Introduction to Book Battles
Book Battles
Why comparative book reviews?
When trying to figure out the answer to a contentious philosophical or scientific question, most of us (at least I) have a tendency to read one good book on the topic and then act like we’ve got a handle on it, rather than actually engaging with opposing perspectives from other good books. Then, we defend what we think we know from that one book and dismiss conflicting arguments out of hand. Thus is the nature of confirmation bias. And laziness. And time constraints. But, with this Substack, we’re taking a different approach to learning, one where competing ideas are given a fair fight.
1. The Setup
Basically, I look for pairs of books that argue different answers to questions that I think are important. They can pertain to any field – science, philosophy, history – as long I have good reason to believe they’re well-researched, accessible and intellectually honest. I read the books and do background research, letting the authors’ arguments battle it out in my head. Then I let them battle it out on the page, in my own words, as I write up the comparative review. And as to who wins the battle, I get to be the arbiter. I don’t simply decide who’s right and who’s wrong and bang my gavel authoritatively. It’s more about trying to carefully explain which argument was most persuasive and why, while confronting my own priors and personal biases about the topic. Ok, maybe a little bit of gavel-banging. But you readers get to decide if I’m being just, and the debate can continue in the comments.
2. The Goal
The goal of the reviews is to explore some of the most important questions facing us and compare the answers posed by different experts. If you’ve read the books, great, but there’s no need to have read or even to be familiar with them, just as long as you’re interested in the question at hand. I’ll lay out the context and summarize each author’s perspective. But my summaries will only scratch the surface of the arguments in the books, so hopefully they’ll encourage you to read them yourself.
The comments section will serve as an “idea lab” (the opposite of an “echo chamber” – see Tim Urban) where we can share and constructively debate the ideas at hand.
3. What to expect
So, what kinds of questions should you expect to see book battles about? The first one, which is already posted, is “From Whence the West?”, in which Joe Henrich and Tom Holland fight it out (via me) about what caused Western culture to become the way it is. Next, we’ll take on the all-important question of free will, with a battle between Robert Sapolsky and Kevin Mitchell. And if that topic’s not deep enough for you, how about the fundamental nature of reality, with Sean Carroll defending physicalism against Bernardo Kastrup’s idealism. After that, I’ve got some more battles lined up about language and cognition and the importance of religion.
By the way, I’m open to recommendations, so if you know of any two books that take opposing perspectives on a particularly important question and you’d like me to review them, mention them in the comments.
You can expect a new review about once a month. If you appreciate them, please subscribe, and please also recommend my Substack to others who might be interested.
See you in the comments!
