When "stigmatizing" has become a bad word and a bad thing everywhere and for every one, one brave British curmudgeon dares to demand it's return!

Romancing Opiates: Pharmacological Lies and the Addiction Bureaucracy

By: Theodore Dalrymple Published: 2006 160 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

This book aims to shatter some of the myths around opioid addiction. The first part covers the myth that stopping opioids cold turkey is both painful and dangerous. The second part dissects the myths propagated by literature, primarily Coleridge and De Quincey. The final part ties it into an addiction bureaucracy, though that part still references De Quincey an awful lot.

What's the author's angle?

Dalrymple worked as a prison doctor and psychiatrist for many years. Accordingly, he has a lot of experience with addicts. But he's also very culturally conservative. The combination of the two leads him to strongly oppose coddling addicts, arguing instead that they should be stigmatized.

Who should read this book?

I'm a fan of Dalrymple. I've enjoyed his columns over the years, and I appreciate his curmudgeonly British insight. I previously enjoyed and reviewed his book Life at the Bottom. I would definitely recommend that book before this book. Actually, I would not recommend this book period, unless, for some reason, you want a really deep dive into Coleridge and De Quincey's writings about opium.

Specific thoughts: Opioid addiction is not a disease?

Maybe the answer really is to be found in early 1970's Chilean socialism…

The Unaccountability Machine: Why Big Systems Make Terrible Decisions—and How the World Lost Its Mind

By: Dan Davies Published: 2024 304 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

The development of accountability sinks, a construct used by governments, corporations, and really any large-scale organization to deflect responsibility (and potential punishment) away from individuals and into processes. As part of his critique and his hoped for solution Davies leans heavily into management cybernetics and Stafford Beer. If neither of those ring a bell perhaps you've encountered Beer's most famous saying, "The purpose of a system is what it does."

What's the author's angle?

Davies sits in a weird place ideologically. He's a huge fan of Beer, and spends lots of time talking about Beer's partnership with Salvador Allende, the president of Chile in the early 70s. They partnered to create Cybersyn, a cybernetic management system for the whole economy. Davies admits it wouldn't have worked at the time, but seems to think that maybe with AI something like it might work now? On the other hand, in many places he seems to be channeling Taleb, and while I can't find anything by Taleb directly commenting on Cybersyn, I'm confident he would not be a fan. Davies also levels significant criticism at Milton Friedman, which makes sense in the Chilean context, but it feels out of character for a soberly written business book.

Who should read this book?

I read it as part of a Slate Star Codex/Astral Codex Ten book club. If that means anything to you, you'll probably find the book interesting. Additionally, anyone looking for another way to describe the hidden brokenness of the world will probably enjoy the book.

What does the book have to say about the future?

Pick it up because it's short. Continue it because of the brutal Bavarian accent. Finish it because maybe he's on to something?

The Future of Truth

By: Werner Herzog Published: 2025 128 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

Legendary badass, and sometimes filmmaker Werner Herzog weighs in on the concept of truth, how best to represent truth, and what's happening to it. Drawing on his own experiences he distinguishes between dry, factual truth, and what he calls ecstatic truth, a deeper kind of truth revealed by art.

Who should read this book?

I don't think anyone should literally read this book. It's best consumed as an audiobook with Herzog's strangely compelling narration carrying you along. With a voice like Herzog's and clocking in at only 3.5 hours of audio, it almost doesn't matter what it's about.

What does the book have to say about the future?

Many college age girls lead lives of quiet desperation.

The Mind Reels

By: Fredrik deBoer Published: 2025 168 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

The book follows Alice. Alice has severe bipolar disorder. This doesn't come out until she's at college. It's entirely awful. Going from least to worst bad, we see: large weight fluctuations, social fallout, impulsive sex, being committed, psychotic and manic paranoia, and depression so deep she can't make it to the bathroom.

What's the author's angle?

Normally I don't talk about the angle for a fictional book, but this book deserves (demands?) an exception. DeBoer is known for many things. (And I would say that he's one of the few Substack writers where I read 90%+ of what they write.) One of the big things he's known for is pushing back against the old vision of the mentally ill as tortured geniuses or the more modern quirky, actually it's kind of a super power narrative. This book was explicitly written to provide a very real depiction of what it's like to have a severe mental illness. (It succeeds by the way.)

Who should read this book?

If you like anything deBoer has written, I think you'll like this. His unsparing view of reality is his biggest charm, and it definitely comes through in this book. I know people who don't like deBoer's fiction, but who nevertheless liked this book.

If you've never heard of deBoer, but you like books where characters have an intense interior life, and there's not necessarily a hopeful "happily ever after" arc, I would also definitely recommend this book.

Specific thoughts: Most men (and women) lead lives of quiet desperation

Part memoir, part science writing, part history, and a lot of blaming her neighbor for her empties.

Drink Your Way Sober: The Science-Based Method to Break Free from Alcohol

By: Katie Herzog Published: 2025 208 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

You may be familiar with Katie Herzog from Blocked and Reported, the podcast she hosts with Jesse Singal. Or you might have seen her byline on the Free Press. What I didn't know (at least before she started promoting this book) is that she's also a recovering alcoholic. I also didn't know about the Sinclair Method for "extinguishing" alcohol use disorder (AUD). Finally I didn't know that we are now calling it alcohol use disorder. So you could say this is a book about a bunch of things I didn't know.

What's the author's angle?

Herzog failed to get her drinking under control using any of the more common methods. Willpower, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), overwhelming shame, etc. The Sinclair Method was what finally worked for her. This method involves taking naltrexone before you drink. This blocks the reward circuit allowing you to train your body out of alcohol dependence. It's also something that not a lot of people have heard about, so her angle resembles that of a fiery recent convert, who believes that people trapped in similar despair need to hear the good word.

Who should read this book?

As someone who's never had a drink, I'm loath to recommend anything in the sobriety space. In the same manner that a fish doesn't know about water, can I have anything meaningful to say about sobriety? That very large caveat aside, if you have AUD, and nothing else has worked, and you haven't tried the Sinclair Method (or if you know someone who fits this category) I would definitely recommend this book.

If you're thinking of reading it just as Herzog memoir, there's some pretty good stuff in here, but not enough to justify reading the entire book. But if you're on the fence I would push you towards getting the book.

Specific thoughts: So why isn't the Sinclair Method better known?

Replay

By: Ken Grimwood Published: 1998 320 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

A man dies and is sent back to his 18 year old self to relive his life over, and over, and over. Every time he dies he's sent back. He dies in 1988, and awakens in 1963, so there's a lot of discussion of those years (Kennedy Assassination, Moon landing, Iran Hostage crisis, etc.)

Who should read this book?

I came across a recommendation for this book on a Youtube channel that was doing a survey of all the movies that had functionally the same premise as Groundhog Day. And he included the book as sort of an appendix in other things people might want to check out. If you're a big fan of the Groundhog Day contrivance, then I think you'll like this book.

Specific thoughts: Great on a personal level, weak on a world-building level.

This review will go from spoiler free to light spoilers to full on spoilers. I will let you know at each transition.

It took 20 years from Bell inventing the telegraph before someone sent an ad with it. It took ~7 years for the first piece of email spam to be sent. Any bets on what it will look like for AI?

Experimental AI Summary:

I open with my own costly, underwhelming SEO experiment and the fact that I've mostly abandoned Google for LLMs, arguing that if AI chat replaces search then AIO (AI optimization) will replace SEO. I frame influence as "numerous / high-reputation / mentions," recall the web's shift from Yahoo's directory to Google's PageRank—where "reputation" changed everything and spawned link-farm tactics—and ask how the same gaming might hit AI. I sketch possibilities: models pre-vetting training data and tagging low-trust commercial pages; spam-style gatekeeping of AI inputs; straightforward paid placements inside AI answers; or darker outcomes where cheap marketing pollutes corpora and bad actors weaponize hallucinations. The core question for me is whether LLMs can build sturdier reputation defenses than Google or whether their architecture makes them easier to spoof. For now, AI search feels like Google circa 1998—astonishingly good—but I doubt it stays pristine once marketers and scammers fully arrive.

If you had been placing bets 150 years ago around what physics would have to say about the existence of God, you would have lost a lot of money.

Modern Physics and Ancient Faith

By: Stephen M. Barr Published: 2003 312 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

Barr takes all the discoveries of 20th-century physics, stuff like the Big Bang, quantum mechanics, the various forces, and argues that all of these things are more compatible with belief in God, specifically a traditional Judeo-Christian God, than with a belief in pure materialism.

This is illustrated most succinctly in the underlying values for various background constants of the universe. For most of these if they varied even slightly then life would be impossible. This is known as the fine-tuning argument for the existence of God, and Barr lays it out in rigorous detail.

What's the author's angle?

Barr is a scientist, and a believing Catholic. So he definitely has a dog in the fight, but he also does a good job of steelmanning the other side of the argument. Also it's important to clarify what the fight is. It's not a fight between religion and science. Barr is both a believer and a scientist. It's a fight between religion and materialism. Which is a different animal. This is not to say he's dogmatic (perhaps I shouldn't keep using the word "fight") the tone is very reasonable. He's mostly targeting a lazy "modern science shows that God is silly and unnecessary" crowd.

Who should read this book?

This was one of the books mentioned by Ross Douthat in his book Believe (see my review of Douthat's book here, or check out the PSmith's far superior one here). And I was glad I followed Douthat's recommendation, the book did not disappoint. If you're at all interested in the fine-tuning argument or related ideas I think you'll love this book. But I can clearly see where it's too niche for the majority of people.

What does the book have to say about the future?

You've heard about placebo's? Well what about nocebos?

The Age of Diagnosis: How Our Obsession with Medical Labels Is Making Us Sicker

By: Suzanne O'Sullivan Published: 2025 320 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

The idea that putting labels on something is not a free lunch—like everything else there are tradeoffs. Rather than framing numerous illnesses as being psychosomatic, O'Sullivan seems more to be suggesting that humans are very suggestible. (I get the meta-ness of the statement.) As such, once you generate a label it has a tendency to warp identities, and make people seek out confirming evidence. This all creates a sort of nocebo effect which may increase the severity of whatever symptoms they're experiencing.

To put it more succinctly, labels have power and we should be circumspect about applying them.

What's the author's angle?

O'Sullivan is a neurologist who noticed that lots of patients have "normal" tests, but are also indisputably suffering. As someone more focused on the brain than other parts of the body, she has long contended that expectations, culture, current fads, etc. play a much bigger role than most doctors want to admit. It's not all about biology, psychology also has a role. Previous books include It's All in Your Head: True Stories of Imaginary Illness and The Sleeping Beauties: And Other Stories of Mystery Illness.

Who should read this book?

Anyone interested in a broader discussion of how the world outside of medicine interacts with the world of medicine. How the epistemic crisis, culture, disease advocacy groups, bureaucracy, and patient longing all affect the act of putting a label on a cluster of symptoms.

What does the book have to say about the future?

It's another self help book. Is this the one that will finally put you over the top, or another in a long line of endeavors that look like progress, but are really procrastination?

Inner Excellence: Train Your Mind for Extraordinary Performance and the Best Possible Life

By: Jim Murphy Published: 2020 360 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

As you have already gathered, this is a self-help book. One of thousands (millions?) so the point is what sets this one apart from all those other books? I'm sure it hasn't avoided all overlap, but the book does have a focus on character, and getting rid of self-centeredness that was refreshing.

What's the author's angle?

Jim Murphy played baseball in the minor leagues, and he was obsessed with winning. Then vision problems derailed his career, so he gave away most of his possessions and moved to the desert. Over the next five years he did nothing sports psychology, in an attempt to figure out how to compete in a way that produced calm regardless of the outcome. Something he had previously lacked. He draws explicit parallels to Thoreau:

I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived.

He went to the desert, but the idea was similar. Of course, not everyone has the wherewithal to retreat to the desert to spend five years thinking. But potentially, if one did, it would bring some very valuable insights.

Who should read this book?

It's once again time to do the self-help math...