3 ms·
I honestly found his writing to be super frustrating and not effective in the least. I've never seen a person confuse correlation and causation as much as him.
by soperj 4y ago
I honestly found his writing to be super frustrating and not effective in the least. I've never seen a person confuse correlation and causation as much as him. I've also never seen a more convincing case for book burning.
- jen20 4y ago> I've also never seen a more convincing case for book burning. I'd encourage you to look a little harder in the same bookstore section that Gladwell tends to be stocked in - there are _lots_ of candidates for this which are far more convincing.
- soperj 4y agoI don't know about FAR more convincing, but point conceded.
- robga 4y agoI’d throw in sheafs of Nassim Taleb and Yuval Harari output to get the fire roaring.
- tom-thistime 4y agoTaleb has a couple of important points to make.
- robga 4y agoIt’s the way he makes them.
- abawany 4y agoHe wrote the foreword to Dr. Thorpe's book and it was just a rant against 'academia'. Reading the book, A Man for all Markets, showed that academia was, imo, a foundation for his success and the basis of his successful investment ventures, with some notable reasons that caused him to exit his tenured position. The foreword was imo pretty much a non-sequitur and did not improve an otherwise excellent read.
- fullshark 4y agoSapiens made me madder than anything Gladwell wrote. Taleb's book I read was basically one correct idea hammered into your brain for 300 pages. His other books seem to be similar just based on their titles.