[ExI] Critical take on The Age of Em

[Dan TheBookMan]

On Jun 21, 2016, at 6:36 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 9:13 PM, Robin D Hanson <rhanson at gmu.edu> wrote:
>> 
>> I suppose I count as having read it, but not as an independent evaluator. :)
> ### Finally I read Age of Em, and quite a few of its reviews as well. Let me go meta on them and commiserate with you: Most of the reviews are completely missing the point. They tend to apply a literary standard ("How do I feel about it") to a work meant more like a documentary, which should be judged by "How likely is it to be correct". Scott Alexander's review is most apt, and it is hard to add something substantive to any subject once Scott is done with it. But I'll try.

Haven't read the rest of your comments or the book yet, but I think that that's not really a literary standard. Rather, it's merely how those readers felt about it. (Which is no great crime because if one person feels one way about a book, others might too. That might helpful for someone deciding to read a book, no? Of course, it depends on why they're reading it...)

And for nonfiction reviews, one can adopt a literary standard approach of did it make a good case for its conclusions? And 'good' here isn't necessarily subjective. It should be succinct, avoid likely criticisms, and not leave out too many steps (depending on the target audience). It's even better if it does so using easy to grasp models and metaphors and flows well.

I've often seen this boiled down to: What point is the author making? and Why does she or he believe that? (In other words: conclusions and arguments/motivations.)

Regards,

Dan
  Sample my latest Kindle book, "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at:
http://mybook.to/Gurlitt

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20160621/a6b700b0/attachment.html>