Battling the Inner Dummy: The Craziness of Apparently Normal People

Rating:
Summary: For Those Who Aren't Afraid to Admit
Review: This book is horrible. Mr. Weiner's writing style is hackneyed at best. He drives each point home relentlessly with an astounding number of examples. He uses a couple of gimmicks I found unbearable: First, his painfully detailed recreations of conversations he had with various individuals under the guise of collecting data for his book, but actually serve to showcase the breadth of Mr. Weiner's knowledge, and ability to annoy. Second, the ridiculous chapters in which makes Dr. Freud a character in this madness. This book had about three to ten pages worth of useful information - the rest of the book is all padding and nonsense.

Rating:
Summary: Why We Do What We Do
Review: Throughout our lives we have seen people doing things that we thought were senseless. Whether they were people in our workplace, people in government or close friends. After reading David Weiner's book, you realize that their "Inner Dummy" made them do it. They really can't control the senseless things they do because they don't know they are doing them. After reading "Battling the Inner Dummy" you are more tolerant of these "Dummy" captured people...and you try to control your own "Inner Dummy."

Rating:
Summary: Interesting theory, tedious delivery
Review: Weiner's theory that much of our so-called 'irrational' behavior has its roots in the limbic system is interesting. However, the weakness of his theory, as well as this book, is his insistence on applying it willy-nilly to every example of irrationality he comes across, while failing to acknowledge the countless examples of people who don't display irrational behavior. One of the 'proofs' he gives is several examples of his valiant efforts to drone on about his theory at parties or on airplanes, only to find that people either leave or stare at him and then change the subject. Weiner interprets this as proof that people can't comprehend the mind-boggling implications of what he's saying. A more likely explanation is this: staring and changing the subject is one of the only ways to deal with someone who's trying his darndest to hijack the conversation. Frankly, this entire book read like a conversation with someone who only has one idea and who can't let go of it or see that there are serious flaws with his theory. I also agree with the other reviewers who suggest skipping the Freud segments. Everything else aside, they're tedious, poorly written and illustrate nothing that wasn't repeated several times in the text proper.