I agree it seems pretty unfocused. To be fair I read it quickly so I might be missing something, but I'm struggling to pull a thesis out of this piece.
At the beginning it seems like it's trying to make a point about society becoming better after eliminating superstition, but then it mostly just goes through a history of Faustian bargains in literature before ending with one paragraph that implies that the modern equivalent is EULAs in software.
EDIT: I just realized from the URL that this is supposed to be a book review? I probably didn't notice because the book isn't mentioned in the title or even in the article until four paragraphs in.
Yeah, on reflection my initial reading was a little unfair. The focus makes sense given what it is, although it still feels odd to start out with what sounds like it wants to be a critique of a critique of materialism.
At the beginning it seems like it's trying to make a point about society becoming better after eliminating superstition, but then it mostly just goes through a history of Faustian bargains in literature before ending with one paragraph that implies that the modern equivalent is EULAs in software.
EDIT: I just realized from the URL that this is supposed to be a book review? I probably didn't notice because the book isn't mentioned in the title or even in the article until four paragraphs in.