Making crucial decisions is not something that can be done hastily. It requires careful thought and consideration before taking any action. This is in contrast to simply following one's gut instinct. When faced with an important decision, it is essential to weigh the pros and cons, gather relevant information, and analyze the potential consequences. Rushing into a decision without thinking can lead to negative outcomes and regrets. By taking the time to think things through, one can make a more informed and rational choice. This does not mean that intuition should be completely ignored, but rather that it should be used in conjunction with logical thinking. In conclusion, making crucial decisions requires a balance of both thought and intuition, and it is important to take the time to make the right choice.

The author of this book may possess awards and high acclaim, yet it is not evident here.

This book should have concentrated on a specific topic and thoroughly supported it. Instead, the author presents examples that often only peripherally relate to the argument and are easily refutable upon scrutiny. The end result, for me, is that the book resembles a verbose evangelical tirade.

Where brevity would have been beneficial, the author embarks on historical diatribes to find snapshots that are supposed to support his propositions. Regrettably, the constant historical allegories detract from the central focus and weaken the arguments as much of history is an interpretation of sometimes unsubstantiated tales.

A recommended programming practice is to refactor code for conciseness and better structure. The author's editors should probably have reminded him that refactoring regular prose often helps and would have made a significant difference here. This appears as a long, wide-ranging rant that is forcibly brought back to a central thesis in some places where the current topic has only a marginal connection to the main book topic.

In attempting to support his thesis with evidentiary examples, especially in the first two chapters, the author leaves himself open to reader doubts when his explanatory evidence is analyzed. In the case of auto windshields being damaged in manufacture, I wondered why time-and-motion studies didn't detect the problem. It was also clear that line and upper management failed to consult or seek input from direct workers. The author didn't mention the lack of accountability for managers or personnel from production measurements. This example seemed to be a case of bad management, often driven by ulterior motives rather than a failure to apply critical analysis.

The second example of three pool repair estimates lacked critical details. The most common approach to debugging a problem is to look for the obvious elements first. The third plumber arrived at the solution indirectly through experience and follow-up, rather than premeditated thinking. This showed that the author failed in his associative support for "Think".

After the first two examples failed to be convincingly demonstrative, it became easy to skim through the author's verbose narrative. While I agreed with most of his points, his topic statements were not decisively supported. His argument about global warming sounded like a political opinion and showed a lack of research. He also failed to understand time frames for geological consequences and population dynamics, despite forcing the reader through his histrionic historical hoops.

I'll restate that I agreed with over 90% of the author's observations. However, the experience of reading the book was like listening to my uncle who served in WWII and evangelized his opinions at every opportunity. He didn't hold two-way conversations and his opinions were not subject to change. After enduring his endless wisdom, I just wished he'd be quiet. I had the same feelings about the author.

The rhetoric employed in this book appears to be specifically targeted at undermining another work titled "Blink."

While the author managed to put forward several valid points, there was an air of pretentiousness about him, particularly when it came to subjects in which he clearly lacked proper education.

For someone purporting to argue from a stance of logic and philosophy, it was rather astonishing to observe the extent of double think he engaged in. At times, his opinion seemed to shift abruptly from one paragraph to the next.

Overall, it makes for an interesting read, but it is by no means a text that one should blindly accept as gospel.

It is important to approach such works with a critical eye and not be swayed by the author's rhetoric alone.

In current American society, the analysis of conformity in beliefs and values is a complex issue. It is often influenced by emotional reactions, the so-called PC police, and unsubstantiated biases. People tend to conform to certain ideas and behaviors without really thinking deeply. This can lead to a lack of rational thought and informed decisions. To return to a state of rationality, it will require several things. Firstly, individuals need to be more self-aware of their own biases and emotions. They should strive to look at issues objectively and consider different perspectives. Secondly, education plays a crucial role. It should focus on teaching critical thinking skills and encouraging students to question and analyze. Additionally, the media and society as a whole need to promote a more rational and informed discourse. By doing so, we can hope to break free from the cycle of conformity and make more rational and informed choices.