I disagree with his assertion because he provides no evidence.
In fact, in the example he used of the Lafferty's, he completely failed to disclose the dynamics of the family. The father was a strange, odd, violent man. Bernard knew the family well. This man for example killed the family dog, this man had odd dietary beliefs. This man ripped the glasses off a kid in high school, while doing a physical, threw them against the wall, and said "if you ate more peas, you wouldn't need glasses."
Strange that the author failed to disclose any of this. Religion was the facade. Something deeper and darker was going on in that family.
Krakauer is intellectually dishonest. And just on this basis his book is total crap. He offers no empirical evidence for any of his assertions.
|