very much a work in progress - maybe all web pages are but this more than most

a page relevant to human behaviour

We all have agendas. And when someone seems to determined to prevent you from considering the evidence on an issue dear to you both, it is logical to conclude that they have agendas of the very worst sort.

Here are some books that have several things in common.

The list

in no particular order

• Mortal Error
• Origin of Species 
• The Bible
• Plentiful Energy

What they have in common 

in no particular order either

• They are a darned good read
• They are by experts in their fields
• They are written in good faith 
• They are essential reading on the subjects they cover
• They reward a detailed read, taking notes, rather than just skimming them (some speed-reading techniques have a lot to answer for)
• They are widely cited, often very critically
• Their critics generally haven't read them (some pretend that they have, but it very quickly becomes obvious when you do that they haven't)
• They are in print (although critics of Origin of Species in particular are often unaware of that) 
• Their critics are often passionately determined to discourage others from reading them 

Conclusions

Isn't that interesting?

Best that you draw your own conclusions.

Even better, read the book before you judge it. Or at the very least, before you publish a critique of it.

And if you do read the book, having previously read its critics, try not to be too offensive to others who like the critics and haven't read the book. Particularly if the other is significant, like a parent or a partner. Truth is no defence.

So try not to laugh in their faces. But this may be difficult. You have been warned.  

See also

• the expert and the others
• how to reveal yourself 
• The SMH vs Donahue for an example of someone who didn't read the book  

and other pages relevant to human behaviour