Social Sciences Books

This is so clear and so interesting, it's impossible not to get caught up in it and easy to forget that it's a textbook.

I really have to compliment Babbie on taking a potentially dry subject and making it fun. Not only is this book a very complete and easy to understand introduction to research methods, but it is also, at times, downright funny. I highly recommend this book. I gained a deeper understanding of research methods by reading The Basics of Social Research and Babbie's unique writing style made me want to learn more.

I was dreading taking this required course in collge, "Methods of Social Research." This was the required text and it has made my life easier. I could actually understand the concepts. I highly recommend this text book.

This is a nice book on the important topics related to how people learn. It serves as an introductory text from which you can gather relevant references on the issues that are of the most interest to you.

The copy I bought at Amazon was defective, though. It was missing more than 20 pages!! But after I contacted the publisher, they quickly sent me a replacement book with no charge at all. (I did not try to contact Amazon for fear that the whole Amazon stock is defective in the same way.)

The tome "How Learners Learn" is what your worthless education courses SHOULD have been teaching you, but didn't because the politicians and the professors would rather push their agendas. If the teacher is to actually teach--convey information from one human to another--then the teacher must know how humans acquire information. That's what this book goes into. Oddly, that is also what outfits such as the federal department of education never go into.

Read this book; buy it if you must, borrow it if you can, but read it.

If you are going to be a teacher, this is a great book to read. Detailed and easy to read, it helps prepare you for what to expect and what will be expected of you as a teacher. It makes it easy to understand how children learn and what are the best teaching strategies to use to teach them as individuals.

My academic advisor at the University of Washington's iSchool suggested I read this along with "Team-Based Learning". I never thought I could get so excited about a book on learning from the National Research Council! Highly recommended to anyone with an interest in research regarding neural processes, teaching /learning, psychology, and the natural desire to learn.

Thank you to the authors and contributors for this book! I can hardly wait to see what they find out next!

The beauty of this volume is that it takes a vast quantity of research on how people learn and organizes it in a way which is readable, practical and accessible for educators. The authors distill the findings of numerous studies into three key principles of learning: (1) Teachers must work with student preconceptions and prior knowledge, (2) Teachers must teach in depth, providing multiple examples of the same concept and (3) Teachers must help students develop metacognitive skills so that they can take control of their own learning. These principles are developed and expanded with numerous references to research and practical illustrations. It should be noted that the book is predominantly about conceptual understanding and does not spend a lot of time on how we learn skills such as playing a musical instrument or learning a language. That said, it is an extremely important contribution to discussions of pedagogy and if the advice contained in the book is heeded by teachers, curriculum writers and policy makers, it has the potential to transform many shallow classroom practices into powerful tools that will enable students to develop deep understanding. The accelerating pace of change in the 21st century means that the ability to transfer skills to unfamiliar situations as well as the skills of lifelong learning have become more important than ever. The principles contained in this book will help us prepare students for a changing world.

Enjoying the book thus far. Really gives practical information about what it is like to try to live on minimum wage.

I have to admit, I grew up as person of privilege. I am from a large home in suburbia and drove a Mercedes SUV to high school every day. I was always taught to appreciate the things you have, and how lucky I am. Being born into wealth doesn't take talent, it takes luck. Even being born in the United States alone takes luck, you only had a 5% chance of being born here.

This book reaffirmed my core belief that while hard work and brains can get you places, the effect of the starting hand your dealt cannot be denied. I have to admit I am pretty embarassed to read some of these reviews that blame the poor for their lot in life. Just because hard work can lead to success in this country, doesn't mean it happens 100% of the time.

Here's a big lesson I learned: tip everyone. One dollar to you might mean almost nothing, but for the working poor it means a whole lot more. Treat employees with compassion and respect. A lot of the poor conditions Dr. Ehrenreich experiences is because people are too self-absorbed to think of others. For example, when she's working as a maid in Maine, dripping sweat and the woman whose house she is cleaning doesn't even offer a glass of water. Instead, she commands Dr. Ehrenreich to clean floors on her hands and knees.

I did find the book to be a bit preachy at times, but really the overarching lessons here I think transcend politics. It's about human decency and compassion for your fellow man. Much of where you end up in life depends on the hand your dealt with from the start. The hand your dealt is all luck. Out of 6 billion people, why did I get to be born to wealthy parents in a great school district while another person of equal intelligence and integrity does not?

Anyway, this book is a must read for people of privilege in my opinion because it forces you to take a step back, count your blessings, and become more generous to fellow men and women.

I heard about this book through my reading teacher and a student a few months ago. Out of curiosity I decided to buy the book.
I really enjoyed it. I loved how it was written in a diary format and how the author was so real and blunt about everyone and everything she came in contact with.

Hopefully this book will wake up the country.

Gave the book as a gift...didn't read it but the reviews on it are great. I'm reviewing the bookseller. The book was here very quickly in excellent condition.

This was me! For those who reviewed the book and said that Ehrenreich was "unrealistic", I'm going to share my story. Several years ago my ex-boyfriend and I could have been in the book; we were each working a full-time job and he also had TWO part-time jobs at the same time (one after his full-time job and another on the weekends). Our jobs were in electronic sales at a big chain store and telemarketing which at the time paid $7.50 an hour. Yet we were still unable to make ends meet. After rent on our shoebox-efficieny apartment and utility bills, quarters for laundry and bus fare (we couldn't even afford a car! And even if we could have, we would not have been able to afford insurance AND gas.), we had hardly any money leftover for groceries and certainly NO money leftover for luxuries such as new clothes and new shoes (we did shop at thrift stores, but only when we really needed more outfits). After we ran out of selling our CDs, books, and magazines, which we sold for bus fare to be able to get to and from jobs, we resorted to selling plasma which paid $20 at the time and was enough for two weeks worth of groceries. Everything else that we owned, a mattress on the floor, linen, and kitchen supplies (which we deemed were the necessities) had all been purchased at a Goodwill also with the help of a friend of mine who worked there and used his employee discount for us.
I'm sure people would have thought my ex-boyfriend and I were lazy and "slackers" but we were working so HARD and pinching pennies and we couldn't understand why we still couldn't afford a nicer apartment, a car, decent clothes and to eat well. I shudder to think how much more of a hell our lives would have been if we had had children to boot!
Unfortunately the strain of our financial situation did our relatonship in. He moved back in with his single mother and I moved back in with my grandparents as we went our seperate ways. Sadly, living with my grandparents rent-free didn't really make my life easier. I was still working a minimum wage job and trying to save money while also helping them with expenses. Then the worst thing happened, I got another job in telemarketing and lost my voice completely two weeks into training which was followed by strep throat; this latest for a month! Needless to say I lost my job because I couldn't even make it through training. Of course I had no health insurance either. I realized there was no way I could ever afford a car to get a better job off the bus route or to move out into my own apartment anytime soon. Finally, I made the desperate decison to enlist in the Army.
My life is completely different now that I am out of the Army and a civilian again. From the Army I gained skills and knowledge in a specific field which are marketable and thanks to the Army College Fund and Montgomery G.I. Bill I am currently enrolled in a graduate program. Finanically I am better off now then I ever was in my life, but I never forget for a minute that I can end up again where I was before the Army, (selling plasma for food)...even with a Master's degree. Unfortunately there are countless reasons why some people would not be able to make the same decisions to join the military. For many people that is not an option. So where does that leave them?
I LOVE this book because I think it IS realistic and dead-on and I should know, I have lived it!

Sheila Weller creates an insightful look at three individually talented singer-songwriters and their lives as they attain increased cultural signifigance. As a 38-year old male, I found it a very interesting look back at a lot of the cultural attitudes in the 1970s. It's not that it was the Dark Ages but there were plenty of boggy undersides to the groovy chic of the time. As some of those my age can attest, I didn't grow up in a household where these three singers were considered Most Relevant by my 20-ish Mom. Sure, we had Laura Nyro, Nancy Wilson, Streisand, Melba Moore and Dionne Warwick, but Carly Simon was an FM radio staple. You almost didn't need to buy her singles, they were that ubiqitous and welcomed. Carole King was the domain of your slightly older sisters or teenaged aunts, penning their initials into 45s of Carole King's 'It's Too Late'- the universal lament crossing any age lines. Joni Mitchell, until 'Court and Spark' (in my house, anyway), was someone you found in your local library, intrigued by her album covers (there's Joni as...a Black man!? Hmm. Let's listen to this!). Perhaps the very interior mastery of their work, especially Mitchell's, made them less a communal indulgence from time to time. You didn't get to sit in a room while your sister wrote in her diary with 'Blue' on the stereo. Wasn't happening!

Ms. Weller weaves a thorough, respectful narrative of the three musicians and isn't too heavy-handed in placing them in the cultural context of their time. The book is an excellent example, especially to writers, of how powerful the written word is, especially when a lyric, song or sentence can express sentiment that becomes globally received and appreciated. The book will clearly steer you to your own memories of classic songs and where you may have been at the time. It made me remember being in Union City in California when "You're So Vain" came on the radio in the family car as we took in a stormy blue sky and thinking that Carly's song would open the heavens. It was that powerful to me at a very young age. It's flashpoint moments like that which make the book an extra-sensory look back in cultural history. Music was more of an integrated landscape then and if a song went to #1 on "the charts" then it was a part of the national zeitgeist, even if for a week. The supposed and real decadence of musicians then, as now, never really translated beyond their origins in Los Angeles or New York. For one, who else could afford it? It wasn't practical for the consumer. Still, a lot of misadventure and lost years can be supported by wealth, but for most of the country the decadence translated to towns in different ways of open-mindedness, cocktail parties with a different soundtrack (and more drinks) and a more decadent sexual assertion with music its ubiquitous background.

The current lives of these three singular women is certainly not a let-down and it's a testament to their individual endurance that they were able to stay culturally and emotionally viable. It's disappointing to see that many of their men let them down and took them through what their stardom, on the surface, would never seem to leave room for. Weller underlines throughout the book the breaking of sexual and social taboos that women advanced in this country. As a parent of a single mother, I sure remember my Mom, post-divorce, in the late 70s going into 'the city' to make a wage beyond the suburban rate; how her style changed more to her expression and how she single-handedly raised her kids. Millions of women, not just a selct few cultural icons, pushed through the real-life gains and advances that eradicated some of the danger/economic peril of being considered constrained minorities. As for the often-louche lovers of the women in this book, many are now deceased, or liquor-bloated semblances of their former shining selves or parodies, still hovering over the younger gliteratti of today. Time waits for no one, so if you find someone and the love is mutual, don't fu** it up! Carole comes across as a grounded woman who supported her core group of friends/musicians enough to embark, on her own terms, the relationships she chose, whether disastrous or not....and hadn't she earned those attempts? Carly Simon made a marriage to a heroin addict work for 9 years, which is like 30 years in real-time when you don't know that love can't replace a blood-and-bone addiction. Joni Mitchell, aggregating the finest points of disappointment and romantic fancy, is still a formidable woman and musician. I found this book extremely honest, even just the lyrics alone speak for their writers thoughts and imagination. I wish enduring happiness for all of them.

At one point in the book, the early 80s, when Joni, Carol and Joni are all close to or past their 40th birthday, Weller notes that with the change of musical icons and chart-burners, they all become aware that music, especially rock/popular music, is for the young. True, true. But don't the young always go back to the past and what isn't exactly right-this-minute? Just like I found my way at 13 years old to The Doors, The Mamas and The Papas, Jefferson Airplane and Hendrix, long after their 'hit' status, I still bought their albums and claimed my own memories to the songs, as people have done decades before and since. Mitchell, Taylor and King will always have their music rediscovered and listened to for the first time and for that they will always be relevant.

This book made me proud to have grown up exactly when I did. Its a superbly detailed story of three fabulous women whose music really was the sound track of some of the best years ever. Their bumpy and passionate love lives were something so many of us can identify with. I've been watching Carly Simon videos on her web site and elsewhere since I finished the book. I knew it had to end sometime but I really didn't want to say goodbye to these talented, fab women!

I can't begin to write how much I'm enjoying this book...it's as if the author wrote it just for me! Joni Mitchell is my favorite female artist (James Taylor being my favorite male)--and I have many albums of Carly Simon and a few of Carole King's as well. Reading this book is like reading a soundtrack of my life! At every twist and turn I find out how incestuous the music business is, and how interrelated and connected my favorite musicians are. While the bulk of the book deals with Joni, Carly and Carole, you'll learn tidbits and interesting facts about many other musicians/actors/celebs as well: James Taylor, Crosby Stills Nash & Young, Jackson Browne, Warren Beatty, Jack Nicholson...the list goes on and on.

The beginning was a bit dry (about their childhoods), but once the women start performing in the music business "katie bar the door!" There are fascinating revelations on nearly EVERY page. Reading the book has made me go back and listen to nearly each and every song by all three artists with a new appreciation and understanding. Brilliant!

Who thought you could do a biography of three different people, each so distinct in background and sensibility, and yet make it read like a fascinating novel? I would not have thought so until I opened this book. I saw people reading it on trains and on the beach so I thought, okay, I'll try. (Skeptical.) Well, it didn't take too long, like 30 pages in, for me to get hooked. The sheer number of people the author got to talk to her, and the variety of their impressions of these women, made it so revealing, I could barely stop reading. But I did stop from time to time, just to process the information. Carole King and a husband who had a baby with another woman (a singer) while they were married? Joni in Canada as an unknown folksinger smitten by Joe of Joe and Eddie? (I thought I knew everything about her.) Bianca Jagger calling James Taylor about Carly and Mick, and James proposing because of it? Somehow it didn't sound like the National Enquirer, though. It had the weight of a serious social history. I didn't want this book to end.

At first glance, Sheila Weller's choice of subjects seems incongruous: Joni Mitchell is one of the transcendent talents of our time. Carole King and Carly Simon, however prolific, cannot possibly come up to that standard. But Weller is concerned with the popular zeitgeist, not comparative musicianship, and we must take her book on its own terms.

Weller writes from a feminine, not a feminist, perspective. She would probably disagree with this assessment, but her particular brand of retrospective feminism has, by now, become so mainstream as to be unexceptionable. We have all come a long way since the 60's.

Three women singer-songwriters, three different life trajectories played out against the background of the 60's. Weller's "parallel lives" succeeds as biography, but fails to extract any greater meaning. I most appreciated her obsessively detailed research; I learned a lot of factual information from this book. Later on, though, it became bogged-down in an interminable and Oprah-like recitation of who slept with whom and how they all felt about it; I would have liked more information about the corporate and sexual politics of the era, and much more about the music itself; for me at least, and I think for many of my generation, it was really all about the music, and the People-Magazine-type shenanigans of its creators and performers are really, more or less, beside the point.

That said, I again praise Weller for her incredibly detailed knowledge and accurate feel of the life and times. It's not exactly the book I had hoped for, but it is certainly worth reading.

The first thing to know about this book is that it is not about Physics, or even more broadly about Science. The book is about what the author believes and wants the reader to believe about various public policy issues. I agree with many of his beliefs, and disagree with a few. He is entitled to his opinion, but he should present his opinion as Science.

The author leads you to believe that what he is telling you is Science, not opinion when he writes, "I'll bring in engineering aspects they are needed, but the focus here will be on the science. Laws of countries can be changed, but laws of physics are pretty much set." However, he fails to meet the goal he set. He also writes, "Physicicsts, by tradition, have a more stringent standard than the courts: if you get caught exaggerating, distorting, or cherry picking, your scientific reputation is damaged if not destroyed." But then he goes on to exaggerate, distort, and cherry pick himself.

Even in cases where the situation would present a great opportunity to introduce the reader to important ideas from Physics, the author fails to present the reader with the information that would argue against his opinion. For example, as a physicist, the author surely understands what thermodynamics says about limits on the conversion of heat to work, but he treats all energy forms as equivalent by quoting their heating value. Given the difference in work that can be obtained from gasoline (his favorite fuel) and electricity, this is a serious distortion.

As an example of cherry picking, the author dislikes electric cars. He claims his dislike is based in physics, but it is not. He cites the energy density of batteries compared to gasoline to show that electric cars are impractical. That is cherry picking, because there are other relevant facts he refuses to tell the reader.

This book also provides little basis for the reader to learn more on his or her own. The "facts" presented are not substantiated with references, or only with the claim that the author heard it from an acquaintance. However, some of his facts are incorrect.

I do not recommend this book.

What drew me to this book was not so much its title, although it is quite intriguing, but its author. I had read a couple of Professor Muller's books in the past and found them to be very engaging as well as models of clarity. This book is no exception. Using logical scientific reasoning, the author addresses various topics that a future president would likely need to deal with. The topics are: terrorism, energy, nuclear matters, outer space and global warming. Removing any mythology and misinformation that may be associated with these issues, the author carefully analyzes them from a physics perspective; this is to help any future presidents in making solid well-informed decisions. The contentious matter of global warming is dealt with particularly well; in fact, it is one of the fairest and most level-headed discussions of this matter that I have read thus far. A set of notes at the end of the book contain a few simple calculations that complement some of the statements in the main text. However, a reader who is math-phobic need to not worry since the notes are not essential to fully appreciate the book's content. The writing style is very clear, accessible, authoritative, friendly and quite engaging. This informative book can be enjoyed by anyone, especially those interested in the use of a logical scientific approach to address important world issues.

This an important primer for non-science types (i.e. those of us who avoided the sciences, especially physics, in colleges and elsewhere like the plague, but still have lots of opinions about energy and international policy, etc.) - nicely organized, clearly delivered, thought provoking, good humored, and humbling. We need a lot more conversations in this country in a process where citizens and their elected officials actually listen and learn from those who have been studying the topics Richard Muller presents in this book - and this is a great way to begin. Thank you, Dr. Muller.

Muller's basic thesis is that we are sure we know certain things, but these things are actually false. He aims to give the basic science behind current issues like climate change, alternative energy sources, nuclear proliferation, and space.

I am not a scientist, but I often spent my time in high school study halls perusing physics texts rather than doing my homework. This book spares the reader all manner of arcane formulae and mathematics. It tries to present the bottom line on why and how things work they way they do. The net effect is to neutralize many fears common among the public. For example, a nuclear reactor cannot explode like an atomic bomb. It does not have the right kind of uranium and should something go wrong, the nuclear reaction naturally stops of its own.

Muller tries to distinguish between the science of something and its interpretation for what ought be done about an issue. When he violates his own rules for his book, he tries to tell the reader he is doing that.

Some basic factual information is repeated several times in the book. While that could be annoying, it serves to reinforce those concepts.

I found some parts of the book more interesting than others and expect that will be true for any other readers. But, those parts of greater interest to others may be the parts I found less interesting. This would be a good book for any voter to read. Our public discourse would be based more on facts and less on feeling. Still, as the author indicates, there are some areas where the science alone does not dictate how a decision should be made in some problem issue. Maybe the science is not even conclusive as science.

Issue: "The burning jet fuel that took down the twin towers ... ." (From review of Muller's book in S.F. Chronicle, 8-3-08, by Graeme Wood, editor at Atlantic).

The physics of burning jet fuel and the melting point of steel do not provide an explanation as to the twin towers collapse.

Wood writes in his review of Muller's book:
"Muller has lucid explanations of how the World Trade Center collapsed ... ."

"The burning jet fuel that took down the twin towers ... ." (from the review of Muller's book).

This is not possible due to the physics of the problem:

Steel has a melting point of about 1370 Degrees C, or about 2500 Degrees F.
(Source Funk & Wagnall's New Encyclopedia (1983 edition, Vol 14, page 243).

Jet fuel when mixed in precise proportions with air will burn briefly at about 1800 Degrees F. The "open air" burn temperature of jet fuel is much lower. In fact "turbine inlet temperatures cannot exceed about 1100 Degrees C, or about 2000 Degrees F, because of the thermal limitations of the materials" in the jet engine. (Ibid, Vol 15, page 42). This temperature is INSIDE the jet engine with highly compressed air burning with the jet fuel in the "combustion chamber," not the "open air" burning temperature of jet fuel which took place in the Twin Towers.

A google search under "burning jet fuel temperature" is instructive.

Muller has not proved "lucid explanations of how the World Trade Center collapsed ... ."

It is intriguing that Muller, a "polymath in Berkeley's physics department," (Wood) is presenting "physics" which do not agree with the physics of the problem he is discussing.

I will be brief about this. Neil Postman's book AMUSING OURSELVES TO DEATH is simply outstanding. As a detailed intellectual analysis, it shows just one reason for the non-book reading, Fox news-watching, anti-intellectual climate that currently pervades the United States in 2008.

The causes are many, but have a common thread--television--a medium which has insinuated itself into the mindlessness of popular culture--so much so that any ignorant, but photo-friendly fool or front-man (one old, or younger) along with his right-wing, neo-con, neo-liberal cohorts and advisors can TWICE ascend to the highest levels of political power in the U.S.

Can anyone read this book and not partially understand the devolution of critical reasoning that has produced such a total debacle of political and governmental competence--all of which were based on carefully crafted lies and smooth media presentations??? From lies about Saddam Hussein's WMD's or his link to Al-Quieda, to the illegal invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, even to the outrageous stupidity of Kansas creationists. (If ANY of these people are the products of "intelligent design", God help us all!)

The culpability is readily seen in glib campaign promises about political "change"--which is ALWAYS trotted out at EVERY election cycle by EVERY slick politican in their sixty-second ads or 60 Minute interviews (which only proves just how stupidly gullible and mindless American voters have become.)

But Postman was right about Huxley--and wrong about Orwell. While the corporate masters feed the multitudes the utter mindlessness of reality television shows, info-tainment, and religious programming as predicted by Huxley, the thinkers and readers and the intellectuals in this society have been and are presently being subjected to an Orwellian nightmare of total information networking and surveillance. The thought-police are alive, busy, and growing like cancer on the body politic--monitoring computers, chat-rooms, e-mails, credit card purchases, library check-outs, medical, dental, and insurance records, even casino visits; using RFID's, GPS tracking, and even satellite and digital tv's for surveillance--all as authorized by the USA Patriot Acts. Books may not YET be banned (or burned ala Farenheit 451), but those who read them will be watched and monitored.

Both U.S. history and the FBI's COINTELPRO shows that many of these people will be set-up, run-down, arrested, and imprisoned--while the masses happily monitor their trials and phone-in their votes via some reality television show--perhaps called American Idolator, or better yet, American Heretics. ("Cops" and "Big Brother." are already taken.)

One million U.S. citizens are currently on the Department of Homeland Security's watch list. ONE MILLION!!! Can you feel the heat??? If not, don't worry...be happy. It's all coming soon to more people like you. Be sure to look for it. It's gonna be Hot, and one hell of a witch-hunt!!!

This is exactly what I wanted and in perfect condidtion as well, which is an added bonus. Thanks!

Essentially a redux of Marshall McLuhan's The Media is the Message, it's an argument that the dominant communications media powerfully affect reasoning (Postman's preferred term is epistemology, which is probably more accurate and to the point), and that we were a lot better off as individuals and as a body politic when that effect came primarily from print rather than TV and other visual media. He makes a pretty strong case. Although he's not happy about things, he's not a ranting old crank like some Yale literary critics. He maintains a sense of humor, he's a good writer, and he's down to earth, straightforward and concise (while McLuhan can be otherwise). Well worth the read.

Just today I logged on to one of the biggest news channels' website (CNN) and on the front page under "Popular News" was the following headline: "Is that Miley Cyrus flashing her bra on the Web?" I had just finished my second reading of this book and it seemed like a stark reminder of what Neil Postman was talking about over 20 years ago, how television has drastically changed our culture and redefined everything in our society from news to politics, education and even religion. I don't know of any book written during my lifetime that is more socially relevant and whose message is more important to be read and understood by the general public.

In Chapter 6, "The Age of Show Business", Postman writes, "To say television is entertaining is merely banal. Such a fact is hardly threatening to a culture, not even worth writing a book about. It may even be a reason for rejoicing. Life, as we like to say, is not a highway strewn with flowers. The sight of a few blossoms here and there may make our journey more endurable." He goes on to point out that the problem is not that there are entertaining shows on television, but that in order to accommodate itself to the demands of television, *everything* must be presented as entertainment. In order to generate ratings, advertisers and ultimately revenue, no subject is too serious to be presented in any way other than the one that attracts the most viewers. When the local news reports about a murder, it has no relevant meaning to our lives and it's not told so much to inform us of the tragedy of a murder but because it is the most exciting and what people want to see. News producers have a motto for this, "If it bleeds it leads."

Probably the most alarming example Postman cites is how television has changed politics and political discourse. This is where the transformation from a word-based media to an image-based media is felt the most strongly. Politicians have realized that the content of what they say is now largely irrelevant compared to how they appear, how they present themselves. Postman uses the example that when Ted Kennedy made a run for the presidency, Richard Nixon offered him the following advice: "Lose twenty pounds." Nixon had been in politics most of his adult life and knew the name of the game well, that one's ideas, beliefs, actions and words are now almost completely irrelevant in a world where nearly everyone has started getting their information from television only. Before Mike Huckabee entered this political race, he lost over a hundred pounds. If you look at photographs of presidents throughout our history, you notice that most of them certainly never got anywhere in life because of their looks and some of them are downright ugly men. Political races are now completely decided in the arena of television and their coverage of it has become absurd and embarassing. This is the change that Postman has tried to point out, that a literate culture that depends on the printed word for information and communication creates a vastly different culture from one that depends on images, ten second soundbites and information that has no context or relevance to anyone's life, like what Miley Cyrus or Paris Hilton is up to.

It has been over twenty years since Neil Postman wrote this but his ideas are even more relevant today. This book should be read and understood by everyone but it mostly falls on deaf ears. I think it was Mark Twain who said that the man who doesn't read has no advantage over the man who can't read. Television is now an integral part of life not only in America but in Europe, China and pretty much any other developed nation. This would not be a problem but, as Postman points out, one of the nasty side effects of television is that it has degraded literacy rates, so that every year we hear that people are reading less and less. People and specifically children spend an alarming amount of their free time watching television and to get them to read you practically have to force it upon them. Once in a while a book like Harry Potter will become a hit but for many children and even adults that was the only book they purchased or even attempted to read in an entire year. We hear that children in this country are performing worse every year in school but the finger is never pointed at the obvious culprit because we hear about this on TV.

"In watching American television, one is reminded of George Bernard Shaw's remark on his first seeing the glittering neon signs of Broadway and 42nd Street at night. It must be beautiful, he said, if you cannot read." John Ackermann

Neil Postman in his book,'Amusing Ourselves To Death', looks at the impact of television culture on the way we live our lives, understand our present and future and how we gather our information. We need to understand the effects of living in a television society. As he says "We are in danger of creating a trivial culture that will spawn a race of people who adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think." Once we are a television society, we have lost control. We can attempt to control television's influence when we understand the dangers. Neil Postman suggests that Americans ask 'what we are laughing about and why we have stopped thinking.' We have all heard the phrase, The Dumbing of America.

Roger Waters, of 'Pink Floyd' read Postman's book, and he was so taken with the message that one of the best CD's of this era was written. The song 'Amused To Death" tells us the story.

The little ones sit by their TV screens
No thoughts to think
No tears to cry
All sucked dry
Down to the very last breath
Bartender what is wrong with me
Why I am so out of breath
The captain said excuse me ma'am
This species has amused itself to death
Amused itself to death
Amused itself to death"

Ackerman tells us that "Television has altered the meaning of "being informed' by giving us disinformation. Disinformation means misleading information;misplaced, irrelevant, fragmented or superficial information. Information that creates the illusion of knowing something but which in fact leads us away from knowing. The television industry did not deliberately set out to misinform us, but when news is packaged as entertainment, that is the result."

Over the past fifty years since the advent of television, we have allowed conversation and communication to become trivial, and to lead into entertainment. TV is a medium of entertainment. TV is a series of programmed images and pictures. Unlike a book we do not have to concentrate to obtain the meaning of a picture. This is the mechanism by which TV can make any subject meaningless and trivial. It is possible to "amuse one's self to death", considering that the first thing to go will be our vision of reality and to comment intelligently. And this is why Roger Waters CD "Amused to Death" had the power to unleash our subconscious. We are living the album. We are all slowly amusing ourselves to death. We are entertaining ourselves into a stupor. The best things on television is junk, and no one is threatened by it. We do not measure a culture by its output of junk, but by what we claim as significant.

I would think that several minutes of murder and violence would be enough for many sleepless nights. We watch the news because we know that the 'news' is not to be taken seriously, that it is all in fun, so to speak. Everything about a news show tells us this; the good looking newscasters, their pleasant banter, the music that opens and closes the show, the film footage, the humorous commercials. These suggest that what we have just seen is no cause for crying. A news show, is a format for entertainment, not for education or reflection. No one goes to a movie to find out about government policy or the latest scientific advances. No one buys a record to find out the baseball scores or the weather or the latest murder. But everyone goes to television for all these things, which is why television plays so powerfully throughout our land. Television is our culture's principal mode of knowing about itself. Neil Postman says, "For the message of television as metaphor is not only that all the world is a stage, but that the stage is located in Las Vegas, Nevada."

We know that no matter how grave news may appear, we soon shall see commercials that will devalue the importance of the news. This is a key element of news and that allows us to believe that television news is not designed as a serious form of public communication. Our teenagers in particular are taught to believe that television is entertainment, so that the nightly newscast should not be taken as a serious responsibility.

This past political season is a prime example of the myriad of issues that have not been examined, but the entertainment value of the candidates has been examined ad nauseam. One reason why the political contest starts as soon as the President is sworn into office. What have we become, why are we laughing, the Dumbing of America is here.


Highly, Highly Recommended. prisrob 06-14-08

All I can add to the many thoughtful reviews here is this:
I've read very few works of fiction that have provoked a profound paradigm shift. This is one of the ones that did.
I couldn't look up from the pages and the story will stay with me for life.
I feel I owe a debt of gratitude to the author for her glorious writing and for helping me to see out of the eyes of someone from another culture. Not an easy book at times, if you're someone who can be caught up by a good writer's story. But not to be missed.

A serious and special read -- highly recommended for the spirit seeker or the simply interetsed in a tale of soul searching.

Stepping Off the Edge: Learning & Living Spiritual Practice
A classic in Native American literature, Ceremony tells the story of Tayo, a young Native man who returns from W.W.II with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Silko's masterful writing interweaves the personal, social and societal causes for Tayo's illness with traditional Native legends and cures. Beautiful, inspiring and very harsh. Like Tayo's life. A stellar book. I have a list of study questions our Book Review used in examining this book. E mail me if you want them.

It is beautifully written. The main character becomes someone you want to know and love. It fills your heart with sadness and hope.

Tayo is a half-white Laguna Indian suffering from the after-effects of his experiences in WWII. When he returns home, he is unable to find his place among his old friends or his family. Over time and with the help of a medicine man Tayo discovers his connection to the land and to ancient rituals. I liked the interspersed myths/poems (which are mixed into the narrative), but the landscape descriptions became tedious over time for me.

This book provides great insight into a handful of cases that highlight corruption, greed and failed politics in China over time. It will likely stir emotions in many native Chinese readers as a hard look at reality.

We all may have different views, theories and experiences with China. However, we all must agree that there is a need for greater transparency, improved human rights and a deep revealing look into the corruption of many highly regarded party members. No country is perfect, but China heavily struggles with aligning the interests of its citizens, with those of its few officials.

I read this book during the Beijing Olympic games. Afterwards, it made me pay extra attention seeing stories like today's "Two seventy year old women sentenced to re-education for attempting to register for the official protests", and "China Practically Unreachable By Western SMS?".

Excellent. I couldn't put it down. I would like to read more about the people in China and their fight for democracy. I hope Philip Pan writes another book.

In his China book Philip Pan, former Washington Post bureau chief in Beijing, chooses to write about the heroic individuals who dared to defy the inexorable force that is the Communist Party of China. He writes about an unemployed documentary filmmaker Hu Jie whose life passion is resurrecting a young woman who dared speak up against Mao Zedong. There's this doctor who -- defying government censors -- revealed the SARS epidemic to the nation, thus saving thousands of lives. There are the labor activists who rallied their fellow laid-off workers against corruption. And then there are the lawyers and the journalists who are always pushing the envelope, trying inch by inch to create institutions -- rule of law and freedom of expression -- that can restrain the abusive authority of the Party.

Philip Pan is a very fluid writer but the book nevertheless feels thin. And worse than feeling thin it feels irrelevant and insignificant. Two thousand and eight is, after all, China's Olympic year -- when America's economy suffers from recession China's economy is booming. In surveys nine out of ten Chinese are optimistic and positive about their country and where China is heading. And the people that Philip Pan writes about so admiringly in his new book are the marginalized intellectuals and the disaffected poor who nostalgically yearn for a time that never was and dream of a future that can never be. And so for Americans and Chinese alike they're irrelevant and insignificant.

That's sad because Philip Pan and his heroes are right. China is a complete mess, and rather than being subversive these individuals who defy the system are the true patriots because with their criticisms and actions they are trying to make the nation-state stronger and more stable.

China right now suffers from a corrupt and ossified bureaucracy determined at all costs to maintain power. China's curious and cowardly blend of authoritarianism and capitalism means that China's Gini co-efficient is comparable to that of Latin America, its pollution problem is a national shame and seriously threatens China's future growth, and China never before has witnessed so much crime and moral decay. And yet -- because multinationals are still pouring into China, because Americans cannot shopping at Walmart, and because China itself is spending hundreds of billions on new infrastructure and factories -- the Chinese economy in the past two decades has managed to create a middle-class that is now the bedrock of Communist Party support. And what the middle-class in their steadfast support blithely ignores is that China's "socialism with Chinese characteristics" is a system built on contradictions and lies and illusions.

And that's what the characters in Philip Pan's book refuse to ignore. The Party's greatest contradiction, lie, and illusion is that it's possible to have economic reform without political reform.

Consider the free market. The free market needs independent media and channels of information to create efficient pricing and distribution and marketing -- but the Party insists on maintaining control over newspapers and the Internet. Now the Party may say that it'll allow economic reporting but not political reporting but what's important for the media to have any real impact on consumers is perceived independence -- so it's in the media's self-interest to report on SARS because that makes their economic reporting more credible.

Consider also the free movement of goods, which is crucial to the free market. The Chinese provinces are controlled by local party bosses which adamantly protect their self-interest and the interest of their constituents. So that means they'll protect local industry by preventing competition from coming into town -- which hampers the economy. And they'll also tax peasants, and steal their land.

So here the Party's interest in strengthening the Chinese economy is perfectly aligned with peasant lawyers who want to break the local tyranny of the Party bosses. But in these cases the Party chooses to side with the Party bosses. Why? Because at the end of the day the Party is only interested in maintaining its monopoly of power, and that in turn means turning a blind eye to the rapacious and corrupt behavior of local bosses in return for their fealty.

That is the sad unfortunate conclusion that the lawyers, journalists, and labor activists come to -- and which we also come to -- at the end of Mr. Pan's book. They always believed that they could change the system gradually from within -- and that weakness is ultimately what will make them irrelevant and insignificant in history's eyes.

As China's economic contradictions finally collapse into each other causing a financial earthquake that will rent society asunder this current generation of activists will be very soon supplanted by another generation of activists -- people who immediately see that the problem is the system itself, and their first reaction will be violence not discussion.

That's even more sad because in these individuals who believed in themselves, in China, and ultimately in the Party stood China's last best chance for real progress.

There's a pejorative that we Chinese overseas hold about American-born Chinese, i.e. the "jook-sing." In Chinese parlance, this is a bamboo section which is closed on both ends of the nodes.

Phillip Pan is a "joon-sing" trying to interpret China and Chinese society through his biased, filtered lenses as a Westernized Chinese-American living in a society assigned to China as a Washington Post bureau chief living in privileged expat enclaves.

His type often tries to flush out the bizzarre, the unorthodox, the rebels, the mavericks, the non-conformists in a country of 1.3 billion people. Similarly, having lived here in America, as a Chinese, I can easily flush out the "armpit" side of America, in the stories of many of America's rebels, mavericks, dissidents, and "political prisoners" and "prisoners of conscience."

Mr. Pan sees the trees, but not the forest. It is apparent that he is befuddled by his Europeanized, Westernized baggage, and he swallows "hook, line, sinker" the false notion that "The Western Moon is rounder; and the Western Fart smells much much more fragrant."\

Frankly, in any society, and political governments, whether in the U.S. or China, you can find the "armpit" smelly sides.

Official corruption in China ? Big deal. How about in the USA ?

At this writing, California is deep in the hole by a tune of US$ 17 billion in a fiscal year which has operated with a gridlocked legislature and a grandstanding showboating governor, Arnaud, Mr. Hollywood.

Our public officials and civil servants have become so uncivil and parasitic that they have fundamentally leeched and fed on government largeese and sucked the public till dry. And these pigs feeding off the public troll are not corrupt ? Holly Dolly.

Gimme a break. Mr. Pan worships the American fart, which he deems to smell much more fragrant.

That he elects to hype and markets his book in order to make mucho dinero points to the intellectual naivite of this obviously smart "jook sing."

The only problem is he sees the trees in detail but can't see the forest.

He is what I call a "white man trapped in a Chinese body." How sad. And he is acting as a shill for China bashers and Chinese Demonizers. In America today, being a CB and a CD sells. And it is PC.

There are a lot of excellent books on modern China out there, but this one is a cut above. I think, as a newspaperman, Mr. Pan knows how to grab and hold his reader's attention. I was unable to put it down for a few days. He also gets very deep into the story, talking to the affected people, but also putting everything into historical context. Lastly, I'm glad this book doesn't try to shoehorn everything into some grand hypothesis about China's imminent superpower status. I was happy to learn about the general trends of public discourse and human rights since the Mao era through the stories of some particular citizens who turn out to be heroes in their own way.

It is interesting, as a brazilian, to realize Said's resentment resembles one of a similar kind which portraits Latin America as the victim of American Imperialism. Latin american intellectuals share the same hate, anger and paranoia towards US.
This may be why to this day brazilian academics force this appaling book down their students throats.
You dont need to be a clinical psychologist to figure this one out: a scape goat is a helpful tool to cope with one's own stupid decisions in life.

This book is a great overview and as noted by many others, a true work of literary genius. Colonial subjects, such as Said himself, have a hard time placing themselves in the mess of Colonialism and the supposed Post-Colonial era we live in and this book aids in that coming to terms process. Said manages to marry the subjectivity of his reality with the brilliant grasp of academia. A Must read by all, to gain a better idea of the world and times we live in.

The book came on time (before college started) and it was in lovely condition :)

Dr. Said missed the track completely with this supposed historical analysis that is neither historical nor good analysis. While I won't write pages of critique, here are just a few examples of poor work to make points not supported by fact (nor faith).

1. The British and French controlled the eastern Mediterranean at the end of the 17th century. False - the Ottomans controlled that area; French and British merchants needed permission to trade. None of the lands of the Eastern Med. were ever colonies. At most they were protectorates in which the real rulers were the local people. (Even true up to the pre-WW II phase.) This is common history for anyone who tried to look at such.

2. Muslim armies conquered Turkey before over-running northern Africa. False - The Arab armies did not "take" Turkey; they went straight to North Africa. The so cited areas remained Christian (Eastern Orthodox) until overrun by the Seljuck Turks in the 11 th century. Same comment as last sentence in #1, above.

3. Westerners get our history wrong. Only we muslims can interpret our religion correctly (paraphrase). I'm sorry, but there is a long history of intellectuals of all religions studying each other. Just because many do not accept that the Koran is god-given (faith) as opposed to man written (fact) does not make non-moslems wrong (some muslims believe it is a man-written document).

What other religion on this earth makes such a claim of perfectness and superiority untouchable by anyone? Why, muslims themselves argue about what the Koran means (unless he is Wahabbi - then of course there is no argument). Fanaticism and fact twisting in the name of religion is a vice.....

Drawing upon the work of Michel Foucault, Edward Said claims that Western ideas of the `Orient' are not based upon objective facts but are created through academic and cultural `discourses' which serve to promote Western imperialism - often despite `liberal' intentions.

This mythical `East' is the antithesis of the West, a negative or inversion of the 'Occident' which is used to define *both* in binary opposition to each other, and to facilitate the political and domination of the East.

However in order to demonstrate the existence of this `Orientalism' Said falls back on an equally stereotypical and monolithic `West' which he constructs entirely from the carefully selected writings of a handful of 19th Century middle-class, white, male English and French authors.

This tactic not only ignores or misrepresents a large body of Western authors sympathetic to the East and sensitive to differences within it, but also glosses over Western heterogenities of class, race, sex, religion and generation in order to manufacture a homogenous `Occident' devoid of differences.

Said is as guilty of *Occidentalism* as those he criticises are of *Orientalism*.

Said fails to provide any evidence that the `West' defines itself in binary opposition to a mythical `East' that Western scholars have created for just this purpose; he simply *manufactures* the kind of `West' necessary to explain the myths about the `East' that he himself has constructed from a very limited number of Western sources.

He has created his own mythical `East' *and* `West' from a small number of literary texts which he then projects onto others and thinks he has *discovered* rather than *invented*.

Afterthoughts: The title could have been "The Wisdom of One Man" because author James Surowiecki impressively exemplifies his theory - that large groups of people are collectively smarter than the smartest individuals themselves - through countless examples from past and present world affairs. Diverse and thought-provoking, Surowiecki's selection takes us from ocean floor to outer space, from a New Mexico bar to a field goal post, Detroit's first car to Zara's latest shipment, gangster films, traffic jams - the list goes on and on. This actually creates a conflict - you're learning so much from each paragraph that it's hard to remember what you read on the page prior. The reading experience is best described as "fleeting factual fun."

Takeaway: The knowledge must sink into the subconscious somehow because it can be applied instantaneously. For instance, barely into chapter three, I found myself jogging around Washington DC. Normally, I cross streets wherever and whenever I want. Citing the pedestrian's right of way, I basically run amuck with everyone else. But I quickly noticed that on these streets, no one else's feet were as arrogant as mine. Everyone was standing at the crosswalks waiting for the little white man to light up for permission to go. Were they just an obedient bunch of tourists OR were police officers in DC more likely to ticket jaywalkers? I opted to wait and walk with the wisdom of this crowd. I'll never know what could have happened had I chose to walk my way but I definitely felt like I had championed my inner intellect in knowing why I acted like I did. At the very least, it balanced out the feeling of inadequacy that resulted when I tried to pronounce the author's last name...

Kristen Zatina
[...]

I have a confession to make. I started reviewing this book before reading it, based purely on the rather lengthy subtitle `Why the Many Are Smarter than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies and Nations'. First, I planned to make a sneering reference to the dotcom bubble as evidence of this collective wisdom. Then, point to Charles Mackay's classic Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. How sad that this ignorant journalist had pinched the title but absorbed none of the content. Finish with a brief summary of the theory of information cascades, which shows how it can be individually rational to follow the crowd instead of your own opinion.

I thought all this, and suffered terrible embarrassment, if only in the privacy of my own home. For James Surowiecki, of course, covered all these bases and more. The book is not a mindless hymn to the virtues of the marketplace but a nuanced analysis, supported by many historical and contemporary examples, of the conditions under which groups can and can't make better decisions than even the most brilliant individuals.

He argues that there are

"four conditions that characterize wise crowds: diversity of opinion . . . independence . . . decentralization . . . and aggregation"

Unfortunately, the meaning of these terms is not entirely clear. And later in the book the necessary conditions are whittled down to three, aggregation for some reason being left out. Similarly, his classification of cognition, coordination and cooperation problems is not well explained. Since the entire first half of the book is based on these distinctions, it can be a little hard to follow. The second half, which applies these concepts to real world problems like traffic jams, peer reviewed science, committees, company organization, markets, and democratic government, is much better.

So much for the form of the book. Fortunately, the content is excellent. The pages are crammed with humorous and illuminating tales. My own favorite: In the wake of the Challenger disaster, the stock of the four major contractors involved with the shuttle program all lost value. By the end of the day, Thiokol (who built the solid fuel boosters) was down 12%, the other three only 3%. The next day, the New York Times reported two rumors unconnected with Thiokol and declared there were "no clues". Six months later the Presidential Commission revealed its findings: the O-ring seals on the boosters were responsible. There was no evidence of any insider trading.

If this story does not take your fancy, there are dozens of others to choose from (many from more systematic if less memorable studies). Failures of rationality are given space along with successes: stock bubbles, intelligence failures, the Columbia disaster. Some of the conclusions are commonplace to economists and possibly surprising to those who are not: seemingly "wasteful" competition can be a valuable discovery procedure, central planning fails because those who have the information lack the power and incentive to act on it, fund managers tend to underperform market indexes, prediction markets (which were so strongly rejected when proposed for terrorism) are the way of the future. And some may be shocking to economists and commonplace to everyone else: sometimes the collective good is served by individually irrational decisions, such as voting or paying taxes.

Like Freakonomics, The Wisdom of Crowds is based on a wealth of informative and amusing material that is partly spoiled by its presentation. Unlike Freakonomics, it is a book which is unashamedly devoted to one central theme. As such, the sheer abundance of information is sometimes a distraction. It also lacks an index, which can be a considerable nuisance. A little pruning, combined with clear and consistent terminology and organisation, would have lifted this book into the five-star category.

Originally published in the Economic Record, September 2006.

There's a reason why democracy is the crappiest form of government, except all others (to paraphrase somebody famous).

The theme of this book is that groups of people are smarter than individual people. It's sort of counterintuitive to the American spirit of individualism, but James Surowiecki does a creditable job of providing a good case to support his thesis in a very readable format. Anyone who regularly works in problem-solving groups will immediately recognize the fundamental truth of the author's message.

It contains excellent (and entertaining) historical examples that should provide plenty of food-for-thought for any student of government, economics or history. Which means, in a perfect world, it should provide something of interest for just about any participant in any collaborative, collective or power-sharing structure (ie, any effective organization, and a double-dose for every ineffective organization).

My only problem with this volume (and it's not really a problem) is that Surowiecki didn't go far enough. He could have productively doubled the size of this book, and given many more prescriptive formulas for effective group participation and leadership. It would provide a great counter-weight to a number of existing works that seem to suggest the same thing (but are far more tedious). A good updating would be helpful as well (considering the plethora of abundant, and more recent, examples of the disasters of individual [or 'siloed'] decision-making).

In its current form, the book is a great primer on the subject; in an expanded format it could be enormously powerful. His basic thesis, however, could not be more relevant. I strongly recommend it.

This author has done an outstanding job of proving his thesis that groups of people are smarter than the smartest person in the group. The book touches on markets, juries, and economics, and many more topics, furthering his main point. This book will persuade the reader that experts and loners do not make the best decisions, but groups of informed people do.

This fascinating book it based on a simple, but counterintuitive premise--that a crowd of diverse people will almost always be smarter than any single expert. That is, take a group of people, some who may be educated, some who may be experts, and some who may be completely misinformed, and let them each independently solve a problem. Then, if you can take the average solution, it will be close to correct. Moreover, it will be closer than almost everyone else in the group. It's basically a bell-curve of knowledge, in which the exact center point would be the best guess.

Surowieki gives numerous examples, from betting markets, stock markets, psychological experiments, game theory, nature, artificial intelligence, economics and business. Two of the cases that really stand out to me are the search for a missing submarine, the Scorpion, in 1968, and the stock market's reaction to the Challenger disaster in 1986. In the case of the Scorpion, an enterprising naval officer named John Craven assembled a diverse team of men with a wide range of knowledge and had each guess, without consulting with one another, where the sub was. He then averaged their guesses. The sub was found 220 feet from that location. Similarly, after the Challenger crash, the stocks of most companies involved in the space program predictably took a quick nosedive. Most also quickly recovered, with the exception of Thiokol, the company that produced the O-rings on the rocket boosters. The stock market seemed to say that Thiokol was responsible, though all news at that point was that the cause was unknown. It wasn't until six months later, when the Presidential Commission released a report that the stock market was proven correct. It had been the O-rings.

Surowieki discusses different types of group decisions and how the theory applies to each. He also covers the many dangers that often befall groups making decisions leading to things like groupthink and stock market bubbles.

The Wisdom of Crowds is a radical theory, one that runs counter to much of what we believe in a democratic society and an economy based on the hierarchical org chart--namely in the power of the individual, the knowledge of our experts, and the wisdom of our leaders. Its implications for the way we manage our companies and our government is enormous. But after reading this book, it's hard to doubt its wisdom.