I've listened to all 3 of these books over the past year, and they feel like extended podcasts more than books, so it feels weird to review them on Goodreads. I do want to share my general thoughts on this genre, and I'll point out my favorite parts of each book.
This style is very similar to Freakonomics, which has been called "pop psychology." I think these books are very entertaining, and I like the way they make you think about familiar issues in a new way. I worry that they take complex problems and try to condense them into a single chapter of a book. They give you the false sense that you understand the cause and solution to a historical challenge in society. I hope anyone making serious decisions based on these anecdotes uses them as a starting point for further research, rather than jumping to the same conclusions. I do like that Gladwell's books seem to have more coherent themes than Freakononics, which allows you to see his main idea.
The Tipping Point: I agree with the idea that lots of "outbreaks" from viruses to social movements, have critical points where they begin to increase exponentially. This means that simple causes, like the Sesame Street TV show, can have powerful outcomes. I think about the "broken windows" analogy often when it comes to classroom management.
Blink: This was the most surprising of the books--mostly the idea that our brain does so much subconscious analysis. It makes sense in the context of art critics, sports coaches, psychologists, and military generals. As powerful as it is, I can see how it could lead to irrational decisions with racial discrimination or even soda flavors. I thought the police shooting was a case where someone with more experience should be expressing the complex factors involved.
Outliers: This was my favorite because the concept was simpler and easy to set from the data. Of course when and where you are born affects your opportunities and behavior. The amount of time we have to practice is definitely a large factor in who rises to the top of any field. I especially liked how he explained his own opportunities that allowed him to be an Outlier. And everything at the end about education, from extended school year and rice paddies to simple Chinese numbers, was very memorable.
What the Dog Saw: This book seemed to focus a lot on business and marketing. The essays got more interesting as the book went on. There were a lot of insights about how difficult certain problems are to solve, but how they are more manageable if we focus on specific pieces. Stories about Enron and the Challenger make it seem hard to determine who is at "fault" when something goes wrong, if no one did anything technically illegal, but many shortcuts led to an overall bad picture. The last section is a lot like "Blink," which questions are immediate judgments, especially about people and their abilities.
David & Goliath: I think this might be the best one so far. I love the idea that David isn't really an underdog. He's bringing a pistol to a knife fight, doing things in a way that no one is expecting. We do overrate a lot of "powerful" people, most notable prestigious universities, which Gladwell discusses. I agree that it is more effective to get a good education at a place you are comfortable than to feel overwhelmed as the smallest fish in a big sea. That being said, I always worry with these books that people are going to take them too seriously, basing policy decisions on a writer's outside perspective rather than reading the original research. He does point out that not every dyslexic person ends up a CEO, and not everyone who goes through a tragedy becomes stronger, but when those are the only anecdotes he shares, you might get a false impression about the overall data. I really liked the final story of the Huguenots--that was an inspiring way to end.