[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by h8kurdt

And that's just negated everything you said before. Some things aren't as easy as a two page summary. That's like saying you get all the information you need about the news from Twitter.

There are books out there that will focus purely on the rise of capitalism, others focusing on the idea of animal rights and that's fine. But that's not what this book set about to do, as the title hints at. If anything, books like Sapiens help the reader push where to focus onto next.

Just cos one person knows all about the dawn of man and the change from foraging to agriculture doesn't mean the next is.

right. which is why i'd rather gather the information in discrete packets. in other words--essays.

what i'm aiming at is a discrepancy between the need for knowledge and the the need for publishers to do business. publishers need glossy attractive packets that look good in a coffee table, knowledge only requires... to fill the gaps in knowledge, plus the new ideas.

this is why i find myself reading wikipedia multiple times a day, whereas it takes a lot for me to commit to a book. got to the point where i've started giving wikipedia money-- they really do me a huge service which i can't ignore.

now, as for errors to be found on wikipedia-- there are errors to be found everywhere. read the guardian's review i mention and you'll see examples.

but yeah. i'm not saying i'm against reading or against ideas. it's just the 500-page volumes i find myself increasingly less willing to handle. i'd buy only "select chapters" if i could-- or pamphlets. many 18th/19th century pamphlets changed the world and didn't need to come in thick volumes (let's look in wikipedia for a list ha ha ha).

where did pamphlets go?