I received a free copy of this book, in exchange for an honest review.
This book challenges conventional beliefs, mores, and ideals. It is an uncomfortable read, because it often feels like the rantings of the author, in that it is often very subjective. Even if you do not accept what Richard Todd Devens writes, this book should make you at least reflect on what it is you believe and why.
After reading Rational Polemics, I had a deeper appreciation for my belief system and a better understanding of beliefs different from my own. I was occasionally challenged to reconsider why I hold specific moral beliefs.
In the opening paragraph, Richard Todd Devens admits to being disillusioned with organized religion, and considers himself to be an atheist. Therefore, if you are devoutly religious to the point where alternative viewpoints will offend you, then this is not the book for you to read. Not only does the author appear to be anti-religious, but he is not too fond of liberals, to whom he refers as “bleeding heart liberals”.
I often found the author’s views to be limited in scope. For instance, on the chapter on racism, he focuses almost entirely on racism between blacks and whites in America. However, racism is broader in scope than that. And, I found the chapter on racism, as with many of the chapters, to only skim the surface of the issue. I was actually disappointed not to have been drawn into deeper philosophical discourse.
This book challenges conventional beliefs, mores, and ideals. It is an uncomfortable read, because it often feels like the rantings of the author, in that it is often very subjective. Even if you do not accept what Richard Todd Devens writes, this book should make you at least reflect on what it is you believe and why.
After reading Rational Polemics, I had a deeper appreciation for my belief system and a better understanding of beliefs different from my own. I was occasionally challenged to reconsider why I hold specific moral beliefs.
In the opening paragraph, Richard Todd Devens admits to being disillusioned with organized religion, and considers himself to be an atheist. Therefore, if you are devoutly religious to the point where alternative viewpoints will offend you, then this is not the book for you to read. Not only does the author appear to be anti-religious, but he is not too fond of liberals, to whom he refers as “bleeding heart liberals”.
I often found the author’s views to be limited in scope. For instance, on the chapter on racism, he focuses almost entirely on racism between blacks and whites in America. However, racism is broader in scope than that. And, I found the chapter on racism, as with many of the chapters, to only skim the surface of the issue. I was actually disappointed not to have been drawn into deeper philosophical discourse.