I love the way Michael Hanan does his book reviews. He does it in a way that is not the typical book review, but more in the way of a conversation between you and your favorite author. I love this book because he writes from the point of view of a non-reader. That makes it much more relatable for me.
As I mentioned in the intro, there are two sides to every story. The problem with Michael Hanan’s writing is that his point of view is one of the least relatable I’ve ever seen. I try to imagine what it’s like to be a reader and how much I know about books before I start reading them. For some of us, being a reader is a skill, and for others it’s not.
The way I see it, the problem is not the fact that he is writing from the point of view of a non-reader, its that his point of view is not relatable to most humans. The problem is that it is a point of view that is too personal.
Michael Hanans is a good writer, and a good writer can help a person see the world through someone else’s perspective. However, his perspective is not relatable to most humans. He doesn’t say, “I believe in God, and that’s all there is to be” or “I believe that humanity is a cancer.” He doesn’t say, “I believe that all humans are created equal.
The problem is that most non-readers are not going to like Michael Hanans. They are going to get upset when he says, I believe that only the ignorant speak. They are going to get upset when he says, I believe that no one has the right to judge another. They are going to get upset when he says, I believe that I would rather be in hell than in heaven.
It’s not that I’m against religion, but it seems that most non-readers in this community are not going to get offended when someone says, I believe that science is a lie. It’s not that I’m against science, but I’m not going to like Michael Hanans unless he is careful to stay on topic.
In any case, he’s not going to be allowed to say what he really thinks, and he’s not alone. The atheists and the secularists in this country are going to be very angry with him for suggesting that science is a lie, and they are going to try to tell him that there are people out there, like me, who choose to believe in science.
I just have to point out that science is just like religion in that it is, in fact, a lie. The idea that man is the center of the Universe is a fantasy. It is a lie because it has the backing of what most people believe, namely, the idea that science can prove that man is the center of the universe. That is not science. Science is the study of evidence. Science is not about proving that man is the center of the universe.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard an older person or a real person say, “Why don’t you just do it?” I think they’re just saying, “Because it’s science.” This isn’t really a good term for it. I think your attitude should be, “I’m just saying, I don’t think it’s science.