Scan barcode
juluccas's review against another edition
What can I say, I'm a rational pessimist. Vomiting data on our evolution doesn't change the fact that we live in a planet with finite resources. Not sure what his conclusion is, but I'm not listening all this massive fact dumping to find out.
wintermute47's review against another edition
2.0
If your intent is to argue that human prosperity and well-being are bound to increase due increasing exchange of ideas and goods, you will not do yourself any favors by ignoring the most salient criticisms of your argument. For example, if you spend pages arguing that the unfettered free market is the best way to increase welfare, don't close with one sentence pointing out 'of course, this doesn't apply if big business has an undue influence on government.' Also, if your point is that society will naturally adapt to new resources and industries as the old ones become untenable, you probably ought to acknowledge that these transitions can be pretty rough--ask the makers of buggy whips how they felt about the transition to the automobile.
These shortcomings make it harder to take Ridley's arguments seriously, which is unfortunate, because a little optimism about the human future is something we could use.
These shortcomings make it harder to take Ridley's arguments seriously, which is unfortunate, because a little optimism about the human future is something we could use.
lilyatilt's review against another edition
4.0
The densely packed facts are a double-edged sword in that they make the book quite dull to read at times while simultaneously making the argument exceptionally persuasive. I'm glad I persevered through the boring bits -- it feels dangerous and stupid in this day and age to have hope, but now, I feel validated.
annaka_haynes's review against another edition
2.0
I bought this book because I'm feeling largely pessimistic these days, and after hearing the author interviewed on NPR I thought he might provide some useful insight. It was quickly evident that Ridley worships at the altar of conservative capitalism, as he seems to posit that all problems- from environmental to social- are solved by free trade. The fact that he's skeptical of climate change and is both pro-fracking and pro-Brexit makes me wary of some of his conclusions. Despite that, and despite over-emphasizing the 'free trade' refrain, Ridley made some interesting points, and I feel like I learned enough to make the time worthwhile. I don't know that I feel much more optimistic about our current political climate, however.
erin_the_tn_librarian's review against another edition
3.0
Thought provoking, which I appreciate. Towards the end the text seemed rambling and a little high horse. The author seemed to disparage other people who had "gotten it wrong". I thought there was not enough science or references to support the author indicating yhe instances of other's being false or foolhardy.
I appreciate the points made in the work and the chance to view issues from many perspectives.
I appreciate the points made in the work and the chance to view issues from many perspectives.
eirikbergesen's review against another edition
4.0
A tale of homo sapiens economicus. An interesting read in a time of antiglobalisation and a seemingly end to major economic trade agreements. The main point is well put, human development excellerates when people trade products and ideas across borders. The last part is somewhat disappointing with more traditional climate scepticism, where also the empiric evidence is more sparse than earlier in the book.
deukalion's review against another edition
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
5.0
jeff88subplot's review against another edition
2.0
Read only the first few chapters and you will walk away with the best part of Ridley’s POV. The remainder of the book becomes whiny, shallow, and wrong. He starts with a great premise- despite what many people think, the world is truly better off than it was before and not just by a little, but in remarkable and wonderful ways. He has compelling and fun metrics to back it up. He gets into why trade and is the greatest driver of peace and innovation and is the reason why civilization exists at all.
But then he spends the rest of the book attacking The Pessimists using name calling and one-sided arguments that make the book feel like something off the desk of the the 45th President (assuming that particular person reads). The veracity of his attacks on environmentalists (trying to save the environment sacrifices people), scientists (research is pointless; true innovation only comes from entrepreneurs), aid workers (helping struggling economies just makes them unlikely to solve their own problems), etc. could not help me think that he either has a financial stake in what he is writing about or that he doesn’t quite believe them himself.
The book winds down with a kind of dark Pollyanna perspective that says that things will always get better because they always do, but fails to acknowledge that the reason why the world might be better is that people who do spend time thinking of consequences work hard to keep it from becoming that way.
Ultimately meant to deliver an uplifting message that humanity is improving all the time and that the past really isn’t better, The Rational Optimist just proves to be an angry and defensive tome that is pessimistic about pessimism.
But then he spends the rest of the book attacking The Pessimists using name calling and one-sided arguments that make the book feel like something off the desk of the the 45th President (assuming that particular person reads). The veracity of his attacks on environmentalists (trying to save the environment sacrifices people), scientists (research is pointless; true innovation only comes from entrepreneurs), aid workers (helping struggling economies just makes them unlikely to solve their own problems), etc. could not help me think that he either has a financial stake in what he is writing about or that he doesn’t quite believe them himself.
The book winds down with a kind of dark Pollyanna perspective that says that things will always get better because they always do, but fails to acknowledge that the reason why the world might be better is that people who do spend time thinking of consequences work hard to keep it from becoming that way.
Ultimately meant to deliver an uplifting message that humanity is improving all the time and that the past really isn’t better, The Rational Optimist just proves to be an angry and defensive tome that is pessimistic about pessimism.
mdyshel's review against another edition
2.0
Didn't manage to finish this book. I think it expresses important ideas about the central role of trust, cooperation and mutuality in human economy (didn't agree with the author in many points, which is not surprising, as he's much bigger support of the "free market" than I am - but I think what he says is important), but I didn't quite manage to get through the long anthropological explanations, and on the whole the book didn't manage to grab me. Maybe I'll try again sometime.