Review by Booklist Review
Poundstone's screed opens with an anecdote about a Hollywood executive an honors law grad, no less who didn't realize the Kenneth Branagh film version of Hamlet was based on the Shakespeare play. Many other examples of American stupidity follow, but what Poundstone wants to get at is why we should care about the dumbing-down of humanity. Sure, most of us have a nice little machine in our pockets that can tell us almost everything we might want to know at any given moment, but what are we losing when we don't have a head full of facts? Poundstone makes the case that we may be losing potential income or even happiness, and in part 3 of the book, he explores reasons why dumbing-down can be smart, offers solutions to junk browsing online, and discusses the best way to distill the onslaught of news (or what passes for news). Librarians and others with a head for trivia will enjoy this, but some readers may feel picked on for not knowing how to correctly spell Caesar salad.--Vnuk, Rebecca Copyright 2016 Booklist
From Booklist, Copyright (c) American Library Association. Used with permission.
Review by Library Journal Review
Poundstone's (Are You Smart Enough To Work at Google?) newest title centers on the hypothesis that knowing more is more beneficial than simply asking the Internet for answers. Conducting surveys on a variety of topics, the author offers some startling results. People on the whole regardless of factors such as gender or political leanings would be well served retaining a bit more seemingly useless information; this assertion appears to correlate not only with greater income levels but also feelings of satisfaction. Divided into three segments, the book begins with explaining the Dunning-Kruger effect (ignorance of our own ignorance), then moves onto survey results, and concludes with a convincing argument for accumulating facts. Ultimately, learning nuggets of wisdom that may not serve an immediate purpose could be well worth the long-term rewards. Despite covering a touchy subject, the narrative never gets personal. Aiming for the benefit of humanity as a whole, Poundstone's book merely wishes enlightenment-"the only thing you can't Google is what you ought to be looking up." VERDICT This title is easily digestible and not jargon-heavy; if somewhat depressing, it is also inspiring. A worthwhile read for anyone, especially those looking to get a leg up.-Kaitlin Malixi, formerly at Virginia Beach P.L. © Copyright 2016. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
(c) Copyright Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
Review by Kirkus Book Review
The story of the dumbing-down of the American brain, as we have all become increasingly dependent on letting our computers think for us.This breezy, pop-research overview of the decline of basic knowledge in the age of information overdrive could provide plenty of nuggets for journalists and hand-wringers over how many more millennials are familiar with the Kardashians than Descartes and can't name a single South American novelist or locate most African countries on a map. So what? Whatever we need to know, we can Google, right? While Poundstone (Rock Breaks Scissors: A Practical Guide to Outguessing and Outwitting Almost Everybody, 2014, etc.) is careful not to confuse correlation with causation, he suggests that, where general knowledge is concerned, "high scores correlate with high income, good health, and sometimes other positive attributes" (including happiness, in some studies). In a voting democracy, it's sad to note that little more than a third of Americans can name the three branches of government and that some of those with the strongest reservations about immigration, global warming, or evolution are among the least knowledgeable in general. However, Poundstone's primary tone is less alarmist than amusing, since it's clear that he's including all of us among those who could stand to know more than we do. As he heads one section, "True or False: You and Everyone You Know Are Idiots." Some of the author's ways of determining knowledge or lack thereof can seem, as he describes some of his results, "arbitrary and puzzling." For example, one chapter seems to equate knowledge with recognizing historical portraits and says that it's quite possible that those who don't recognize a photo of Bach ("about half of the American public") might well be familiar with his music. (Though perhaps it's more remarkable that even half of Americans surveyed recognize a photo of Bach.) The book reads like an extended game of Trivial Pursuit, featuring some who play very well and many more who play very poorly. Copyright Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.
Copyright (c) Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.
