s a great read.

Jeff Hawkins’ “A Thousand Brains: A New Theory of Intelligence” is a book of three distinctly different parts, and I’d almost want to write three reviews of it.

Part 1 is about brain structures and cognitive processes; a fascinating tour of the current leading theories of how the brain works. The ‘thousand brains’ theory seems sound and helps explain quite a few things better than previous theories. It also plays nicely with what I recently learned from the book “The Experience Machine”. This exploration into neural mechanisms and cognitive functions is the book’s strongest suit, offering valuable insights into the human brain. So far so good.

Then the book turns to artificial intelligence; written in 2022, it already feels like this part aged very quickly. That’s not the only issue though; it also seems to rely on a very restrictive and narrow definition of “intelligence”, assuming – and I’m simplifying a little here – that the only way of achieving artificial intelligence is to copy how humans work. This perspective seems very off.

One of the more perplexing aspects of Hawkins’ thesis is his treatment of emotions in the context of intelligence. While he acknowledges the important role of “older” brain functions in intelligence, there appears to be an almost wholesale dismissal, or at least an undervaluing, of emotions as a component of intelligent behaviour. This stance is contradictory, given the increasing recognition in neuroscience and psychology that emotions are integral to human cognition and decision-making processes.

Hawkins also tends to oversimplify complex societal features. His approach to discussing broad social and cultural phenomena occasionally lacks depth and nuance, which can leave the reader wanting a more thorough exploration of these crucial aspects of human intelligence and behavior.

Then the last part goes on to talk about things like persistence of human knowledge, and settling space that start going on rather thin ice. His views on all things space feel overly enthusiastic and not fully considering the vast array of challenges and realistic timelines associated with such ambitious endeavors. “A City on Mars”, another recent read, adds a useful reality-check here.

“A Thousand Brains” shines in its discussion about brain structures and functions; it falls short in things like its treatment of AI, emotions, societal complexities, and space things. I do, however, wholeheartedly agree with one of the concluding desires of Hawkins when he says “I hope that one day every person on Earth will learn how their brain works”. I share that hope.

* Rating: 4 out of 5 overall, but quite unevenly so
* Dog-ear index: 10.9
* Who is it for: those interested in neuroscience will like Part 1; people thinking of ways to achieve AI might find views in Part 2 interesting; Part 3 may appeal to those thinking of long-term survival of not just humans but knowledge in general.

This review is of a book I read many years ago, but it covers covers work from a perspective we are all going to need to pay more attention to. Since first coining the term a decade ago in an article, David Graeber’s concept of “bullshit jobs” has become something of a classic. Under the provocative title lie fundamentally important matters when it comes to the world of work. For those who somehow have escaped the core premise, it’s simple, intriguing and unsettling: that many jobs in today’s industrialised societies are essentially pointless.

I think intuitively many of us know that; deep down many of us understand our jobs to be bullshit jobs, and we can certainly point to some that we think are. A key pain point Graeber identifies is the moral and psychological toll these jobs take. Contrary to the idea that “easy work” is a dream, employees in these roles often report significant dissatisfaction, feeling their time and talents are wasted on meaningless tasks. This, Graeber argues, stems from a fundamental desire to feel that one’s work has a meaningful impact on the world.

When you add to this premise the transformative wave that is AI in automating a bunch of these tasks, interesting perspectives arise. On one hand, we know generative AI is a fluent bullshitter. So given there are many bullshit jobs, maybe there _are_ some genuine, well-deserved redundancies to be had — if we only had a system where unemployment wouldn’t result in such huge problems. UBI is becoming urgent.

Yet, the economic models we seem to (over-)rely on usually assume “that if humans are offered the option to be parasites, of course they’ll take it”. However, as pointed out in the book, “almost every bit of available evidence indicates that this is not the case”. Here we have another case of organisations, including governments, NOT being data-driven, but instead stuck in their original ill-conceived preconceptions.

Another perspective the book brings out is the critical social nature of human beings; this is something we should keep in mind as we seek to automate away the little points of human interaction disparagingly framed as friction; “Human beings are not just social animals; they are so intrinsically social that if they are cut off from relations with other humans, they begin to decay physically.”

The world may look a little different than it did six years ago when this book was written, but what’s happened since has, if anything, only made the points in it more important. Incidentally, this book will make a great companion read to Sidney Dekker’s “Compliance Capitalism” (may have to write a review of that later), which is chock-full of examples of bullshit jobs.

* Rating: 4.5 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 3.8
* Who is it for: Anyone who’s ever doubted the meaningfulness of their job, people interested in labor and economic theory, and readers looking for a critical perspective on modern work culture.

We all know there are some prominent people who insist on building a human outpost on Mars like yesterday. Let me get this out of the way first: I agree humanity should become a multi-planetary species, but – and this is a rather critical but – not before we’ve gotten our act together on Earth.

To throw some serious cold water onto anyone’s Mars dreams comes the book “A City on Mars: Can We Settle Space, Should We Settle Space, and Have We Really Thought This Through?” by Kelly and Zach Weinersmith. The book takes an insightful, often humorous look at the feasibility and implications of establishing a human presence on the Moon, Mars or beyond.

Spoiler alert: it does not look good. I was somewhat skeptical, but also naïvely curious, about the potential for establishing any Mars colony in this century prior to reading this book. Reading “A City on Mars” took those incipient dreams and shot them in the head, execution-style, multiple times over. We’re not going to settle Mars. Nor are our grandchildren. We should stop trying so hard and focus back on THIS planet for a while longer.

The Weinersmiths, well-known for blending humor with scientific rigor, embark on a very thorough investigation of the current state of space technology and business, asking questions about the viability of having children in space, the governance of space settlements, space psychology, the potential for conflict both in space and back on Earth, and quite a bit more. As I should have known, Ben Goldacre’s line of “I think you’ll find it’s a bit more complicated than that” applies perfectly here.

The exploration in the book delves into both the technical challenges, like health impacts of prolonged exposure to low gravity and cosmic rays, but also, surprisingly interestingly, into the sociopolitical aspects, including space law and the potential shift towards authoritarianism in small space settlements. It’s easy to say that this is a very comprehensive feasibility overview.

Settling space to achieve the – in itself arguably good – goal of improving humanity’s long-term survival chances requires enormous advancements in technology and a better understanding of the political and ethical implications of space settlement. Not to mention something should probably be done to the way humans tend to act and generally go about being humans. That could be tricky, but we should 100% try to fix that here on our home the Earth first before pining for other planets to ruin.

* Rating: 4 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 3.4
* Who is it for: Space enthusiasts, both advocates and skeptics of Mars colonization, and readers who enjoy a blend of science, humor, and critical analysis.

Now, the topic at hand for the book review is climate change – probably the single biggest challenge humanity has had to deal with, and will continue to be so for decades to come. What keeps dominating the discourse are the doomer views, and occasionally still the techno-optimistic views along the lines of renewables will save the day.

In “The Best of Times, The Worst of Times: Futures from the Frontiers of Climate Science,” Paul Behrens doesn’t shy away from the stark realities of our environmental predicament. The title itself sets the stage for a narrative that oscillates between hope and pessimism, painting, in alternating chapters, two visions our possible futures on a variety of climate-related topics.

The book serves some useful purposes; one is providing pragmatic future visions. While it does provide two “opposite” scenarios, both are plausible and realistic – neither is about an imminent utopia, nor an extinction event. The other purposes is giving an honest, data-driven and research-backed appraisal of the state of the planet.

It’s not without its weaknesses. One of the problems with the data-driven approach is that it can leave you feeling detached; it’s one thing to talk about the probability of multiple breadbasket failures, but it’s another thing to _see_ yourself in that kind of a future, or to envision what it might mean. While Behrens takes steps to that direction, we know people aren’t convinced by data or facts.

Another issue are a few false dichotomies; for one, Behrens notes that “if you do spend money on adaptation, you’re not spending on mitigation and even if these defensive expenditures are effective, the most they can do is buy time.” It’s not that simple – we do have to spend money BOTH on mitigation and adaptation; they are not mutually exclusive. And while saying “they only buy you time” may be accurate, buying time – in some cases hundreds of years of time from certain risks – is absolutely a warranted and valid approach.

The best thing that can result from the book being read far and wide is that it expands the Overton window of possible actions; it’s candid about the need for huge structural changes in our societies and the urgency of them, are we to avoid a catastrophic collapse. It is becoming quite clear the old approach of muddling through isn’t going to cut it. The Best of Times, the Worst of Times helps convey that message, and for that alone, it’s an important book.

* Rating: 4 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 6.7
* Who is it for: people wanting to learn realistic climate futures

https://www.amazon.com.au/Best-Times-Worst-Futures-Frontiers/dp/1911648098/

We return to normal book review programming this week; the book at hand – Andy Clark’s “The Experience Machine: How Our Minds Predict and Shape Reality” has the potential of completely transforming what you think our brains are doing, depending on where your understanding is now.

Clark’s core premise is that our brains, far from being passive receivers of information, are powerful ‘prediction machines.’ Furthermore, our experiences are not the result of sensory input but rather a dynamic synthesis of the inputs with our internal expectations and predictions about the world. When constructing our reality, varying weights are given to the predictions and actual inputs – to the extent that sometimes our predictions far overshadow the “real-world” input. This simple-sounding revelation has profound implications for how we understand ourselves and our place in the world.

It wasn’t an entirely novel idea for me; Lisa Feldman Barrett has talked about how emotions are constructs in her brilliant book “How Emotions Are Made” some years ago; Clark extends that to all processing. As such, this book was more of a broadening, deepening and tuning of my understanding of how the brain works, not a wholesale revolution in it – but for those still in the “input processing engine” mindset about the brain, this book and its dive into cognitive science can fundamentally challenge your understanding of how we perceive the world around us.

I found the chapter on the extended mind particularly illuminating. Clark posits that our minds extend beyond our bodies, incorporating tools, technologies, and even other people to augment our cognitive skills; we are, and have always been cyborgs (which incidentally ties well into a project I’m working on with Jerry Michalski; more on that later). The way we interact with our environment becomes an integral part of our thinking processes. This forces us to reconsider the boundaries of our selves – are we just the contents of our skull, or perhaps we should more honestly think of the ‘self’ as something more distributed and interconnected?

Clark writes with a style that blends academic rigor with engaging explanations, in a manner that is accessible to a broader audience. There’s references galore to dig into later if you so feel like, but they are skillfully weaved into the narrative in a way that doesn’t distract at all.

The implications of these concepts to others like consciousness and even intelligence are sure to linger in your mind long after finishing this mindset-shifting book.

* Rating: 4.5 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 9.2
* Who is it for: Anyone fascinated by how we experience the world, and concerned with the implications of living in an age where both the physical and digital worlds we end up being shaped by are constructed in ways we are not always aware of and may not agree with.

It’s only February, but I can already say that “Freethinking: Protecting Freedom of Thought Amidst the New Battle for the Mind” by Simon McCarthy-Jones is going to end up in the Top 5 books of this year. It is one of the most thought-provoking books I have read ever.

I picked it up while grazing in Readings, so had no expectations. For a relatively short book, it covers such impressive ground that I’m struggling with this review; I’ll be digesting this beautiful, eloquent, book with just the right amount of dry humor for quite some time.

The book explores the importance of free thinking from all conceivable angles, and I can guarantee there are more angles than you think there are (like how the Enlightenment, in its individualism, did a disservice to the thought it tried to promote). To not be able, or capable, of thinking freely would mean losing a key part of what makes us human – yet so many forces are imposing on our ability to think freely that one could argue we are, at present, not able to do that.

“Freethinking” synthesizes insights from philosophy, law, technology, and psychology, and explores both external constraints and internal mental thought processes that might restrict free thinking.

Throughout the book there is an understanding that we are controlled in more ways than one, and the author concedes that “thoughts bubble up into our consciousness from a brain we neither control nor understand”, but McCarthy-Jones does not go to Sapolsky’s extent of denying free will.

With abundant threats to free thinking, what are we to do about it? Here, McCarthy-Jones proposes nothing less than restructuring our society to free thinking, starting with architecture. This includes ramping up education, designing public spaces and digital platforms to support reflection, enacting regulations and transparency requirements around persuasion techniques, and cultivating values promoting thought.

If that seems a little utopian, there are easier lessons, too: McCarthy-Jones urges us to guard our attention, reason deliberatively, reflect deeply and find courage in our convictions. He offers some practical steps to achieve “mental self-defense”, while cautioning that true freedom of thought requires vigilance, effort and humility.

“Freethinking” also proposes reinstating communities of thinking, in which people can think together, while shifting away from competitive inquiry or persuasion, with the only aim being the mutual gain of understanding.

I do not hesitate saying this is a “must-read”, and that is a rare thing for me to say. In a world cluttered with distractions, ‘Freethinking’ is call to action for the preservation or re-discovery of our most human ability – the freedom to think.

* Rating: 5 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 16.8 (record high by some margin)
* Who is it for: anyone worried about freedom of thought; anyone not worried about freedom of thought ought to read it too, because they need to be.

Continuing the theme of ‘heavy book, heavy topic’; “Breaking Together” by Jem Bendell was extremely interesting, but also a supremely difficult book to review.

Its central thesis is that the collapse of modern societies has already begun due to converging environmental, economic, and social crises. It makes its case using interdisciplinary evidence, making up the first half of the book, with the second half exploring visions for societal transformation in the face of such a collapse. It also aims to be a profound meditation on resilience and community in the face of climate crises.

Critically important stuff.

Much of it is written with scholarly rigor, and many of the arguments are compelling. However, the journey through “Breaking Together” is a rocky one, marked by moments of insight but also distracted by several drawbacks. At times it’s just lacking editing; sometimes a distinct lack of realpolitik; at other times it’s missing out key technologies (like thorium); other times the systems analysis is surprisingly shallow and consequently unconvincing; and then, while deriding some conspiracy theories, it wholeheartedly embraces other conspiracy theories.

Another thing that distracts from the book’s primary message is how Bendell uses language. While the latter part of the book delves more into topics where scientific rigor does not apply so easily – critical wisdom, freedom, even free will (of which Bendell could learn a lot from Sapolsky about; see previous review) – that is no excuse to start spouting pseudo-profound bullshit, of which I offer this phrase as an example: “The recognition of natural freedom can complement a polycentric unity consciousness perspective to inform a view of both the individual human and human communities as tending towards connection, expression and emergence.”

It’s moments like this where the book veers off course, loses its focus and diminishes its impact. Reading it then becomes a cognitively taxing exercise as you try to maintain a neutral and charitable attitude to what you’re reading, despite having just read something batshit crazy (nb. idiom used for illustrative purposes only).

The book, while an ambitious and commendable as a piece of work, is marred by its sometimes rambling nature and Bendell’s tendency to dig his own grave with unsupported claims. This makes for a frustrating read, as the potential for a meaningful contribution to the discourse on climate change and societal transformation is evident, but not fully realized.

* Rating: 3.5 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 4.2
* Who is it for: For readers worried about the fate of our civilization, but also willing to navigate through a mix of insightful and controversial content; for those who can critically engage with a text and sift through its inconsistencies to find the valuable nuggets.

From last week’s “light book, heavy topic” we move to a “heavy book, heavy topic”: Robert Sapolsky’s “Determined: Life Without Free Will”.

With his characteristic dry wit and wisdom – and copious footnotes the length of a small book – Sapolsky takes us through the latest scientific research on decision-making, weaving together insights from biology, neuroscience, psychology, and philosophy. His central argument is simple and radical: free will as commonly understood does not exist. Our actions stem not from some free-standing conscious choice but from the interplay of activity in our neural networks, genes, brains, and environments we both grew up in and find ourselves in – all factors we do not control.

The question is tackled from multiple angles; he looks at the neurological basis of decision-making, showing how unconscious processes in our brains commit us to act before we’re even aware of deciding. He examines the powerful influence of our life experiences, physiology, and social contexts on our behaviour.

For many, this assault on free will may trigger existential unease. Sapolsky proposes a more compassionate response; if causes beyond the individual determine actions, blaming people for their conduct makes little sense. Instead, we should recognize the limits of self-control and treat wrongdoers with empathy rather than condemnation. Notably, this does not mean we should let criminals roam free – instead, we should move to a more quarantine & rehabilitation-based approach, away from the dominant punishment-model.

And we, as society, can change. We no longer believe people with epilepsy are in cahoots with Satan; we no longer believe schizophrenia is caused by bad parenting. We’ve debunked the myth that left-handedness is a sign of malevolence. We’ve (mostly) moved on from viewing the LGBTQ+ community as something “unnatural”, though that’s still a bit of a work in progress. We have learned important lessons in the past hundreds of years. We can, and should, continue to learn and adjust.

Fully accepting there is no free will brings us to a view that “we need to accept the absurdity of hating any person for anything they have done”. Sapolsky also notes that “we already know enough to understand that the endless people whose lives are less fortunate than ours don’t implicitly ‘deserve’ to be invisible”, but concedes that “Ninety-nine percent of the time I can’t remotely achieve this mindset, but there is nothing to do but try, because it will be freeing.”

At the very start, Sapolsky states that one of his goals with the book is “to convince you that there is no free will, or at least that there is much less free will than generally assumed when it really matters”. It succeeded with me, at least on the ‘much less’-scale.

Will it with you?

* Rating: 5 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 10 (very high)
* Who is it for: people willing to question their assumptions about free will and moral responsibility

This week the book is light; the topic is not: “This Civilisation is Finished: Conversations on the end of Empire – and what lies beyond” by Rupert Read & Samuel Alexander. At under 100 pages is more of a pamphlet than a full-fledged book.

The contents is less book-like, too; it is a conversation between Rupert and Samuel on some of the toughest realities that we need to face. It’s a combination of stark realism in the face of what, exactly, the future of the planet and humanity look like in the face of the climate (and other) crisis, but also a set of constructive visions.

The gist of the book is that our civilization, as we know it, will not survive. Given as far as we know, all civilizations eventually collapse, that’s not much of an insight, but the thesis is that driven chiefly by climate change, we are going to need to radically transform our civilization – and what will take place is either a permanent terminal collapse, a collapse that manages to seed a successor civilization or a radical transformation to something different without an overt collapse.

In the book, the authors take a stand that many think veers on doomerism, and view the transformation scenario as the least likely outcome. They have good reasons to believe so, but is that right call and do they have great reasons to believe so? The reader will need to be the judge of that.

Many of the arguments made in the book are backed up by solid data, but I was somewhat bothered by the arguments that were not – I understand that from a conversational rhetoric perspective the exaggerations and simplifications can be warranted, but even though this is a discussion, it’s also a book, so I’m a little uncomfortable with some. For example, using terminology like “climate Armageddon”, stating that it’s “unacceptable to gamble on nuclear power”, or making the frankly ridiculous assertion that “most of humanity has lived a pretty easy and good life” [in pre-agricultural age] are all arguments that are _not_ backed up by data, and detract from the important core message of the book.

I wholeheartedly agree that our civilization _will_ undergo a transformation. In many ways, that transformation is likely to be traumatic. I agree humanity is far, far too focused on the economy. I agree continuing the status quo is reckless. I agree with a whole lot of what is said in the book, but then they go off on these tangents that are not backed up by data, that are more opinions-stated-as-facts, and that I am allergic to.

Nevertheless, it’s a worthy read – a conversation offering insights into the views of both great thinkers; a conversation you will most likely not agree with everything on; a conversation you would want to occasionally jump in and say “Now hold on a minute!”, frustrated that you can’t.

* Rating: 3.5 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 4.2
* Who is it for: environmentalists, activists, policymakers; people interested in ecological philosophy.

This week’s book review is more grounded one; an easy, quick read that nevertheless comes with an important lesson. Chip Heath and Dan Heath‘s “The Power of Moments” is about identifying life’s big, memorable events, but also a guide to understanding why certain experiences have such a profound impact on us – and more interestingly, how we can intentionally create more of these moments in our lives and in the lives of others.

The Heath brothers, known for their accessible writing of important concepts and actionable insights, explore how certain brief experiences can jolt us, elevate us, and change us, and how these moments are crafted from elements of elevation, insight, pride, and connection. As usual, their writing is filled with a mix of humor, anecdotes, and solid research.

One of the most interesting aspects of the book is its applicability across various aspects of life, from professional environments to personal life. The authors use a range of examples, from a hotel that turns a mundane stay into a memorable experience to a teacher who transforms a standard lesson into a pivotal moment in a student’s life.

The book is classified under “Business & Economics”, so it’s natural there is an emphasis on business. Even so, I’m scoring it at less than 5/5 because I feel like the concept of moments is profound enough to warrant a better treatise of the broader implications, and not present it so often with an economic benefit-lens. I get why businesses want to do that; I just feel like there’s more actual value to be had elsewhere.

Where the book is great at is in its ability to not only provide a framework for understanding what makes a moment powerful but also in offering practical guidance on how to create such moments – whether you’re running an organization or just your own life. Irrespective of your role, this book offers some valuable insights & tools.

In a world where we often find ourselves in a routine – and businesses that insist on that route – the book is a refreshing reminder of the power we have to transform ordinary experiences into extraordinary ones – yes, including in business, where that reminder comes with the lesson of giving your people autonomy and power to create those extraordinary experiences.

I’ll end with a quote:

“””
If you knew you could make a positive difference in someone’s life — that you could create a memory for them that would last for years —and it would take only a trivial amount of time on your part, would you do it?

Well, now you know it.

Will you do it?
“”””

* Rating: 4 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 5.6
* Who is it for: in a business context, for leaders who want to make their brand experience an actually memorable (and a more profitable) one – ‘sticky’, even, linking it to some earlier work by the Heaths. In personal context, it’s a reminder for all of us on the importance of moments + a simple guide to increasing the likelihood of having more meaningful ones.

The first review of the year – of the last book I read in 2023 – takes us on a unique exploration of faith and the human mind.

The perspective of tanya luhrmann‘s “How God Becomes Real: Kindling the Presence of Invisible Others” is as simple as it is unexplored; rather than presuming that people worship because they believe, it asks whether people believe because they worship, and what it takes for people to make God ‘real’.

Luhrmann argues the key to understanding religious experiences lies not in whether gods or spirits are real in a material sense, but in how practices and rituals enable individuals to experience them as real, and develop personal relationships with them.

What sets the book apart is the unique approach to the topic; Luhrmann isn’t here to debunk or affirm religious beliefs. Instead, she offers a window into understanding how belief works from a psychological and anthropological viewpoint, making the book accessible and intriguing regardless of your personal beliefs.

Indeed, whether you’re a believer, an atheist, or somewhere in between, “How God Becomes Real” invites you to consider the profound ways in which the invisible others – gods, spirits, or whatever name they take – become tangible and transformative in human experience. Whether or not the beings are ‘real’ in an analytical sense of the word, their impact is undeniable, broad, and quite well-researched. We can analyze and research all that goes into constructing a belief and people’s relationship with their gods without taking a stand on the ‘objective underlying reality’ of things; something mostly Western people obsess about.

In the book, you’ll learn the hard work it takes to kindle a presence of an invisible god; what parasocial relationships are and how we build them with our deities; how specific language and religious practices works to reinforce that; what it means to look at the world through a “faith frame”; how that changes people; how prayer works; and much more.

Personally, I was fascinated by the exploration of prayer as a metacognitive practice. Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, the book also made me think of faith in general in a somewhat kinder, more compassionate light. At the same time, I am keenly aware of the outliers and extremes that are not healthy, and as pointed out, “while a relationship with a benevolent god is often quite good for the individual, it does not at all follow that this god is good for the social whole. It also does not follow that all human-god relationships are good ones.”

* Rating: 5 out of 5
* Dog-ear index: 13.3 (record high for the published reviews so far)
* Who is it for: for those curious on how gods are made real to people, including for those who they are real to. This isn’t a book that seeks to convert or challenge your faith; it’s a guide to understanding how faith functions in human lives, and what are the elements required for that to happen.

https://www.amazon.com.au/How-God-Becomes-Real-Invisible/dp/0691234442/