As the title indicates, this book offers a refutation of the theories put forward in "Blink". It is truly an engaging read.

The author delves deep into the various concepts presented in "Blink" and carefully dissects them, presenting counterarguments and evidence that challenges the validity of those theories.

The book not only provides a critical analysis but also offers alternative perspectives and interpretations. It forces the reader to think beyond the initial assumptions and consider different possibilities.

With its engaging writing style and thought-provoking content, this book is sure to capture the attention of readers interested in the topic. It offers a fresh and unique take on the theories presented in "Blink" and encourages further exploration and discussion.

Whether you are a fan of "Blink" or simply interested in learning more about the subject, this book is definitely worth a read. It will expand your understanding and challenge your preconceived notions, making it a valuable addition to any bookshelf.

I did not like this book at all.

Although I do applaud the author for posing the argument, I found this book to be incredibly dated.

This is a rather mild observation, but the tone of this book just didn't sit well with me.

The ideas presented seemed to be from a bygone era and lacked the relevance and freshness that I was hoping for.

The writing style was also a bit dry and unengaging, making it a struggle to get through the pages.

Overall, I cannot recommend this book to others.

It may have had some interesting points to make, but they were overshadowed by its many flaws.

I would suggest looking for a more contemporary and engaging read on the same subject matter.

I completed reading this book, but I simply cannot tolerate it.

The author, of course, attempts to position it in opposition to Malcom Gladwell's "BLINK!". As stated in the liner notes, which I also read, I initially appreciated the idea of someone presenting a good counterpoint. After all, critical thinking skills are often undervalued. I intuitively believe that even if Gladwell's conclusion is valid, the best thinking is likely to be the snap judgments formed in the mind of a practiced critical thinker. In other words, these thinking styles could potentially be complementary. So, I thought a comprehensive, challenging exploration of critical thinking, even if I didn't agree with all of it, would be ideal. In fact, it would be even better if I didn't agree with it all.

However, the first problem becomes evident. Despite extensively referencing Gladwell's book on the liner jacket, the author fails to present any argument for the necessity of critical thinking. While I might consider it self-evident, if you directly use a more popular book as a foil and promise something better but completely neglect to actually engage in a debate with the other book, that is not critical thinking. It is merely piggybacking and disrespecting the owner of the "coat" while riding on it. It is a rather foolish move.

Does the situation improve with its own content? Unfortunately, no. In not a single chapter does the author rely on anything other than cherry-picked sources to support his personal biases.

In summary:

1. The rude and unfulfilling reference to another book, which could have been the basis for a great debate.

2. The shoddy and lazy research.

3. Presenting "critical thinking" as simply agreeing with the author rather than a process of research, analysis, discovery, and change.

Years later, what I remember most about this book is how long the author spent denying climate change within one of the chapters, using the many rehearsed objections that had already been disproven by scientific consensus decades earlier. The fact that this is what I remember most about the book speaks volumes. It was emblematic of the entire work. It was memorable enough for me to write a review from memory years later.

I regret not asking for a refund, but I did (resentfully) read it cover to cover, giving the author every opportunity to redeem the book.

Save yourself the trouble and don't buy or read this book. Use my experience as a zero-trial learning opportunity. That's probably the only satisfaction I'll ever get from it.

He presents outstanding arguments regarding the reasons why critical thinking skills are declining in this country and the ways in which we can regain greatness through enhanced education.

This work was penned in direct opposition to "Blink," yet it was, overall, an extremely well-written book.

The author delves deep into the issue, analyzing various factors that contribute to the erosion of critical thinking.

He also offers practical solutions and strategies for improving education to foster the development of these essential skills.

Through his well-structured and engaging writing, he manages to capture the reader's attention and make a compelling case for the importance of critical thinking in today's society.

Whether you agree or disagree with his观点, this book is definitely worth a read for anyone interested in the state of education and the future of our country.

The text "Bit musty but still a compelling read" is rather concise. Let's expand it:

At first glance, this piece might seem a bit musty. The language and perhaps the overall concept give an impression of being a touch outdated. However, as one delves deeper into it, there is an undeniable allure. The story or argument presented has a certain charm that keeps the reader engaged. Despite its initial appearance of being a bit dusty around the edges, it manages to draw you in and hold your attention. It makes you want to keep reading, to discover what lies beneath the surface. It's a reminder that sometimes, even things that seem a bit old or worn can have hidden treasures within. And this particular piece is no exception. It's a compelling read that, in its own way, manages to stand the test of time.

I had the opportunity to speak to the author following his delivery of a presentation on this particular topic. Additionally, I had already read the book.

He presents a very convincing argument that opposes Gladwell's theory as put forth in "Blink".

The author's perspective is truly fascinating and offers a fresh take on the subject matter.

It is an interesting read that is well worth the effort.

His insights and analysis make one question some of the commonly held beliefs and assumptions.

The book provides a thought-provoking exploration of the topic, challenging the reader to consider different viewpoints.

Overall, it is a valuable contribution to the field and a must-read for anyone interested in the subject.

I had extremely high hopes for this book. However, I was rather disappointed in the end.

The thing that brings a smile to my face in a strange way is that I was let down by this book for the exact same reasons that I felt let down by Gladwell's Blink. There simply weren't an adequate number of facts. They both read as if someone was handed an assignment and didn't bother to invest the time in proper research. Instead, they filled the required number of pages with unsupported assertions, conventional wisdom, and anecdotes. Unlike Think, at least Blink had some entertainment value.

I wholeheartedly concur with the author's opinion that as a species, we are overall losing our critical thinking skills. I also agree that, contrary to popular belief, the USA is not alone in this regard. However, I was eagerly seeking facts to support my opinions, and I simply didn't find them within the pages of this book.

Anyone who has read my reviews is well aware that I am not a writer. Nevertheless, I have this feeling that if I were given a copy of Gladwell’s book to attempt to refute and had a good editor by my side, I could have written this very same book myself.

All that being said, if you have read Blink, then you should also give Think a read. They are like two sides of the same coin. Unfortunately, what both authors fail to understand is that both skills are essential and needed in our intellectual toolkit.

Michael Legault's response to Gladwell's Blink

I had anticipated that hearing the argument against snap judgements and in favor of critical thinking would be extremely interesting.

To a certain extent, some of Legault's conclusions were indeed very well thought-out and unique. He presented valid points that made one stop and consider the importance of not relying solely on quick judgments.

However, his overall voice and writing skills left much to be desired. I found his writing tedious and difficult to work through. The density of his prose made it a challenge to fully engage with his ideas.

I do support his initiative to encourage Americans to think more critically. In today's fast-paced world, it is crucial to take the time to analyze and evaluate situations before making decisions.

Nevertheless, I wish that he could have presented his arguments in a less dense and more accessible manner. This would have made his message more widely understood and potentially had a greater impact.

Overall, while Legault's ideas have merit, his writing style detracted from the effectiveness of his communication.

So, the edition in the possession of this reviewer has 355 pages.

On page 11, perhaps Congresswoman Smith could be invited to comment on the difficulties that arise from the situation of "we're-us-over-here-and-we're-looking-at-what-is-going-on-over-there-and-well-you-know-whatever" and how these difficulties are best handled, addressed, and resolved. There might also be concerns about the content of Chapter One generally developing arguments along the lines of "well-they're-them-over-here-and-they're-not-as-good-as-LeGault".

On page 35, the reader is presented with thought-provoking questions such as "On whose high horse did I ride into town proclaiming, in effect, that people need to get back to school? Where am I coming from when I implore America (and the world) to think more, better, and to practice (sic) the skills upon which the intellect breathes and grows? What exactly do I wish we'd think about, and how do I propose this would help us?" These questions remind the reader of something that might come to mind later, perhaps at the end of the book. Oh, and on page 38, it is argued that "the vast majority of people do not even get near to thinking critically or creatively on a consistent, life-changing basis", which is an interesting point to consider.

The mention of aphids on multiple pages (pp40 - 4, p64, p76, etc.) seems to be an important aspect of the book. It makes one wonder what the significance of aphids is in relation to the overall themes and arguments.

On page 77, there are other issues and arguments that appear to be generally relevant. The ones on pages 83 - 4 and 85 - 6 need to be carefully handled and addressed at an appropriate time and setting. On page 79, the question of what sort of arrangements might be available to handle and address before-the-fact sense, sensibility, and less abstract considerations, as well as to organize suitable assessments of materiality, is raised. And on page 91, the extent to which satisfactory arrangements have been found to address the limitations described in Louise Armstrong's assessment is a matter for further exploration.

The conversations related to the implied argument on page 268 around "if-you-can't-feel-pain-how-do-you-know-you-are-alive?" should take place in an appropriate setting. The ones on page 311 seem to be hedged, and on page 279, the significance of "This is more than just a sign of self-absorption and callousness" is open to interpretation.

Finally, on page 301, the reader is informed that "Flaws in reasoning can usually be traced to lack of rigor in our logic due to an emotional appeal of some sort." This statement invites further discussion and analysis.

I really wanted to like this book. LeGault has a great premise. He argues that for America to succeed as a country, Americans must engage in critical thinking and relearn critical thinking skills. Instead of simply relying on sound bites, the media, and so on for information, people should think for themselves.

However, what the book ends up being is a bit of a mishmash. It contains great ideas supported by solid evidence, but also takes potshots at Malcolm Gladwell's "Blink" and tries to link him to feel-good psychology and political correctness. There is also a fairly substantial conservative/right-leaning bent.

His attempted indictment of "Blink" as always promoting gut feeling without regard to experience or weighing evidence makes me think he didn't fully understand the book. He seems to have read only the first couple of chapters, thrown it across the room, shouted "balderdash!" and then started writing his own book.

Interestingly, when I apply his thesis to his own book, it falls short. He repeatedly criticizes the "radical environmental" movement, but his endnotes lack evidence to support his claims about global warming and the Kyoto Protocol. He also takes shots at other movements, such as "radical feminists/minorities/political correctness/name of recent disenfranchised group here," for forcing the public to accept "common knowledge" without evidence. However, whenever he presents evidence to support his own assertions, I can think of studies that refute his观点.

Even stranger is his book's refusal to really examine failures of critical thinking in important situations like the handling of Iraq and the aftermath of Katrina. Each of these topics barely receives a page of attention. How can he not examine the Downing Street Memo or the nomination of an Arabian Horse judge to run FEMA?

Throughout the book, I found myself questioning LeGault's own research and methodologies. Given his background in science writing, this is quite interesting. I also began questioning my own background and judgments. I found myself agreeing with some of what he says, but disagreeing with other parts. Am I just being a reflexive liberal, or am I really not buying it?

LeGault's book sets up an interesting and timely premise, and a call to return to critical thinking is definitely needed. However, I'm not sure he would want his own book to be subject to the same level of critical analysis. It's a wonderful concept that is overdue, but sometimes it feels like it's riding on the coattails of Gladwell's success. It also veers into conservative screed territory more often than I would like. Nevertheless, if his goal was to get readers to think critically, then in my case, I believe he has achieved it.

As the contrary of the book I read before (Blink), this book really makes sense to me. :-)

This new book presents a completely different perspective. While Blink might have focused on quick judgments and snap decisions, this one delves deeper into more profound and complex ideas. It offers valuable insights and explanations that resonate with my own experiences and thoughts.

The author's writing style is engaging and easy to follow, which makes it even more enjoyable to read. Each chapter builds upon the previous one, gradually unfolding a comprehensive and coherent argument.

I find myself constantly reflecting on the concepts presented in the book and applying them to various aspects of my life. It has truly opened my eyes and made me think differently about many things.

Overall, I am extremely glad that I picked up this book. It has become an important addition to my reading collection and has had a significant impact on my intellectual growth. :-)

In recent times, there has been a remarkable book that stands out as the best referenced work on critical thinking.

This book offers a comprehensive and in-depth exploration of the subject, presenting valuable insights and practical strategies for developing strong critical thinking skills.

It delves into various aspects such as analyzing arguments, evaluating evidence, and identifying biases.

With its clear and engaging writing style, it makes complex concepts accessible to readers of all levels.

The author's expertise and extensive research are evident throughout the book, providing a solid foundation for anyone looking to enhance their critical thinking abilities.

Whether you are a student, a professional, or simply someone interested in improving your cognitive skills, this book is a must-read.

It has the potential to transform the way you think and approach problems, enabling you to make more informed decisions and judgments.

Overall, it is an outstanding contribution to the field of critical thinking and a valuable resource for anyone seeking to expand their intellectual horizons.