Status
Available
Call number
Collections
Publication
London : Fourth Estate, 2004.
Description
What characterizes our era? Cults, quacks, gurus, irrational panics, moral confusion and an epidemic of mumbo-jumbo, that's what. In How Mumbo-Jumbo Conquered the World, Francis Wheen brilliantly laments the extraordinary rise of superstition, relativism and emotional hysteria. From Middle Eastern fundamentalism to the rise of lotteries, astrology to mysticism, poststructuralism to the Third Way, Wheen shows that there has been a pervasive erosion of Enlightenment values, which have been displaced by nonsense. And no country has a more vivid parade of the bogus and bizarre than the one founded to embody Enlightenment values: the USA. In turn comic, indignant, outraged, and just plain baffled by the idiocy of it all, How Mumbo-Jumbo Conquered the World is a masterful depiction of the absurdity of our times and a plea that we might just think a little more and believe a little less.… (more)
User reviews
LibraryThing member SimonW11
Occasionally amusing if you like watching the shooting of fish in barrels. Wheen seems to fancy himself as a modern H. L. Mencken. In an age when people generally let twaddle pass unremarked shrugging shoulders and assuming that the foolish are always with us he strikes at the obvious targets
Wheen does convince me that the fog of moral relativism has spread far. all forms of objectivism seem to be under assault. Social moral and scientific values are all at times lost in the myths of relatism. Where one theory is always assumed as good as another.
Science and technology of course continues unbothered by the lack of critical thought or real peer review in other areas.
But unless critical thought is widespread society is doomed to misuse that science.
However there is no real depth just a selective list of examples of varying degrees of dubiousness, with no description of a theme, no analysis of context nor sociological impact beyond the immediate cause-effect.
Wheen starts with the proposition that Mumbo-Jumbo took power along with Khomeini and Thatcher. and has remainded ascendent ever since.
He lists examples and thats thats it.. No grand plan, No analysis of trends no real evidence evidence of its growth no distinguishing between follies. mere anecdotes. Just a list of things that he felt personally affronted or amused by. I see one of hisnewspaper reviewers summed the work up as equivilant to watching Victor Meldrew mutter I dont believe it. He was wrong. Meldrew is more amusing.
Mumbo Jumbo did not in my opinion suddenly gain ascendency. to remain in power ever since. Pivitol though that year may be in many ways. People have been battling it since time immemorial. H. L. Mencken, George Orwell, and Alan Sokal. are amongst the fighters. Indeed Sokal's success in spreading dismay amongst the enemy is documented. here evidence that Mumbo jumbo does lose that it has not cconquered the world.
There is no overall analysis. we are left to assume that Margret Thatcher's confrontational nature her inability to seek or negotiate compromise. is some how equivilent to the indescisive ambivilence of those politicans who's natural instinct on seeing a fence is to sit on it ignoring as often as not the warning signs,Danger Wolves!
Show More
boldly. Here is someone who presumes it is possible to gain some sort of advantage over the forces of idiocy.Wheen does convince me that the fog of moral relativism has spread far. all forms of objectivism seem to be under assault. Social moral and scientific values are all at times lost in the myths of relatism. Where one theory is always assumed as good as another.
Science and technology of course continues unbothered by the lack of critical thought or real peer review in other areas.
But unless critical thought is widespread society is doomed to misuse that science.
However there is no real depth just a selective list of examples of varying degrees of dubiousness, with no description of a theme, no analysis of context nor sociological impact beyond the immediate cause-effect.
Wheen starts with the proposition that Mumbo-Jumbo took power along with Khomeini and Thatcher. and has remainded ascendent ever since.
He lists examples and thats thats it.. No grand plan, No analysis of trends no real evidence evidence of its growth no distinguishing between follies. mere anecdotes. Just a list of things that he felt personally affronted or amused by. I see one of hisnewspaper reviewers summed the work up as equivilant to watching Victor Meldrew mutter I dont believe it. He was wrong. Meldrew is more amusing.
Mumbo Jumbo did not in my opinion suddenly gain ascendency. to remain in power ever since. Pivitol though that year may be in many ways. People have been battling it since time immemorial. H. L. Mencken, George Orwell, and Alan Sokal. are amongst the fighters. Indeed Sokal's success in spreading dismay amongst the enemy is documented. here evidence that Mumbo jumbo does lose that it has not cconquered the world.
There is no overall analysis. we are left to assume that Margret Thatcher's confrontational nature her inability to seek or negotiate compromise. is some how equivilent to the indescisive ambivilence of those politicans who's natural instinct on seeing a fence is to sit on it ignoring as often as not the warning signs,Danger Wolves!
Show Less
LibraryThing member Jargoneer
I agreed with much of this book, with it's debunking of new-age medicial practices, flying saucers, fundamentalism, et al, but therein lies the problem. The people who will read this book will probably hold many of the same opinions already, while the people who won't, and should, read it will see
Because of it's polemical nature the book lacks is balance, occasionally it would have been useful to hear the other side of an argument, and not everything he tackles is mumbo-jumbo.
Economics is the book's weak point. Wheen dismisses economists like Milton Freidman for putting forward a monetarist approach. Also, why did certain economists believe that if you taxed the rich more there would be a trickle down effect that would enrich the rest of society? Especially in light of the efforts the rich go to avoid paying tax in the first place. Was this belief political or economic, and if it was political, is that not a betrayal of the 'science' of economics? Whichever way you look at it though, holding a different economic belief is not believing in mumbo-jumbo.
There is a problem with his approach to alternative medicine, as well. Homeopathy, and a number of other 'treatments', have been proven to be bunkum as medicine but they do work as treatments because of the placebo effect. It appears in certain circumstances if a patient believes something is working then it does. Although of course, there is a limit to this effectiveness - it doesn't heal bullet wounds, for example. Acupuncture is a different matter, there are studies showing that it may have be effective in some areas - in China, you can get cheaper operations if you use acupuncture instead of conventional anaesthetics, and it appears to be working.
Other than that, the usual suspects get the treatment they deserve - alien abduction, anti-evolutionists, homeopathy, Diana worship, etc. The book can't help but highlight how gullible and foolish sections of the general public can be. Despite Chris Carter, creator of "The X-Files" stating it was only a tv show, a number of viewers were not fooled by him and realised that his creation was indeed an oracle of truth. (Carter is also quoted as saying that he wanted the show to expose hoaxes as well but that idea got shelved in the end because the paranormal explanation got better ratings - or was it because you can't hide the truth?). It is disappointing he didn't question why aliens, whose science must be significantly more advanced than humanities, keep kidnapping humans in order to anally probe them?
Of the gullible and foolish sections of society it appears that one of the most gullible, and certainly foolish, are managers, who will latch onto any theory. Jesus Christ, CEO, anyone? Tom Peters made a fortune selling the idea of excellence to managers only to made another fortune later when, after changing his mind and stating there were no excellent companies, he sold the idea of managing chaos. My personal favourite is Edward De Bono and his [[Six Thinking Hats]], which posits the idea of wearing a different coloured hat for a different style of thinking - red hat for emotions/feelings, green hat for alternative thinking, and so on. After developing this idea, De Bono then likened himself to Plato, Aristotle, & Socrates.
This book can be added to a number of recent works that are debating the enlightenment - romanticism schism, the rational against the emotional.
It's credo, and the enlightenment in general, can be found in George Santayana's "The truth is cruel, but it can be loved, and it makes free those who have loved it".
Show More
it as an unbalanced attack by a left-wing journalist. (It should be noted that Wheen's politics doesn't stop him attacking people and beliefs on the left).Because of it's polemical nature the book lacks is balance, occasionally it would have been useful to hear the other side of an argument, and not everything he tackles is mumbo-jumbo.
Economics is the book's weak point. Wheen dismisses economists like Milton Freidman for putting forward a monetarist approach. Also, why did certain economists believe that if you taxed the rich more there would be a trickle down effect that would enrich the rest of society? Especially in light of the efforts the rich go to avoid paying tax in the first place. Was this belief political or economic, and if it was political, is that not a betrayal of the 'science' of economics? Whichever way you look at it though, holding a different economic belief is not believing in mumbo-jumbo.
There is a problem with his approach to alternative medicine, as well. Homeopathy, and a number of other 'treatments', have been proven to be bunkum as medicine but they do work as treatments because of the placebo effect. It appears in certain circumstances if a patient believes something is working then it does. Although of course, there is a limit to this effectiveness - it doesn't heal bullet wounds, for example. Acupuncture is a different matter, there are studies showing that it may have be effective in some areas - in China, you can get cheaper operations if you use acupuncture instead of conventional anaesthetics, and it appears to be working.
Other than that, the usual suspects get the treatment they deserve - alien abduction, anti-evolutionists, homeopathy, Diana worship, etc. The book can't help but highlight how gullible and foolish sections of the general public can be. Despite Chris Carter, creator of "The X-Files" stating it was only a tv show, a number of viewers were not fooled by him and realised that his creation was indeed an oracle of truth. (Carter is also quoted as saying that he wanted the show to expose hoaxes as well but that idea got shelved in the end because the paranormal explanation got better ratings - or was it because you can't hide the truth?). It is disappointing he didn't question why aliens, whose science must be significantly more advanced than humanities, keep kidnapping humans in order to anally probe them?
Of the gullible and foolish sections of society it appears that one of the most gullible, and certainly foolish, are managers, who will latch onto any theory. Jesus Christ, CEO, anyone? Tom Peters made a fortune selling the idea of excellence to managers only to made another fortune later when, after changing his mind and stating there were no excellent companies, he sold the idea of managing chaos. My personal favourite is Edward De Bono and his [[Six Thinking Hats]], which posits the idea of wearing a different coloured hat for a different style of thinking - red hat for emotions/feelings, green hat for alternative thinking, and so on. After developing this idea, De Bono then likened himself to Plato, Aristotle, & Socrates.
This book can be added to a number of recent works that are debating the enlightenment - romanticism schism, the rational against the emotional.
It's credo, and the enlightenment in general, can be found in George Santayana's "The truth is cruel, but it can be loved, and it makes free those who have loved it".
Show Less
LibraryThing member Greatrakes
Francis Wheen is the enemy of unreason.
All believers in homoeopathic medicine, post modernism, creationism, crystals, horoscopes, management gurus, Boo.com (or ANY company or market that has the words New Paradigm associated with it) prepare to be sneered at, not only that, but sneered at with
He divides his book into various targets and dissects the absurdity of this post-enlightenment age. On post-modern anti-scientific relativism he points out that a fact, once asserted to be a fact, remains a fact. The result of this 'Alice Through the Looking Glass' philosophy is that it remains a FACT that the earth is the centre of the universe until Copernicus, only post-Copernicus is it a fact that the earth rotates around the sun.
On the the new liberation-through-celebration-of-victim-hood culture he quotes Linda Holt, "That Diana's therapist victim-speak could turn her into a feminist role model is a bad joke..." and then goes on to lay waste to Elton John, Tony Blair, William Hague and all the others joining in the nauseating outbreak of fawning sycophancy over a "simpering Bambi narcissist". How I cheered, what a perfect summation of Diana "simpering Bambi narcissist" is. A little known fact is that, in the days after the crash the BBC switchboard was overwhelmed with calls from people demanding less coverage, but the media feeding frenzy had begun and this wasn't anything anyone in the media wanted to hear.
I also really enjoyed the chapter Old Snake-Oil, New Bottles. I suffer from guru management overload myself, and this, from an enquiry into the prison service, struck a chord:
"Any organisation which boasts one Statement of Purpose, one Vision, five Values, six Goals, seven Strategic Priorities and eight Key Performance Indicators without any clear correlation between them is predictably a recipe for total confusion and exasperation."
Also, in this chapter, he sets up all the famous management gurus then demonstrates how their pronouncements fail to stand the test of time (and it is remarkable how many ended up broke, in prison, or both. The pointless aphorisms of Antony Robbin come in for particular mockery, lesson 364 (in self mastery) from Giant Steps "Remember to expect miracles ... because you are one" - didn't David Brent use that one?
I liked this book, but then I agreed with it. It is not always well constructed and his targets could have been better grouped, but it is a much needed book.
All believers in homoeopathic medicine, post modernism, creationism, crystals, horoscopes, management gurus, Boo.com (or ANY company or market that has the words New Paradigm associated with it) prepare to be sneered at, not only that, but sneered at with
Show More
footnotes and suggested reading.He divides his book into various targets and dissects the absurdity of this post-enlightenment age. On post-modern anti-scientific relativism he points out that a fact, once asserted to be a fact, remains a fact. The result of this 'Alice Through the Looking Glass' philosophy is that it remains a FACT that the earth is the centre of the universe until Copernicus, only post-Copernicus is it a fact that the earth rotates around the sun.
On the the new liberation-through-celebration-of-victim-hood culture he quotes Linda Holt, "That Diana's therapist victim-speak could turn her into a feminist role model is a bad joke..." and then goes on to lay waste to Elton John, Tony Blair, William Hague and all the others joining in the nauseating outbreak of fawning sycophancy over a "simpering Bambi narcissist". How I cheered, what a perfect summation of Diana "simpering Bambi narcissist" is. A little known fact is that, in the days after the crash the BBC switchboard was overwhelmed with calls from people demanding less coverage, but the media feeding frenzy had begun and this wasn't anything anyone in the media wanted to hear.
I also really enjoyed the chapter Old Snake-Oil, New Bottles. I suffer from guru management overload myself, and this, from an enquiry into the prison service, struck a chord:
"Any organisation which boasts one Statement of Purpose, one Vision, five Values, six Goals, seven Strategic Priorities and eight Key Performance Indicators without any clear correlation between them is predictably a recipe for total confusion and exasperation."
Also, in this chapter, he sets up all the famous management gurus then demonstrates how their pronouncements fail to stand the test of time (and it is remarkable how many ended up broke, in prison, or both. The pointless aphorisms of Antony Robbin come in for particular mockery, lesson 364 (in self mastery) from Giant Steps "Remember to expect miracles ... because you are one" - didn't David Brent use that one?
I liked this book, but then I agreed with it. It is not always well constructed and his targets could have been better grouped, but it is a much needed book.
Show Less
LibraryThing member tjd
This is one of the those books that once I picked it up I couldn't help but put it done. Dull and unmemorable. I can't get into it at all, and wouldn't mind giving it away.
LibraryThing member kettle666
A brilliant and funny look at the mad beliefs the human species is so regrettably addicted to. Astrology, Nostrademus, all the various human invented crazy gods, magic crystals, preposterous gurus, along with frighteningly gullible world leaders, like Reagan, Thatcher, various crazed mad mullahs,
Show More
and even the dim and witless George Carey, one time archbishop of Canterbury! A brilliant demolition of dousing, homeopathy, and dopey Prince Philip's alien visitors. Trouble is, you end the book feeling some despair at the gullibility of so many people. If you take the X Files seriously, don't read this refreshing book. Show Less
LibraryThing member sanddancer
The quotation on the front of the book from Jeremy Paxman described it as 'hilarious' - obviously Mr Paxman and my ideas on humour differ greatly as this book didn't raise many laughs. Parts of it did raise a wry smile and it pointed the finger at many ludicrous things, but this book is not humour
Show More
as I have seen it categoried - unless like Paxman your idea of fun is terrorism, Islam, Enron, New Labour and post-modernism then don't come here looking for laughs. Having said that, I did enjoyed most of this book. The most light-hearted that looked at the popularity of self-help books which just rehash platitudes. Some times, I was confused by how certain things were going to be connected (Iran and post-modernism for example) and I did wonder that in some cases if his connections and conclusions would really hold up to close scrutiny. That he pours similar scorn on people playing the lottery as terrorists misinterpreting the Koran seems a bit off at times. But overall an interesting book even if I didn't always agree totally with the author. And it made me relieved that I didn't always 'get' post-modernism. Show Less
LibraryThing member Devil_llama
A book reminiscent of the older work, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. The author traces the history of current trends in anti-critical thinking and embrace of delusion through the last couple of decades of the 20th century, though she does move backward to find the
Show More
threads and traces that led to that point. She writes lucidly, selects quotes that are relevant, and at times delicious, and does her research well. It is easy to read, not bogged down in technical minutiae but not superficially fluffy, either. It would be interesting to see an updated version now that the problem has spread its tentacles even further. Show Less
LibraryThing member Black_samvara
Have been reading gradually, a chapter at a time, have found all chapters amusing and was forced to read chunks to a random man on the train yesterday. Have urge to bookmark every third page and read bits to someone.
Skims over such topics as Thatcherism, Self-help books, Alien spotting, The demise
Skims over such topics as Thatcherism, Self-help books, Alien spotting, The demise
Show More
of Princess Diana, Post-Modernism and the dotcom phenomenon. Fun! Show Less
LibraryThing member swadeson
Really quite good. Not always the easiest read as much of the language is quite intellectual and references a lot of people I have never heard of. Nevertheless it presents an interesting point of view. (read most of it on the train)
LibraryThing member cmc
The world is a scarily illogical place. Francis Wheen has some ideas on why that is, and while I don’t completely agree with him about everything he has to say, I definitely enjoyed the ride.
LibraryThing member reading_fox
Interesting in places, but the arguments don't always follow through in places. Some topics could be discussed in greater detail. Disjointed.
LibraryThing member cdogzilla
Some interesting points, but not very well written. Sam Harris's "The End of Faith" is more focused and, as a result, much more readable.
LibraryThing member JollyContrarian
Francis Wheen is that curiously uncomfortable sort of liberal leftie: the sort who, possibly because it's part of the party line, agrees we are best served by a tolerant and pluralistic society, but in the same breath declares with startling certitude (if not good reason) in favour of hard-edged
You can either take or leave his particular gripes: For example, it strikes me as a little arch to say the least for a devotee of Karl Marx to cast stones at other economists' glasshouses, and while one might not agree with Thomas (or Milton) Friedman's libertarian capitalism, it's difficult to see how it qualifies as "mumbo jumbo".
The pinch point with his argument is postmodernism, for it is the only philosophy which justifies the appeal to tolerance and pluralism he makes. As is customary a some relativistic straw-men are wheeled out and ridiculed (the Sokal Hoax makes yet another appearance as the sole evidence for the prosecution), but it doesn't alter the fact that tolerance and pluralism under Wheen's regime would surely be nothing more than the indulgence of the preternaturally dim: If there really is a Single Right Way To Do It, any temptation to stray from that path, however well-meaning, would be at best a wasteful distraction from the timely solution of the eternal verities. That is, Wheen ought to say there should be very little tolerance at all. But that wouldn't be very liberal: if Francis Wheen were serious about his programme (or at any rate consistent about it), he ought to be something more of an autocrat than he actually professes to be.
The postmodern view, on the other hand, is that a discourse need not be certified enlightenment-compliant for it to have value - value being, like beauty, in the eye of the beholder. We all behold things differently, and thank heavens for that. What Wheen asks us to accept is the measure of beauty beheld by *his* eye. With respect, it really isn't all that beguiling.
In sum, what this book really doesn't do is what it says on the tin. It doesn't ever set out what it means by "mumbo jumbo" much less how, when, or in what way it "conquered the world" (I suppose Wheen thinks we have exited a golden age of some sort; I didn't notice anyone turning out the lights or closing any door). All this really adds up to is a Dawkins-like moan. If you fancy a grumpy old man blowing hard (and in places entertainingly, I grant you) against all the things he thinks are rubbish in the world, you'll find some value here. If you want a more thoughtful entry than that, look elsewhere.
Show More
enlightenment values (in particular the primacy of science and logic over other modes of discourse), and who argues without apparent irony that the world would be better off without "mumbo jumbo" which, seeing as it encompasses not just astrologers, faith-healers, priests, and people who believe literally in science fiction, but also supply-side economists, Chomskyites, neo-liberals, neo-conservatives and post-modernists, appears to defy all categorisation other than "Things Francis Doesn't Like". You can either take or leave his particular gripes: For example, it strikes me as a little arch to say the least for a devotee of Karl Marx to cast stones at other economists' glasshouses, and while one might not agree with Thomas (or Milton) Friedman's libertarian capitalism, it's difficult to see how it qualifies as "mumbo jumbo".
The pinch point with his argument is postmodernism, for it is the only philosophy which justifies the appeal to tolerance and pluralism he makes. As is customary a some relativistic straw-men are wheeled out and ridiculed (the Sokal Hoax makes yet another appearance as the sole evidence for the prosecution), but it doesn't alter the fact that tolerance and pluralism under Wheen's regime would surely be nothing more than the indulgence of the preternaturally dim: If there really is a Single Right Way To Do It, any temptation to stray from that path, however well-meaning, would be at best a wasteful distraction from the timely solution of the eternal verities. That is, Wheen ought to say there should be very little tolerance at all. But that wouldn't be very liberal: if Francis Wheen were serious about his programme (or at any rate consistent about it), he ought to be something more of an autocrat than he actually professes to be.
The postmodern view, on the other hand, is that a discourse need not be certified enlightenment-compliant for it to have value - value being, like beauty, in the eye of the beholder. We all behold things differently, and thank heavens for that. What Wheen asks us to accept is the measure of beauty beheld by *his* eye. With respect, it really isn't all that beguiling.
In sum, what this book really doesn't do is what it says on the tin. It doesn't ever set out what it means by "mumbo jumbo" much less how, when, or in what way it "conquered the world" (I suppose Wheen thinks we have exited a golden age of some sort; I didn't notice anyone turning out the lights or closing any door). All this really adds up to is a Dawkins-like moan. If you fancy a grumpy old man blowing hard (and in places entertainingly, I grant you) against all the things he thinks are rubbish in the world, you'll find some value here. If you want a more thoughtful entry than that, look elsewhere.
Show Less
LibraryThing member jaygheiser
About 70-80%. I don't agree with everything he says, he's awfully glib, and he makes a few logical leaps that are not really substantiated. At least he's neutral on the left-right continuum, equally critical of both sides. He's essentially a sort of intel
LibraryThing member wrichard
The author has a superficial look at the actions of world leaders and various other points of contention, such as medicine that doesn't work. He seems to take far too much at face value- for example he has not asked Tony and Cherie Blair why they had a mayan rebirthing ceremony- it may have been
Show More
that they just wanted a sexy sauna. He also doesn't realise that a UFO is an Unidentified Flying Object - some of which are subsequently identified. This does not make them interplanetary travel devices. On the whole it is a journalist doing what they do best - sensationalise to sell papers, in this case a book. Far too superficial for me I was left thinking this is five hours of my life wasted. Show Less
LibraryThing member Quickpint
I rarely write reviews of books I don't finish reading but I refuse to finish reading this one. Name-drops aplenty but entirely superficial. Doesn't answer its title; doesn't offer anything profound at all. Simply a hotch-potch of things in the last few decades which its author finds ridiculous,
Show More
often unfairly and without context, and ends with a single paragraph summary that the Enlightenment offered a lot but people acting in bad faith frustrated its promise and that frustration may continue. A meaningless conclusion. Look elsewhere for commentary of significance. The question that leaps out at the reader, of course, is whether the Enlightenment itself was flawed, but that would require a depth of thought not evident here. Has made me distrustful of Wheen. Tabloid, albeit post-graduate. Next. Show Less
Subjects
Language
Original publication date
2004
Physical description
xiv, 338 p.; 25 cm
ISBN
9780007140961