Emre Soyer

Argumentum Ad Verecundiam. This book had an excellent premise, but just a mediocre implementation (in so far as the arguments themselves - the writing was excellent). Soyer and Hogarth excel when showing how one's own experience can blind oneself in numerous areas and arenas, and suggest ways to overcome this blindness. But then fall to their own blindess in accepting and even appealing to the "authority" of "experts" in various topics - seeming to completely disregard that these very "experts" have the exact same problems with being hampered by their own experiences that Soyer and Hogarth are attempting to show us how to overcome in this book. Ultimately, they make a lot of good points, which is why the book gets as many stars as it does. That you have to wade through so much muck to get to all of them is why it *only* gets as many stars as it does. Still, absolutely something everyone should read, and thus recommended.… (mer)

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool," said Richard P. Feynman. This book tries to explain how we fool ourselves and proposes some tactics to stay vigilant. It's a good book when it summarizes other books, but when it tries to be original... things get messy.

The first chapters are a great combination of insights from other sources. They are organized well, explain briefly and easily key ideas, and provide references for those who want to go down the rabbit hole. Authors discuss biases (Thinking, Fast and Slow), randomness (Fooled by Randomness: The Hidden Role of Chance in Life and in the Markets), behavioral psychology (Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions), and innovation/creativity (How Innovation Works: Serendipity, Energy and the Saving of Time). I think it's written well, and I guess everyone should regularly remind themselves about those concepts.

Later on, authors take on less known and researched subjects and try to put them in the context of the last decade or two. US elections, Hurricane Katrina, pseudoscience and alternative medicine, COVID pandemics, social media, startup culture, persuasive design, and many more recent examples are used to prove claims about not trusting our perception of reality. Sometimes it works, other times it falls short and feels like authors become the victims of their own experience. There is more pop-science and storytelling than solid research in this part. The book loses focus, contradicts itself, and sometimes just makes no sense (especially when authors explore areas that clearly are not their own domain).

Overall it's an engaging book, with a good pace and clear writing. I wish it shown more rigor and consistency in the second part, where authors deviate from widely recognized sources.… (mer)