1. You're conflating a bunch of terms here, but I think you're referring to global application state changes being treated as a pure function which takes in the

1. You're conflating a bunch of terms here, but I think you're referring to global application state changes being treated as a pure function which takes in the global state and event parameters, and returns a new global state. There's nothing stopping you from doing that without Redux; the state = function(state, event) pattern is supported by native JavaScript. If that's not what you're talking about, please clarify. 2. This is only marginally more powerful than a debugger. 3. I would consider this allowing you to shoot yourself in the foot. Explicit is better than implicit, and explicitly defining your dependency tree is a benefit, not a downside. When you're feel the small pain of having to explicitly define a data dependency, that prevents you from introducing it if you don't have to, thereby avoiding the much larger pain of having an overly complex dependency graph. By adding Redux you're adding hours of debugging time on complex global dependencies to save yourself a few seconds worth of keystrokes.