This was absolutely riveting, and it's not often I say that about a philosophy book. A lot of that essential appeal is due to the subject matter, because the prospect of resurrecting mammoths, for example, is just deeply compelling, but a lot of it is because it's just plain lucid. Coming from a science communication background as I do, I've often thought that philosophers could use the same crash course in communication that more and more scientists are getting, because the majority of philosophy texts that I've read (and there have not been that many) are clear as mud and apparently happy to be so.

This, on the other hand, has made clarity and general accessibility a clear priority, and I really appreciate it. I have to admit, when it gets down to reporting arguments along the lines of "is a resurrected mammoth really a mammoth, or is it a fake mammoth because it will not have the same gut flora as real mammoths?" (I paraphrase) I start to feel this is taking things a bit too far... even having written about microbiomes and identity myself (albeit in terms of speculative fiction). Campbell and Whittle are reporting these arguments, however, and assessing them for logical underpinnings, not putting them forward themselves, so I feel no need to clutch at their collars and exclaim, in rising tones, "Who cares about gut flora! It's a mammoth! Don't you want to see a mammoth?!"

Reader, I don't care if the resurrected mammoth is a real mammoth or not. I'd still give up a kidney to have them back. Because they're fascinating, and so is this book.