A Conflict of Visions“ is Sowell‘s favorite of his own books. I contend it’s his second masterpiece next to „Knowledge and Decisions“.

I write a review of both CV and “The Vision of the Anointed” (VA), which is just a polemic version of CV where Sowell clearly takes sides.

VA is intellectual entertainment for people who agree with Sowell that the constrained vision superior and people with the unconstrained vision cause all sorts of problems. So I focus my review on CV, which is more intellectually serious and more balanced (though not totally, as I will argue - which leads up to VA).

CV is a brilliant book. Most of all, the finding that visions are “pre-analytic cognitive acts” is a timely insight. In other words, we have made up our mind before we look at facts and logic, and look for evidence to confirm our “vision”. This is a finding echoed by moral psychology, most notably Jonathan Haidt in “The Righteous Mind”, which is instrumental to understand contemporary political polarization.

Let me first say that the criticisms pointing at the “inaccuracy” of the two visions miss the point. The simplicity of the argument “there are two visions” is a strength rather than a weakness, because it illuminates a lot of things with as few assumptions as possible. It is a very useful and prolific distinction.

I point to two more pointed criticisms of the book:

- The lack of a sociological scope, i.e. who are the people following one vision, or version of vision and why, and what’s the ultimate implication of it? People confuse the two visions with conservative and progressive, and this is misleading (even though there's probably still a tendency). Arguably the material for a separate book (Jonathan Haidt kind of fills this gap with "The Righteous Mind").

- It’s inconsequential in comparison to e.g. Sowell's teacher Milton Friedman, who clearly was out to propose a positive vision of capitalism, coated in his constrained vision of human affairs. Sowell doesn't show a positive vision of human affairs (like Friedman) or proposes a way for people on different political sides to understand each other (like Haidt). His consequence is more a polemic against people with the "vision of the anointed", which is ultimately a bit Tea Party-direction.

In the age of Trumpism, it has therefore not served as a useful guide for conservative thinkers or politicians, nor as a guide for more liberal or progressive thinkers to bridge gaps (which it undoubtedly could have had).

I think this is ultimately tragic because Sowell is brilliant and his thoughts could permeate our contemporary thinking much more for the better if anchored more in a positive, Friedmanian framework, rather than a negative framework - in this way he is paradoxically more comparable to Karl Marx than to Milton Friedman. Karl Marx was extremely reluctant to show a positive vision for society, rather than a negative critique of society (of course analytical and scientific).

You can clearly see Sowell's resignation in recent interviews (he kind of half-heartedly endorsed Trump, but also seems very disappointed at the political activism and rhetoric around Trumpism).

Again, this is comparable to Marx who was also very unhappy with the direction that his followers took.

Nevertheless, this book should be seen as a modern classic.

I may later come back to this and reconsider my rating. I'm close to 4, but the conclusions of the book are in some ways, nebulous.

This book can be heavy going at times and while the discussion between the constrained vision of life and the unconstrained (and the also some views that don't completely conform to either view) can be interesting and even absorbing it can also go slowly. I didn't go into this book nearly as deeply or as completely I as I need or want to. So, it's partly "me" right now and things in my own life that have kept me from going in the depth I'd like here.

Good book interesting book. Well worth reading and considering, espically in today's political climate.

This was so dense but so insightful and satisfying to me. It impacts how I see the world now, I can’t not see things through this perspective. I had to rewind so often to understand it took me like 4x longer to feel through this book but I felt was well worth it. I’m going to keep listening to other Thomas Sowell books.

The 2nd most thought provoking books I've ever read. This book was said to greatly affect the thoughts of Jonathan Haidt, author of The Righteous Mind, probably the most thought provoking book I've read.

The basis of this book is uncovering why groups of people seem to have the same viewpoints on many seemingly unrelated social and political issues. Sowell's thesis is that a persons "vision" of the nature of man leads him to beliefs on a number of issues.

People defined by the "constrained vision" see man as morally limited and inherently selfish. People identified with the "unconstrained vision" see man as having the ability to evolve socially to reach a level of intelligence and selflessness where they can put other peoples needs in front of there own.

Dividing people into these groups may seem arbitrary, but Sowell systematically shows have these views of man drive people classified under these two visions toward vastly different opinions on topics such as law, social policy, youth/age, freedom, justice, war, crime, etc. Topic after topic, Sowell consults famous economists and political theorists to defend both visions, and explains the reasons why political groups have particular stances on issues. Reading the book, the pieces begin to click.

I think some people read this book knowing the authors personal viewpoints (until he recently he wrote a column in a newspaper and was known for being very open and frank) and caught wisps of personal bias in it. I did not see this at all. Sowell argues both sides equally, never mentions his viewpoints, and rarely uses the term republican or democrat. This book is too full of insight to be wasted by throwing a few political jabs, and it doesn't. Treat it as a textbook.

Beyond the political discussion, Sowell routinely tosses in a sentence that would blow my mind for 5 minutes as I wrapped my head around the wisdom entailed in it. He might be the smartest author I've read.

Highly recommended, though expect to have to read and reread. Its a thought provoking, dense sucker.