A little bit of slog to start off, but became easier to read as I understood the author’s approach to the material. Wasn’t a fan of Setiya’s syntax. I thought his sentence construction and word choice at times was confusing. He also applied philosophy principles to problems he was discussing like someone constructing a geometry proof. If A results in B, and Z results in B, then A equals Z kinda thing. I suppose that’s how the rationality of philosophy works, but he usually then discounted the results, so at times it felt unnecessary to state the “unliked proof” in the first place. All that said, this was a good little book. It provoked me to stretch my thinking about middle age and reading it right in the period I was turning 50 made it all the more salient. So, overall decent and enjoyable with certain ideas still sticking with me several weeks after the read.