Scan barcode
deschatjes's review against another edition
4.0
I have a small problem with reviewing this - on the one hand it was very interesting and insightful, on the other I kept on wanting to say "yes but ..." - the thing is it's easy to make these sweeping statements about the world and humanity and technology when viewed from 50,000 feet, but the reality on the ground is a little less prosaic and somewhat more messy. In fact a lot more messy. Added to this I'd just been listening to a freakanomics podcast in parallel on "prophets and wizards" and he is definitely is on the prophet side of things.
The thing is that nothing works quite as well as advertised and most technology is shockingly badly designed and executed, with vast tracts of interactions occurring with legacy systems from pre-2000 - ever tried to change your bank account address? I also have to bristle when authors make assumptions and projections based on flying into and out of countries (like the one on Beijing - where the day to day reality is so different from whatever snapshop he may have had in the moment he happened to be here).
But still it was a worthwhile read (listen), and I'm just pausing before embarking on Sapiens. I do however think that fiction writers do a better job on dystopian future than nonfiction writers.
The thing is that nothing works quite as well as advertised and most technology is shockingly badly designed and executed, with vast tracts of interactions occurring with legacy systems from pre-2000 - ever tried to change your bank account address? I also have to bristle when authors make assumptions and projections based on flying into and out of countries (like the one on Beijing - where the day to day reality is so different from whatever snapshop he may have had in the moment he happened to be here).
But still it was a worthwhile read (listen), and I'm just pausing before embarking on Sapiens. I do however think that fiction writers do a better job on dystopian future than nonfiction writers.
furlanius's review against another edition
5.0
Continuing on from Sapiens, Harari sets up where to for Homp Sapiens. well researched and thought provoking, Harari, provides a number of alternate theories as to our future.
annineamundsen's review against another edition
3.0
Not as good as Sapiens, but it's an interesting read. Felt a little dragged out at times, and I'm not quite sure what the main point actually is?
wast's review against another edition
1.0
A book could be compiled on this book to explain all of the author's misconceptions or deliberate attempts to mislead.
The author is trying to guess the future like a fortune teller. As a science fiction writer, but that didn't work out for him either.
"All careful studies and painstaking examinations have failed to discover any trace of a soul in pigs, rats or rhesus monkeys"
First the author asks the question of the soul, then he says that scientists have not discovered the soul. Then a page later the sentence author declares peoples don't have a soul "In essence, we humans are not that different from rats, pigs, dolphins or chimpanzees. Like them, we too have on soul. Like us , they too have conscions and a complex world of sensations and emotions."
The book is disgusting to me.
1. Nothing useful
2. Described some strange laboratory experiments (with dogs, mice, monkeys) and events, I am absolutely not interesting.
3. The author relies on modern science, Darwin's theory, mentioning sometimes events from the Bible, some nonsense not understandable.
4. Another extremely disliked when the author tells the story from other books and give his understanding. Again, I am not interested in his opinion and I myself want to read without knowing the plot of the book beforehand and make up my own opinion.
An endless list of flaws.
The author is trying to re-invent the bicycle based on Darwin's theory and Christendom, and science (experiments on animals) that doesn't know anything yet, to understand who people are, but without success. This book is garbage in my opinion.
The book was supposed to be about the future of humanity, but it turned out to be about the past that we all know and about Darwin's stupid Theory of Evolution at the head. This is just one of many theories.
Krishna gives an excellent explanation of the soul and everything in the world in the "Bhagat Gita as it is" with commentary A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
Bhagavad Gita 2.20 For the soul there is neither birth nor death at any time. He has not come into being, does not come into being, and will not come into being. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain.
2.22
As a person puts on new garments, giving up old ones, the soul similarly accepts new material bodies, giving up the old and useless ones.
2.24: This individual soul is unbreakable and insoluble, and can be neither burned nor dried. He is everlasting, present everywhere, unchangeable, immovable and eternally the same.
2.25: It is said that the soul is invisible, inconceivable and immutable. Knowing this, you should not grieve for the body.
Bg. 18.61
The Supreme Lord is situated in everyone’s heart, O Arjuna, and is directing the wanderings of all living entities, who are seated as on a machine, made of the material energy.
People make decisions to a large extent what energies affect them, it's the same as what lifestyle they lead.
The Bhagavad Gita describes the three gunas of nature in Chapter 18 Verses 20-21:
"There is sattva, which is the quality of goodness, light, and harmony; there is rajas, the quality of passion and activity; and there is tamas, the quality of inertia and ignorance.”
These three gunas represent the essential qualities of nature, and they are found in the subtle energy and material forms of the universe. Sattva is associated with knowledge, wisdom, and purity; rajas is associated with action, desire, and attachment; and tamas is associated with ignorance, inertia, and delusion.
The author is trying to guess the future like a fortune teller. As a science fiction writer, but that didn't work out for him either.
"All careful studies and painstaking examinations have failed to discover any trace of a soul in pigs, rats or rhesus monkeys"
First the author asks the question of the soul, then he says that scientists have not discovered the soul. Then a page later the sentence author declares peoples don't have a soul "In essence, we humans are not that different from rats, pigs, dolphins or chimpanzees. Like them, we too have on soul. Like us , they too have conscions and a complex world of sensations and emotions."
The book is disgusting to me.
1. Nothing useful
2. Described some strange laboratory experiments (with dogs, mice, monkeys) and events, I am absolutely not interesting.
3. The author relies on modern science, Darwin's theory, mentioning sometimes events from the Bible, some nonsense not understandable.
4. Another extremely disliked when the author tells the story from other books and give his understanding. Again, I am not interested in his opinion and I myself want to read without knowing the plot of the book beforehand and make up my own opinion.
An endless list of flaws.
The author is trying to re-invent the bicycle based on Darwin's theory and Christendom, and science (experiments on animals) that doesn't know anything yet, to understand who people are, but without success. This book is garbage in my opinion.
The book was supposed to be about the future of humanity, but it turned out to be about the past that we all know and about Darwin's stupid Theory of Evolution at the head. This is just one of many theories.
Krishna gives an excellent explanation of the soul and everything in the world in the "Bhagat Gita as it is" with commentary A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
Bhagavad Gita 2.20 For the soul there is neither birth nor death at any time. He has not come into being, does not come into being, and will not come into being. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain.
2.22
As a person puts on new garments, giving up old ones, the soul similarly accepts new material bodies, giving up the old and useless ones.
2.24: This individual soul is unbreakable and insoluble, and can be neither burned nor dried. He is everlasting, present everywhere, unchangeable, immovable and eternally the same.
2.25: It is said that the soul is invisible, inconceivable and immutable. Knowing this, you should not grieve for the body.
Bg. 18.61
The Supreme Lord is situated in everyone’s heart, O Arjuna, and is directing the wanderings of all living entities, who are seated as on a machine, made of the material energy.
People make decisions to a large extent what energies affect them, it's the same as what lifestyle they lead.
The Bhagavad Gita describes the three gunas of nature in Chapter 18 Verses 20-21:
"There is sattva, which is the quality of goodness, light, and harmony; there is rajas, the quality of passion and activity; and there is tamas, the quality of inertia and ignorance.”
These three gunas represent the essential qualities of nature, and they are found in the subtle energy and material forms of the universe. Sattva is associated with knowledge, wisdom, and purity; rajas is associated with action, desire, and attachment; and tamas is associated with ignorance, inertia, and delusion.
lakmus's review against another edition
5.0
Remarkable. I don't use this word too often, but this book definitely deserves it. The author covered so much stuff, you could extend pretty much every chapter to become its own book, and those books would be great.
People here have already written plenty of summaries, so I'll skip that.
The language is really accessible and the author doesn't use bigger words than he needs to. Which I personally think is great, since all too often people hide pretty simple ideas behind a thick layer of needlessly complex syntax and vocabulary. This guy just gets to the point.
I kind of regret not buying the big heavy edition, which I am pretty sure had decent margins - because this book is the scribble-in-the-margins kind, and I ended up writing all over mine. It prompts a conversation really well, I wanted to argue and comment and go on tangent thought trains all the time, which I also take to be the signs of great non-fiction.
I'd be really surprised if in a few years this book wouldn't be in every possible 'must read' list. Really surprised.
People here have already written plenty of summaries, so I'll skip that.
The language is really accessible and the author doesn't use bigger words than he needs to. Which I personally think is great, since all too often people hide pretty simple ideas behind a thick layer of needlessly complex syntax and vocabulary. This guy just gets to the point.
I kind of regret not buying the big heavy edition, which I am pretty sure had decent margins - because this book is the scribble-in-the-margins kind, and I ended up writing all over mine. It prompts a conversation really well, I wanted to argue and comment and go on tangent thought trains all the time, which I also take to be the signs of great non-fiction.
I'd be really surprised if in a few years this book wouldn't be in every possible 'must read' list. Really surprised.