An interesting spin on the "what is reality" question, with interesting comparisons to twentieth century entertainment.

Hm. this is a tough one. Not the book, the review. Turns out the author is self-taught, with all the outsider consequences that come with that. The book made me think of the Mentaculus, sans equations. There is a large quantity of inner dialogue (author to self or author to reader, whichever you prefer), with the bottom line being what Buddhists, Taoists, Nominalists, General Semanticists, et al have realized before - the map is not the territory, the menu is not the meal, things are not what we call them, the tao that can be spoken of is not the Tao, etc. He doesn't rely on these sources but rather The Matrix films to argue that what we think is real is just what our brains have pieced together based on sensory input (which is only part of what's out there) and on millennia of evolution which selected the inputs that increase the likelihood of survival. Yes, OK, that's a good lesson if you haven't seen it before but it has been done in more succinct fashion. This seemed a bit of a chore to get to an old point, valid as it is. Let's say A for effort and C for execution.