The book is helpful, interesting, and contains quite a few valuable insights that can only come from experience. For that very reason, inexperienced people will miss it all, btw. So, overall it's not bad. At the same time, I've noticed that every time I read something by Weinberg, I have a feeling of displeasure for some reason, even though it is hard for me to put my finger on it. What is it? My best try has got to be that he doesn't write well and needs to be energetically edited. The general tone is condescending, fuddy-daddy'ish, frequently ponderous, and vague. The humour is a bit on the unfunny side. He mentions Russell in the bibliography, and by golly, he could learn from him how to write concisely, *clearly*, with good logic and all parts connecting.
There may be something else beside that, but as I said, it's hard to put a finger on what exactly it is. It's kind of a good book, but I wish it was reworked so it's not as annoying to read. Therefore I gave it a 3. In other words, this is a mediocre book that is worth buying <g>. Now, *that's* clear writing, isn't it <g>?