No offense meant, I was genuinely curious about your obviously very different opinion of the book.
I figured it was out of curiosity. It's just that that book is so aligned with my philosophies I hold it dear to my soul.
My issue was more with presentation than content. While I think Quinn had some good ideas the book came across as very .... obvious (?) ... and to me quite shallow and simplistic. Although I think there's something to be said about the shallow/simplistic part in terms of it allowing the reader to fill in the depth on their own, that's not really what I'm looking for in that type of book.
Completely understandable. I loved the book more so for the content. I think I fell in love with the content to much I didn't even care about the simplistic writing.