Re: The Official Book Thread

by CBarca Thu Oct 04, 2012 1:05 am

RedOranje wrote:
CBarca wrote:Has anyone read the classic Atlas Shrugged?

Was thinking about picking it up. I love dystopian novels.

I cannot read Ayn Rand... just can't do it. I've tried a few times but couldn't.

May I ask why? Was it her style, difficulty of her novels, or just a dislike for her books...?

Por que, Red?

by RedOranje Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:12 am

The philosophy she holds, and espouses in all of her novels, is simply absurd in my eyes, and her writing style as well is not appealing. It just feels as though she's preaching her beliefs the entire time for me.

by CBarca Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:50 am

RedOranje wrote:The philosophy she holds, and espouses in all of her novels, is simply absurd in my eyes, and her writing style as well is not appealing. It just feels as though she's preaching her beliefs the entire time for me.

Fair enough, I've heard of her philosophy- objectivism- but don't have much knowledge on the subject. Perhaps I will pick it up, and perhaps not, I don't have enough time right now anyway. We'll see when the footy season ends for me.

If anyone has any dystopian novels that they enjoyed that are less popular than the 1984's and Fahrenheit 451's (because I would have read it, then), then please let me know, I'm a sucker for dystopian novels, as I said before.

by Guest Thu Nov 15, 2012 5:42 am

Started to read "The Art of Learning" on Sunday and I must say that I'm in love. I don't ever read story type books as I struggle to follow them. Instead, I tend to read informative books and books that might help guide me in life (not to say I will just do something because the author of a book says so). I was basically recommended this book by my Sensei a few months ago - it's based off the character from "Searching for Bobby Fischer" (Josh Waitzkin). Funny enough, while reading the book on the train today, the name "dostoevsky" was mentioned and I had a good laugh.

I also read the book "Quiet" by Susan Cain this summer and thought it was brilliant. It's a book about introverts living in a world that predominantly lives follows the extrovert ideal. I would recommend it to any introverts that want to learn more about it and also to any extroverts who might want to better understand introverts.

by CBarca Thu Nov 15, 2012 5:50 am

I actually have heard of "The Art of Learning" and was very interested, as it was highly recommended to me. I wanted to pick it up, but it was close to my birthday, so I just requested it. Request got denied, and I haven't thought of it since- but now that you mention it, I'll have to go see if I can pick that book up.

by Guest Thu Nov 15, 2012 5:53 am

10 bucks on Amazon, #justsayin - perhaps I can ship it out to you when I'm finished, it can be considered a late birthday present.

P.S. :bow:

communicating on two different topics simultaneously (I'm hoping you respond to my other post before I finish up this response).

by CBarca Fri Nov 16, 2012 1:42 am

Haha I went to bed I believe. Was getting late and I had a lot to do the next day (today), couple tests.

I'll see if the local library has it first, if not, then I'll think about getting it. I could always just bring it up again around Christmas time though, with a bit more emphasis.

by RedOranje Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:55 am

by free_cat Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:47 am

FilipeFerreira wrote:The Children of Hurin is a really good book, i Recommend it to anyone.

The silmarillion

and obvious The lord of the rings trilogy.

I'm a fan of LTR and somehow I couldn't read past the 50 page of Children of Hurin. Is it really any good? I was bored to death.

Some of my personal favourites that have not been mentioned:

Fatlessness: The book about the holocaust that has impacted me the most. His author was awarded a novel prize for this novel, although it's a relatively unknown book. It's a complete masterpiece, that can touch you and make you think. I recommend it to every human being, even if they don't like reading.

Fever pitch: surprised that in a football forum no one mentions this hilarious football fan biogrpahy. I don't usually lol reading, but this made me cry out laughing.

Carl Sagan's Cosmos or Stephen Hawking's Brief History of time: Both pop-science favourites.

by free_cat Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:58 am

CBarca wrote:As said, I have returned to Plato's Republic

Damn Aristotle and Plato are way over my head though. I can pretend to understand everything, but I really can't.

No need to understand bullshit Plato and Aristotle philosophy. They are very influential philosphers because their way of thinking, that favours working the world in your head instead of experimenting and observing, was favoured by Christianism because it didn't confront religion and favoured faith.

by RealGunner Wed Dec 05, 2012 3:35 pm

free_cat wrote:
CBarca wrote:As said, I have returned to Plato's Republic

Damn Aristotle and Plato are way over my head though. I can pretend to understand everything, but I really can't.

No need to understand bullshit Plato and Aristotle philosophy. They are very influential philosphers because their way of thinking, that favours working the world in your head instead of experimenting and observing, was favoured by Christianism because it didn't confront religion and favoured faith.

It's funny how everything for you ends up with Religion.

Plato and Aristotle are one of the greatest people to ever live on this earth. Just because you don't understand what they said doesn't make their Work "bullshit" They placed Morals ahead of anything else, and maybe that's why you think it's bullshit Rolling Eyes

by Onyx Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:43 pm

Anyone read the 'Objective Barcelona : How To Beat The Most Powerful Team In The World' book?

by free_cat Fri Jan 04, 2013 8:43 am

RealGunner wrote:
free_cat wrote:
CBarca wrote:As said, I have returned to Plato's Republic

Damn Aristotle and Plato are way over my head though. I can pretend to understand everything, but I really can't.

No need to understand bullshit Plato and Aristotle philosophy. They are very influential philosphers because their way of thinking, that favours working the world in your head instead of experimenting and observing, was favoured by Christianism because it didn't confront religion and favoured faith.

It's funny how everything for you ends up with Religion.

Plato and Aristotle are one of the greatest people to ever live on this earth. Just because you don't understand what they said doesn't make their Work "bullshit" They placed Morals ahead of anything else, and maybe that's why you think it's bullshit

Yeah, I'm not religious so I'm not moral. :facepalm:

Religious people and their deluded sense of superiority. :facepalm:

Plato and Aristotle were philosophers who, instead of trying to figure out the world through observation and experiment, favoured to figure out the world with thought. Although that sounds good, time has taught us that you can't figure the world thinking inside a dark room. You need to observe and experiment. They barely did that, so most of their work is basically wrong.

Examples of very wrong work is Plato's Republic, were he argues against democracy and in favour of a city-state run by Philosopher-kings (like himself... how curious), and from Aristotle, his cosmological Geocentric view of the Universe that was the prevalent view of the cosmos due to Christian influence until Copernicus and Galileo.

Off course, for their time they were brilliant people and they also have very interesting and right work, but I think it will be more profitable to spend your time studying Socrates or the Ionian/Alexandrian philosophers than Plato and Arsitotle.

by free_cat Fri Jan 04, 2013 8:44 am

Yohan Modric wrote:Anyone read the 'Objective Barcelona : How To Beat The Most Powerful Team In The World' book?

Haven't read it, but I googled, and judging by their website and videos it's very wrong.

by goonbrain Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:20 pm

Started reading "A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE" :bow:

RIP good grades Crying or Very sad

by stevieg8 Fri Jan 04, 2013 4:49 pm

free_cat wrote:
RealGunner wrote:
free_cat wrote:

No need to understand bullshit Plato and Aristotle philosophy. They are very influential philosphers because their way of thinking, that favours working the world in your head instead of experimenting and observing, was favoured by Christianism because it didn't confront religion and favoured faith.

It's funny how everything for you ends up with Religion.

Plato and Aristotle are one of the greatest people to ever live on this earth. Just because you don't understand what they said doesn't make their Work "bullshit" They placed Morals ahead of anything else, and maybe that's why you think it's bullshit

Yeah, I'm not religious so I'm not moral. Religious people and their deluded sense of superiority.

Plato and Aristotle were philosophers who, instead of trying to figure out the world through observation and experiment, favoured to figure out the world with thought. Although that sounds good, time has taught us that you can't figure the world thinking inside a dark room. You need to observe and experiment. They barely did that, so most of their work is basically wrong.

Examples of very wrong work is Plato's Republic, were he argues against democracy and in favour of a city-state run by Philosopher-kings (like himself... how curious), and from Aristotle, his cosmological Geocentric view of the Universe that was the prevalent view of the cosmos due to Christian influence until Copernicus and Galileo.

Off course, for their time they were brilliant people and they also have very interesting and right work, but I think it will be more profitable to spend your time studying Socrates or the Ionian/Alexandrian philosophers than Plato and Arsitotle.

Oh so many things to correct.

You're reading them for the wrong reasons. By thinking about the world with thought, they - and the pre-Socratics which preceded them - created modern science. Nobody had done this before, it had all been religion (through Hesiod and Homer in Greece, and others elsewhere). Instead, they decided they'd rather use logic - based on what we see and observe (their versions of laws of nature), what can we conclude? Obviously science has made discoveries since them that contradict what they came up with, but they would have accepted that they were wrong due to the evidence against them.

You don't read Plato and Aristotle as scientific textbooks. You read them to learn how to think, how to approach materials and how to form a logical argument. Their arguments are the basis of all philosophy that followed for the next 2000 years (up until, and in some ways including, Descartes). It's also fascinating to see how close they came to being right. The idea of atoms comes from Democritus, and the idea that we have "elements" (yes, the same type as the Periodic Table) is directly from Aristotle. If you want to point to the fact that they missed the theory of gravity or that their astronomy was wrong, you're missing out on a lot of things you could learn from.

Plato is actually very right in this case, if you look at political philosophy. He acknowledges that the system of the "philosopher king"(or what we would call an "enlightened despot") is not practical in reality, because there's no check on the ruler to ensure that he is of the highest order. Without that option in reality, Plato argues for a Democracy as not quite as good, but still acceptable (see the Laws, the more realistic version of the Republic). Of course, we can take one look around our Democracies and see exactly why that is - nobody wants to take actions people don't like, even if they are necessary for the welfare of the country (just look at the current US debate over entitlements - or last week's fiscal cliff crisis). As Churchill once said, "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter".

Also, you should know that Plato did not consider himself a Philosopher in the sense that "philosopher king" connotes. This is why he never really engaged in Athenian politics. He would not have considered himself appropriate for the role you're talking about. Making that assumption is off-base to say the least.

This was my favorite. First of all, studying Socrates IS studying Plato. Although if you've read any of either, you'd know that. Regardless, I'm uncertain why you think you can learn practically from any of the people you list; the only difference with the ones you mention is that they don't touch on metaphysics, and stick with ethics instead. If you think we can learn morality from any of them, just tell CBarca to only study their ethics - Plato and Aristotle both have very famous texts on these topics that have nothing to do with cosmology or science (Nicomachean Ethics anyone?)

But I don't know why you'd read any of them for help developing a moral code. You wanna talk about outdated ideas, lets discuss Socrates' approach to virtue. Or the idea of stoicism. Neither of those work very well at all as a life philosophy in the modern world, nor do any of these.

The point is, you're missing the purpose of philosophy. You don't read any of these people for guidance or knowledge; you read them to learn how to think. Their writings train you in the nuances - and failings - of logical argument, and help teach you to break down discussions and create your own logical approaches. All philosophy that has been developed over the last several millenia works equally well for this purpose, because the actual content of what's within is quite secondary. If you treat them like religious texts, you're not going to gain anything.

So to CBarca - keep struggling through them. It's really impressive that you're trying so early. Even if you don't understand, try to read things over until you do - move slowly, there's no need to finish all of it. The value lies in understanding in, not in learning all of it. And once you've had enough, put them down, and come back to them in a few years and try again.

by RealGunner Fri Jan 04, 2013 7:10 pm

stevieg

Thanks for saving my time.

by CBarca Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:43 pm

So to CBarca - keep struggling through them. It's really impressive that you're trying so early. Even if you don't understand, try to read things over until you do - move slowly, there's no need to finish all of it. The value lies in understanding in, not in learning all of it. And once you've had enough, put them down, and come back to them in a few years and try again.

Haha that was a while ago. I did get halfway through it but started reading other things.

I'll come back to The Republic in a year or so. I tried reading Les Miserables in 6th grade and couldn't, I tried reading Brave New World in 7th grade but it went over my head. I later picked up Brave New World, read it in 9th grade, understood it much more than I did before and loved it. I'm always trying to challenge myself and sometimes it doesn't work, so I come back to these books a year or two later and by then I can understand them much better. I'll do the same with this one.

Right now I'm in the middle of The Art of Learning, a book THC recommends and I do too. This is an intriguing book and quite a good one.

by RealGunner Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:53 pm

Brave New world is fantastic. One of my favourites. If you liked it as well then i recommend "A Modern Utopia". Equally good.

by CBarca Fri Jan 04, 2013 11:20 pm

Equally as good as Brave New World? That makes me skeptical. Few books reach the heights of Brave New World for me. That will be the next book I'll check out then, thanks RG.

by RealGunner Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:04 am

It's a bit dry and u might find it boring if it isn't your style. I liked it though Razz

by McLewis Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:07 am

About to start Douglas Adam's classic Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy followed the Restaurant at the End of the Universe and finally Life, the Universe and Everything.

As for comics...I'm a huge Coheed & Cambria fan so I want to start the Amory Wars...looking to buy the first issue on Amazon soon.

by TheRedStag Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:14 am

My brother got me Nineteen Eighty-four for Christmas. I want to start it but I'm re-reading A Song of Ice and Fire and it is too addicting to leave down.

by RealGunner Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:21 am

Irish_Catalan_Scouser wrote:My brother got me Nineteen Eighty-four for Christmas. I want to start it but I'm re-reading A Song of Ice and Fire and it is too addicting to leave down.

You will be shaking halfway through 1984 lol.

by TheRedStag Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:23 am

RealGunner wrote:
Irish_Catalan_Scouser wrote:My brother got me Nineteen Eighty-four for Christmas. I want to start it but I'm re-reading A Song of Ice and Fire and it is too addicting to leave down.

You will be shaking halfway through 1984 lol.

Say nothing please. I don't want spoilers. He just told me once I start it and get into I'll have it read in a day or two.

by stevieg8 Sat Jan 05, 2013 1:00 am

Absolutely loved both 1984 and A Brave New World. Distopian literature is probably my favorite at this point.

McLewis wrote:About to start Douglas Adam's classic Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy followed the Restaurant at the End of the Universe and finally Life, the Universe and Everything.

Great books, plowed through them numerous times when I was younger. Had me rolling on the floor laughing. You should know there are 5 in the trilogy though (I know, I know, it's Douglas Adams and he did it on purpose).

by Sponsored content