The book did have great concepts and presented most of them in a clear and meaningful way. I see how I sometimes look for a lighter cognitive load when asked difficult or abstract questions This book pointed out where I might fall into error doing that, and helps me recognize some of those errors.
The trouble lies in taking everything in the book and applying it generally to all cases. Psychology is tricky in that way, especially with the replication crises thrown into the mix, leading to erroneous conclusions that can't be replicated and/or had small sample sizes to begin with. The book itself mentioned how researchers tend to underestimate the needed sample sizes and don't perform the simple computations for the desired statistical outcome. Some research shows that some of the studies cited in the book do in fact have replicability issues.
Overall, the high level concepts are good, even if they don't apply generally to all situations. Overestimating probabilities, regression to the mean, availability heuristic, and more are concepts that give a richer view to how we think and how we can improve judgments and decision making. The author's main goal was to give people a more precise vocabulary to make better judgments and decisions, which I think he did accomplish.
I'll suspend a total judgement on the book, since this was the first time I was exposed to some of these concepts, and would like to see them under different scenarios, contexts, and circumstances; however, it was a useful book and had great insight.
This book is incredibly well written with great ideas and themes throughout. The only problem I have is the book itself is a paradox, which I will explain shortly.
Wilde presents us with the damaging effects immorality and sin have on our soul. We are shown a grave image of the grotesque people we will become through the practice of vanity, love of oneself, living only for pleasure, etc.
Influence is a strong theme in the book revealing the power we give to others. These themes motivate us to avoid living a decadent life after seeing the degradation of Dorian's soul through his portrait, and more importantly the concrete effects: loneliness, remorse, paranoia, moral weight, the effects we have on others and the dangers that brings, etc. We walk away from the book not wanting to be Dorian Gray, selling our souls for pleasure and passion.
The paradox comes from the Preface.
“There is no such thing as a moral or immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all.”
This is a moral book, despite Wilde arguing that books should exists for themselves and the beauty contained within. Dorian takes immoral actions that lead to disastrous consequences. Wilde seems to be passing moral judgment on those actions.
I strongly believe that art for arts sake should not be the primary motivation in art. Art is beautiful because it connects and elevates our experience in the real world. It influences us for great good, or evil. Of course there are moments when art is beautiful and nothing more; a landscape painting can be beautiful without passing moral judgment. However, I can't agree that books or art are never moral or immoral, especially when this book is filled with questions and analyses of morality.
I actually picked up this book because I originally felt I had the need to defend merit. This book has changed my perspective on merit by introducing me to the corrosive effects that accompany the celebration of merit.
The author argues that we mostly live in a meritocracy that rewards effort and talent. The winners introduce a tyranny by having hubris and by looking down on the losers with disdain; they also believe that all of their success is due to their own talent and effort and it has nothing to do with luck, help from others, upbringing, etc. The losers then feel left behind, humiliated, and resentful.
I never thought about merit this way and I think the author does a fantastic job showing the pitfalls of a meritocracy and showing some of the ways we fall into the meritocratic traps in current political discussions.
I learned that we need to have more humility in our success. We need to restore the dignity of work, even if it doesn't have the highest social esteem or the highest pay. There is a difference between meeting economic demand and meaningful societal contributions for the common good. Those on bottom should feel dignified and respected; we should all work on increasing our social cohesion and caring for the common good.
I could probably write much more on the ideas in this book and what I agree or disagree with, but to keep it short I highly recommend this one.
Favorite quote: “Governing well requires practical wisdom and civic virtue - an ability to deliberate about the common good and to pursue it effectively.”
This book will require me to ruminate further to let the ideas and methods sink in. Socratic thinking is definitely lacking in today's world. I myself fall guilty in breaking some of the rules of engagement listed and have some work to do. Some chapters were better than others, but the ones that really shined changed my view and perspective on the world quite drastically. The rules of engagement, finding principles and their implications, using an elenchus to have someone see their own inconsistencies, are some of the ideas I found the most helpful. It will take some time and review to increase my understanding and application in Socratic thinking, but this book has showed me the importance of doing so and the good that can come from it.
