Via Uncommon Descent Contest: What do we call people who refuse to read books they are attacking? The idea was to come up with a pithy term for critics of Intelligent Design who slam books without reading them. It isn’t just your random Amazon reviewer, either. Even leading Darwnists do it, although to PZ Myers’ sort-of credit, he threatened to read one of the books — so take that!
The second award offer in the recent contest, a copy of Don Johnson’s Probability’s Nature and Nature’s Probability, asks “What do you call a guy who reviews/trashes a book without reading it?”
It goes to homerj1 at 3 for
The review is a noview and the reviewer is a noviewer.
This won because it can be used effortlessly in a sentence, as in:
Prof. Retro Darwin’s noview of biochemist Michael Behe’s latest …
Rev. Darwin Santa, noviewer of Steve Meyer’s …
Recently, Dimbo Darwin, science writer, noviewed Bill Dembski’s latest …
Ease of use is important. And dropping the pretense of reading makes for more honest communication: He didn’t read it because he wouldn’t like it and wouldn’t learn anything from it, plus he can find an audience who wants to hear from him for precisely that reason. Don’t forget how many people out there know they are “for science” because they believe any nonsense talked in Darwin’s name.
While I’m glad to have won and to have a tiny part in ID slang history, I thought “re-skewer” or “hypocritic” would win. But I’m keeping the book.
This is a two-way street, of course. We shouldn’t give 5 stars on Amazon to pro-Christian books if we haven’t read them.
P.S. I suspect that most of those who gave 1 start to Ann Coulter’s new book are noviewers as well.