List Price: $15.00
www.amazon.com's Price: $10.20
You Save: $4.8 (32%)
Condition: New
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
Average Customer Rating: 2.5
Lowest New Price: $7.95
Lowest Used Price: $7.48
| Read this book.As noted in the 7 habits: what you keep repeating becomes your habit and you ARE your habits: your life is a bunch of + or - similar situations to which you act according to what you're used to...
People need to get used to THINK! To be able to evaluate the situation, research solutions and appraise them in order to select the best one. The most imporatant part is: we need to so this 100+ aday: with every big or small situation, until it's our habit to think first then react, i.e. until we're smart again...Do yourself and the world a favor: Read this book.
Think, Blink and the Big StinkMichael LeGault's Think is quite a readable book. Its strength is the very personable voice of the author, and one is never left in any doubt about his viewpoint. There are no politically- correct half-truths here! Indeed, one of LeGault's favourite criticisms is of politically-correct culture itself, which prevents genuine critique of particular subject areas. Multi-perspectivism grants the illusion that all worldviews and opinions have an equal value, or an equal degree of truth. This is clearly not the case.
LeGault also argues that the internet is encouraging sloppy thinking, because it permits the expression of poorly thought-out information and opinion, with little need for the discipline of research and rational thought. This is a perfectly valid point, and one that I'm sure many of us would agree with. It is also perfectly true that there is a need for careful and systematic analysis in a wide variety of domains, and that sometimes this does not happen, or is not permitted to happen.
The upshot of Think is that western liberal democracies are allowing a proliferation of "free thinking", but much of it is poorly thought out. This includes the immediate intuitive decision making, epitomised by Malcom Gladwell's bestselling Blink. Any decision of real worth emerges from careful thinking, argues LeGault, and Gladwell's philosophy is just part of the increasingly lazy thinking that is bedeviling America today.
With any public policy, there will often be numerous opposition groups coming forward, and with each having an equal right to protest, it makes progress extremely problematic. As an aside, this is one of the prime arguments being put forward for those who are trumpeting the recent success of Chinese authoritarianism. Largely free of the hassles of democratic accountability, Chinese authorities can proceed to do as they wish with little need, as the system is extremely hierarchical, and the public often has little power to protest. Personally, I'd prefer the clumsiness of the democratic system to the inhumanity of authoritarianism.
One of the prime weaknesses of this book is LeGault's failure to distinguish amongst the differing functions of intuitive, emotional and logical/rational cognition. The author uses the label "intuitive" to cover a host of mental processes, many of which are actually quite different. These include emotional ranting, shoot-from-the-hip loud-mouthing, lazy thinking, opinionated thinking, politically correct thinking, and gut feelings. These are not the same thing that Malcolm Gladwell writes about in Blink. Gladwell presents a case that the self-organising function of mind can be employed in some circumstances to circumvent the need for thinking through a problem. For example, Gladwell refers to "thin-slicing", where the mind takes a snapshot of a situation, and unconsciously extrapolates the big picture. This occurs unconsciously for all of us; and it is true that some decisions can be made while employing this fuzzy approximation tendency of the human mind.
Of particular interest to me are the cognitive functions surrounding holistic and mystical perception, which have been well-recorded for thousands of years. This is what I refer to as "Integrated Intelligence", where the mind connects with domains of information beyond its physical limits. It grants a kind of immediate, non-linguistic, non-rational perception which ostensibly operates the same way as Gladwell's intuitive thinking. This may not be mainstream scientific thought, but there is vast anecdotal evidnce for it, and a host of evidence form fringe areas of science as well. While I am not surprised that neither LeGault or Gladwell discuss the application of this kind of intuitive thinking, it does concern me that they fail to address it in any way. Integrated Intelligence forms a crucial component in the history of thought in both eastern and western traditions - not to mention Middle Eastern, Indigenous and other cultures right across the world. LeGault's (and Galdwell's) failure to understand this aspect of intuitive "thinking" is a case of western paradigm blindness.
Intuitive modes of thinking, whether they be Gladwell's more mundane "blinking", or the more mystical Integrated Intelligence, have their legitimate domains; just as logic, analysis and empirical enquiry have their legitimate domains. The key is appreciating which way of knowing to use in which situation. LeGault appears to be completely unaware of such distinctions.
In the end, it can be seen that Legault's presentation is heavily biased. It is quintessentially male (feminism is one of his favourite targets), western and Anglo in predisposition. It thus fails to convince. LeGault does not rise above the emotive polemic of the very thinking he critiques. He gets caught in the heavily binary thinking of dominant western thought, and is so busy attacking and defending, that he leaves little time for genuinely novel perception of the probblem, nor to examine the issues at a greater depth. A more nuanced approach would permit a critique of western logic systems, and especially what Edward de Bono refers to as "the thinking trap". Perhaps a better way forward from the current impasse of multiple competing voices in developed cultures, is not to beat each other over the head, but to find a place within ourselves to be able to observe the machinations of thought without become heavily attached to them. This is somewhat Buddhist, but would allow us to put away the blunt instruments which we have used to beat each other over the head, and begin to see things with greater detachment.
Though I found it entertaining, and LeGault correctly indentifies the limitations of certain kinds of emotive and lazy thinking, his book Think does not take us forward; but rather backward to a less reflective time, when the strong white man ruled the landscape (and I say that as a rather big white guy). Think fails to be deeply reflective of the nature of thought itself, nor does it appreciate the limitations of "thinking" as defined by dominant white culture. Unfortunately for Michael LeGault and conservative thinkers everywhere, the world has changed far too much for us to return to the narrowly-defined rationalism of mid-twentieth century western civilisation. And the changes will only keep coming. Just look East, and you'll see a whole civilisation is emerging to challenge the west; and I can only hope the thinking which takes place on either side of the divide will feature genuine depth.
Marcus T. Anthony, author of "Integrated Intelligence" and "Sage of Synchronicity".
Good premise horrid argument.This is a book I would really like to like; and has a premise that I think no rational, thinking person disagrees with: it is important and useful to apply critical thinking, use evidence and reason when making decisions. So far so good. However, the book fails by its own standards; apparently LeGault forgets that he is supposed to think.
One of the most annoying things is that LeGault does not properly cite sources or give any indication where he gets his stuff from. For example, when he discusses global warming, he claimed "in fact there is vehement disagreement among climate experts all around the world about many aspects of global warming theory" (111) yet he does not cite any expert who either advocates or is skeptical of global warming (there are none cited and there is no reference to any study, paper, review, book, TV program or expert in the references section either). This is just poor scholarship. LeGault also cites wikipedia (whilst wiki may be a good place to get information this information should always be verified). In another section he raves about child beating and the fact that his friends who were beaten were never disrespectful towards their parents (220). LeGault claims that "it is widely recognized that children not only need standards and rules for healthy social, ethical and intellectual development, they desire them" (219) yet he does not bother to tell us by whom it is "widely recognized". Further, he seems to suggest that parents must be authoritative contra his avowed sponsorphip of critical thinking. If we want to raise people who are better at critical thinking, rhetoric, analysis and argumentation shouldn't parents engage in reasoned discussion with their kids? No says LeGault, auhtority is a must so kids can be instilled a work ethic and the knowledge that actions have consequences.
LeGault wants children to spend more time outside as "the outdoors is a breathing space for the mind, a repository of unknown adventure" (227). Isn't the internet the biggest repository of information, and a valuable tool by which people can explore things? LeGault is a libertarian and this taints his views; he blames bad parenting for all the ills of society. LeGault is careless when making arguments because he does not justify them nor provide evidence to support his claims. Think is a vitrol against Blink. The author does not critical appraise his ideas; he merely supports things that align with his politics.
Feeble attempt at skewering a much better book...I can't for the life of me understand why a "rebuttal" book should sport a cover so much like its intended target. That said, throwing rocks at a better, more rounded and robust piece like Gladwell's while somehow turning it into a right-wing rant may imply a kind of talent. This author is gifted with the ability to completely misread even the most basic assertions of Blink, and has found ways to present his mangled interpretations in some of the most empty language I've read in a long time. A badly conceived and written book...if you still want to bother reading it, go ahead. You'll wish you read Gladwell's book instead. Too bad this is billed as a rebuttal, because it's clearly out of its league in its attempts to criticize Blink. Did this author even READ Blink?? Made me wonder.
One star is too many. Save your money. There are so many good books out there waiting for you!
BlinkI didn't get my book after place order more than one month. I order four books in the same order. Till now only get three books. I send email to both Amazon and the provider two week ago. But both parties didn't reply may email. I wonder how they can ignore my mail like this.
Product DescriptionOutraged by the downward spiral of intellect and culture, Michael LeGault offers the flip side of Malcolm Gladwell's bestselling phenomenon, Blink, which theorized that our best decision-making is done on impulse, without factual knowledge or critical analysis. If bestselling books are advising us to not think, LeGault argues, it comes as no surprise that sharp, incisive reasoning has become a lost art in the daily life of people everywhere. Somewhere along the line, the Age of Reason morphed into the Age of Emotion; this systemic erosion is costing time, money, jobs, and lives in the twenty-first century, leading to less fulfilment and growing dysfunction. LeGault provides a bold, controversial, and objective analysis of the causes and solutions for some of the biggest problems facing Western culture in the 21st century. From the over- load of reality TV shows and gossip magazines that have rendered curiosity of the mind and spirit obsolete to permissive parenting and low standards that have caused an academic crisis among our children, LeGault looks at all aspects of modern lives and points to how and where it all went wrong.
Read more...
Similar Products:Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking
The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference
How to Win Every Argument: The Use and Abuse of Logic
Outliers: The Story of Success
What the Dog Saw: And Other Adventures
|
