Negative Positive
Title: Not the book it claims to be
Review: Marketed as a rationalists response to Gladwell's "Blink", LeGault spends precious little time explaining the books thesis and inordinate time presenting his personal political viewpoints. For example, the author claims that the vast majority of scientists disagree with the threat of global warming, and he accuses those that believe in the problem of falling prey to poor thinking again, and again, and again. The author also feels that radical feminism is a serious threat to American culture (I still haven't met one of these mysterious radical feminists). In general, the author seems to think that simply being a contrarian makes one rational. If you think like he does, then you are being logical. LeGault's real thesis appears to be an attempt to conflate rationalism with conservativism. Still, if you can wade through the author's obvious biases, there are a few thoughtful passages that offer a valuable counter-point to "Blink".
Is the review positive or negative? 