Reviews
But What If We're Wrong? Thinking About the Present As If It Were the Past by Chuck Klosterman
roseybot's review against another edition
5.0
I tore through this book. It might not have been perfect but it definitely made me think and that, in the end, makes me love books.
Note to self: the analysis of the us constitution is worth a reread. For novel purposes.
Note to self: the analysis of the us constitution is worth a reread. For novel purposes.
jbmorgan86's review against another edition
5.0
I rarely give 5 stars, but this one definitely deserves it. This is one of my favorite books I’ve read in awhile. Klosterman is quickly becoming one of my favorite non-fiction writers.
The premise of this book is that we could possibly wrong about . . . well, just about anything. Klosterman looks at history, politics, music, sports, science, etc. Therefore, we should be less certain about the present and try to think about present if it were the past. Sure, we think of Elvis and the Beatles as being the ultimate representatives of rock music. But what will people 500 years from now think? Will they even remember rock music? We consider Moby Dick a classic now, but it was hated by Melville’s contemporaries. Who is going to be remembered as the best author of our age? Chances are we have no idea who the person is. Someone hundreds of years from now will identify them and say they are representative of our era. 1000 years ago, philosophers were certain about the makeup of the universe. They were wrong. What could we be wrong about?
Funny, thought provoking, and a quick read. Well done.
The premise of this book is that we could possibly wrong about . . . well, just about anything. Klosterman looks at history, politics, music, sports, science, etc. Therefore, we should be less certain about the present and try to think about present if it were the past. Sure, we think of Elvis and the Beatles as being the ultimate representatives of rock music. But what will people 500 years from now think? Will they even remember rock music? We consider Moby Dick a classic now, but it was hated by Melville’s contemporaries. Who is going to be remembered as the best author of our age? Chances are we have no idea who the person is. Someone hundreds of years from now will identify them and say they are representative of our era. 1000 years ago, philosophers were certain about the makeup of the universe. They were wrong. What could we be wrong about?
Funny, thought provoking, and a quick read. Well done.
fernandoml's review against another edition
4.0
It would be a 4.5 if I could.
I really liked the book, but still I felt that something was missing to make it almost perfect.
The book is good, and it really makes you think and laugh (those footnotes). Klosterman really knows what he's doing, he really did a good job making his point that maybe all we believe is false because there's no way to knowing it. What if we're asking the wrong questions?
A good philosophical view that's presented in a very simple form that anyone can understand.
I really liked the book, but still I felt that something was missing to make it almost perfect.
The book is good, and it really makes you think and laugh (those footnotes). Klosterman really knows what he's doing, he really did a good job making his point that maybe all we believe is false because there's no way to knowing it. What if we're asking the wrong questions?
A good philosophical view that's presented in a very simple form that anyone can understand.
alykat_reads's review against another edition
reflective
slow-paced
2.75
The concept of this book is great - and there's certain things I do wholeheartedly agree with, such as how egotistical we are to think that we have it all figured out and that people will always think this way. To quote Phoebe Buffet when talking to Ross about evolution: "Ross, could you just open your mind like this much, okay? Wasn't there a time when the brightest minds in the world believed that the world was flat? And up until, like, what, 50 years ago, you all thought the atom was the smallest thing, until you split it open, and this, like, whole mess of crap came out. Now, are you telling me that you are so unbelievably arrogant that you can't admit that there's a teeny tiny possibility that you could be wrong about this?" In general, I agree with the sentiment. As humans we are arrogant to believe that we finally reached the end of understanding but then someone comes along and completely disrupts that; so we need to have some humility and realize that we could be wrong about so many things.
I think I would have personally enjoyed this more had the focus been more on the universe, astrophysics, and philosophy instead of pop culture and the failing US political system. While I do agree that guys who lived 250 years ago have outdated ideas *gasp*, it just seems like such a no-brainer that this section of the book just felt long; and I personally don't have a huge interest in caring about how rock-n-roll is perceived by people 300 years from now (if we even survive that long as a species..) so those parts also felt long to me. And since those parts were 75% of the book, it just wasn't really something I was invested in.
I think I would have personally enjoyed this more had the focus been more on the universe, astrophysics, and philosophy instead of pop culture and the failing US political system. While I do agree that guys who lived 250 years ago have outdated ideas *gasp*, it just seems like such a no-brainer that this section of the book just felt long; and I personally don't have a huge interest in caring about how rock-n-roll is perceived by people 300 years from now (if we even survive that long as a species..) so those parts also felt long to me. And since those parts were 75% of the book, it just wasn't really something I was invested in.