I should first specify that I used a summarised audiobook, going through the whole book in 20 minutes. It was not a bad book, it had some valid ideas,I should first specify that I used a summarised audiobook, going through the whole book in 20 minutes. It was not a bad book, it had some valid ideas, but mostly it was an unnecessary sequel to "Sapiens" which I believe was mostly written as a result of the success of the previous book and with the aim of financial gain more than informing the reader. Even the tone of the author has changed ......more
I should first specify that I used a summarised audiobook, going through the whole book in 12 minutes. Despite my dislike for non-fiction books that gI should first specify that I used a summarised audiobook, going through the whole book in 12 minutes. Despite my dislike for non-fiction books that generalise ideas, this one kept a very open-minded view (Oscillating between perspectives) which counteracted its generalisations. It sounds like a very interesting book, and I am going to read the full 180-page text as soon as possible. ...more
I should first specify that I used a summarised audiobook, going through the whole book in 15 minutes. That being said, I found it enough to get the gI should first specify that I used a summarised audiobook, going through the whole book in 15 minutes. That being said, I found it enough to get the gist of the book, I even dare say that probably over 400 pages are too many for the key ideas of this book. I found it excessive and mixed my general distaste for self-help books it was a recipe for a 1-star rating. Still, I cannot deny that a couple of the techniques mentioned in the book (although I have yet to test them) seemed interesting and potentially effective, which bought it a second star.
To sum up, I would say (acknowledging my bias about self-help books) that if you have extra time on your hands, not knowing what you want to do, there is no harm in reading it. But if you want to be careful about what you spend your time and energy on, maybe there are better and more scientific books you can choose....more
I should first specify that I used a summarised audiobook, going through the whole book in 20 minutes. That being said, I had been exposed to the ideaI should first specify that I used a summarised audiobook, going through the whole book in 20 minutes. That being said, I had been exposed to the idea before when I was reading "Nice Racism" by the same author; a brilliant book which is basically theorised upon "White Fragility" as its main premise. That book was the foundation of 30% of my master's thesis, and this book was as brilliant and made the idea of "Nice Racism" even more clear.
DiAngelo is THE author you should make your White (and Woke) friends read, if you are a person of colour being the victim of the performance of Woke culture like I am ......more
I should first specify that I used a summarised audiobook, going through the whole book in 25 minutes. That being said, I found it enough to get the gI should first specify that I used a summarised audiobook, going through the whole book in 25 minutes. That being said, I found it enough to get the gist of the book, I even dare say that probably over 400 pages are excessive for the key ideas of this book. However, I should also acknowledge that my 3-star is partially due to the fact that I found parts of the ideas old and irrelevant based on our knowledge about language today. The disagreement with the "Linguistic Relativity" hypothesis (Something which is part of what I personally like to call "Chomskian Bias") is now less relevant, as many empirical psychology, neurology and cognitive science research has partially or completely confirmed that hypothesis recently. Also, some of its claims about the uniqueness of sound articulation are argued through the inability of machines to recreate that, which we find today as a given norm of daily life in simple text-to-speech services. But I believe that for its time, it might have been a good book, which is why it still gets above the middle 2.5 starts. While the "Chomskian Bias", specifically for a book that relies partially on Saussaurian linguistics, is not justifiable even for 1994; at the end of the day, it gives a general picture of the major discussions in anthropological linguistics....more
Loading...
