Most modern non-fiction titles that claim to provide new ideas or connections using historical anecdotes and scientific literature, while being ambitious in presenting the author’s insights into these concepts, usually fail to mention a few crucial disclaimers. It is usually not made explicit anywhere in the text that the author is presenting an interpretation of historical facts and scientific research that may be incorrect at any sentence in the text of the book.

It is therefore not surprising, that many of the subtleties in quite popular such works are not accurate representations of vetted historical records or of the scientific literature.

These are just some of the inconsistencies I have noted as I was attempting to read one of the newer such books (Nexus, see below):

• There are notable deviations from fact to opinion, sometimes within the same sentence.
• Concepts that are related but nevertheless different are used interchangeably.
• Sources from scientific literature are sometimes inappropriately cited for the conclusions presented.

One needs to be quite careful in the consumption of such works, to not be misled by either the author’s incompetence at assimilating his thoughts, his personal biases or the deliberate misdirection of the author’s work by subjugating the author to include these inconsistencies in it, by unknown propagandists.

Eg: Nexus, Yuval Noah Harari (all three inconsistencies are found within the first chapter) This being a work of mass market distribution, does not mention that the ideas are an attempt by the author to present his own interpretation, and is thus misleading. The book reads as an authoritative commentary on complex ideas, but is plagued by the inconsistencies noted above. I have not proceeded beyond even the first chapter as it does not make any sense to absorb ideas and thoughts that are so muddled. Whatever the reason for such gross errors in the production of this book, my quest for a thorough understanding of the concepts discussed, being the reason for having purchased a copy of the book, will have to resume elsewhere, probably with other works and original works from history.

There are other works of a scholarly nature which attempt to provide an interpretation of some complex ideas, but they are usually clearly highlighted as being just that. The emphasis is on the discourse around the topic and is to be understood as the author’s attempt to clarify certain ideas, which may have other interpretations as well by other authors either in contemporary times or historical.

I will not proceed into the specifics of the errors I have noted, although interested readers are advised to check for themselves.