is it "terrible" because you don’t agree with his conclusions?
I just remember it being somewhat pompous, not at all well founded, and generally not that insightful. But I did read the whole thing, so it must have had interesting moments. If you found it interesting, perhaps I’m judging it more harshly in retrospect than I actually did at the time.
However, it did not convince me in the slightest that its theory had any validity. There may have been some enjoyable philosophical ruminations, but the science was 100% pseudo.
Go to Source
