Este tópico está presentemente marcado como "adormecido"—a última mensagem tem mais de 90 dias. Pode acordar o tópico publicando uma resposta.
1lorannen
What do you think about the author’s research? Was it easy to see where the author got his info? Were the sources credible?
2kristilabrie
I really wish Harari cited his claims a lot more. So much of what he said came off as gross generalizations or assumptions; some statements he made seemed flat-out false and I want to know where he got the info so I can check my sources. If he did a better job citing sources, I would be able to tell the difference between him making factual statements and him just "spitballing" or philosophizing.
Perhaps his language was just too confusing for me, but (for example) when he claims scientists don't know the evolutionary benefit of subjective experiences, and then goes on to give the scientific explanation of a subjective experience in a survival situation in the next paragraph (p.111)....doesn't match up for me. He just seems to contradict himself too many times for me to take what he's saying seriously, from a factual standpoint. Philosophically, sure, he discusses some interesting thoughts.
(Aside: I have my own thoughts of what he's trying to say with this argument, re: neurological responses to external stimuli & feelings/subjective experiences.)
Perhaps his language was just too confusing for me, but (for example) when he claims scientists don't know the evolutionary benefit of subjective experiences, and then goes on to give the scientific explanation of a subjective experience in a survival situation in the next paragraph (p.111)....doesn't match up for me. He just seems to contradict himself too many times for me to take what he's saying seriously, from a factual standpoint. Philosophically, sure, he discusses some interesting thoughts.
(Aside: I have my own thoughts of what he's trying to say with this argument, re: neurological responses to external stimuli & feelings/subjective experiences.)
