Instruct: Classify Amazon reviews into positive or negative sentiment
Query: Brilliant physicist, flawed reasoning

The book covers a lot of ground, but the grand tour of physics and mathematics is designed primarily to support the author's argument that machines will never be capable of matching human intelligence. The author's main argument for this is based on Godel's Incompleteness Theorem. Unfortunately, this argument is just plain wrong. It assumes (without explanation) that human intelligence bypasses the limitations of the theorem in a way that computer intelligence cannot - as if humans somehow know it's better to be incomplete than inconsistent. The presentation of 'alternative' theories about the physical nature of intelligence seem unnecessary when the central argument falls down.