Disagree with lots of it but I love his writing and his approach and ideas. Probably the most interesting book I read all year, loved it.
There are an infinite number of questions that we will never answer, but which clearly have answers. How many fish are there in the world's oceans at this moment? We will never know. And yet, we know that this question, along with an infinite number of questions like it, have correct answers. We simply can't get access to the data in any practical way.
There are many questions about human subjectivity -- and about the experience of conscious creatures generally -- that have this same structure. Which causes more human suffering, stealing or lying? Questions like this are not at all meaningless, in that they must have answers, but it could be hopeless to try to answer them with any precision. Still, once we admit that any discussion of human values must relate to a larger reality in which actual answers exist, we can then reject many answers as obviously wrong. If, in response to the question about the world's fish, someone were to say, "There are exactly a thousand fish in the sea." We know that this person is not worth listening to. And many people who have strong opinions on moral questions have no more credibility than this.
Disagree with lots of it but I love his writing and his approach and ideas. Probably the most interesting book I read all year, loved it.
There are an infinite number of questions that we will never answer, but which clearly have answers. How many fish are there in the world's oceans at this moment? We will never know. And yet, we know that this question, along with an infinite number of questions like it, have correct answers. We simply can't get access to the data in any practical way.
There are many questions about human subjectivity -- and about the experience of conscious creatures generally -- that have this same structure. Which causes more human suffering, stealing or lying? Questions like this are not at all meaningless, in that they must have answers, but it could be hopeless to try to answer them with any precision. Still, once we admit that any discussion of human values must relate to a larger reality in which actual answers exist, we can then reject many answers as obviously wrong. If, in response to the question about the world's fish, someone were to say, "There are exactly a thousand fish in the sea." We know that this person is not worth listening to. And many people who have strong opinions on moral questions have no more credibility than this.
I was considering this, but I read some reader reviews on Amazon and decided against it. The reviews all said that while he had some good prose, he didn't actually apply science to any questions of morality. He basically promulgated his own opinions as obvious conclusions, without backing them up with any of the advertised scientific thinking. It sounds like you had a similar problem. Might see if I can catch it at the library.
Finished Way of Kings last night. Had a pretty satisfying ending for a book that is only the first of 12. Worst part is now I have to wait. And wait. And waaaaaiiiiiiiiiiit.
About a third of a way through Tokyo Vice, as well. Interesting book about what it's like to work for a Japanese newspaper. I wonder if they're dying as much as their American brethren are?
So I finished Cordelia's Honor which was linked by Tycho in a newspost awhile back (which can be found here) and I really enjoyed it. They're all freely available from that link and I think I'll grab the rest and go through them now.
I finished Old Man's War. I pretty much agree with Quoth. The main character is way too much of a cool awesome guy, the info dumps were obnoxious and awkward... the combat was handled OK and the setting was interesting.
I finished Old Man's War. I pretty much agree with Quoth. The main character is way too much of a cool awesome guy, the info dumps were obnoxious and awkward... the combat was handled OK and the setting was interesting.
yeah like i said, i think it was a book that started as a really cool idea and then fell short in the execution
it makes me wonder whether i would like the forever war better, since i hear they're similar
Disagree with lots of it but I love his writing and his approach and ideas. Probably the most interesting book I read all year, loved it.
There are an infinite number of questions that we will never answer, but which clearly have answers. How many fish are there in the world's oceans at this moment? We will never know. And yet, we know that this question, along with an infinite number of questions like it, have correct answers. We simply can't get access to the data in any practical way.
There are many questions about human subjectivity -- and about the experience of conscious creatures generally -- that have this same structure. Which causes more human suffering, stealing or lying? Questions like this are not at all meaningless, in that they must have answers, but it could be hopeless to try to answer them with any precision. Still, once we admit that any discussion of human values must relate to a larger reality in which actual answers exist, we can then reject many answers as obviously wrong. If, in response to the question about the world's fish, someone were to say, "There are exactly a thousand fish in the sea." We know that this person is not worth listening to. And many people who have strong opinions on moral questions have no more credibility than this.
I was considering this, but I read some reader reviews on Amazon and decided against it. The reviews all said that while he had some good prose, he didn't actually apply science to any questions of morality. He basically promulgated his own opinions as obvious conclusions, without backing them up with any of the advertised scientific thinking. It sounds like you had a similar problem. Might see if I can catch it at the library.
While that was my exact problem with it, you soon realise his aim is to shift the taboo rather than provide a specific scientific framework. His point is this is such an under-explored area and idea, that he is open to suggestions on the approaches, rather than just steamrolling into them himself. He offers a lot, and I think as a philosophy student I loved the book because it was like having a big juicy steak with beer after being on a strict diet for years.
While it is almost entirely an opinion piece, he doesnt really go a page without hedging his bets constantly and providing every opportunity for caveats with his ideas. I think his main argument is one from principle, hes asking the question rather than providing the answer (although of course he does sway in and out).
Its a fascinating read and the guy will be publishing some neurobiological findings soon! So he's not all bells and whistles, but still your concern is pretty much spot on, but it doesnt stop it from being a confronting and thought-provoking read.
Of course if you out and out disagree with him theres nothing in the book thats going to change your mind, but I really cant think of anyone else who has made or is making the same kind of arguments with the same clarity and sense of drive and tenacity. I think by the end of the book I disagreed with him less? If that makes sense, because you get a clearer picture of what hes advocating and why and a lot of it is entirely justified, if even though he does so largely through metaphor and analogy.
I think my favourite thing about the book is hes trying to bring morality back into reality and engage with it as something practical and useful to human lives. Its like hes rescuing it from nebulous quandary of irrelevance it faces in the various branches of philosophy. You either hate this on principle or love it to death. I love it to death, but I still find myself conflicted. Its difficult to trust an idea when you find it so tempting I guess :P
He, like me, gets frustrated that when you try and discuss the practicalities and evidence for moralities, you get treated like a religious fundamentalist, as if the only people that are allowed to be confident in moral assertions are fundamentalists. In no other field of thought is this attitude applied, and its detrimental to our understanding and furthering of morality, and therefore human (and animal) experience.
We are forever trying to justify basic assertions on morality, a process that seems to have resulted in everyone throwing their hands up in the air and saying, its too difficult or dangerous, therefore there is no answer. Which is the equivalent of still not believing in germ theory because some people still believe in witchcraft, or the mountain of evidence is not quite enough and we shouldnt be too confident, like we need to convince some cosmic uber-peer-review process before it is considered worth combating contagious diseases.
I bought The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins on my new Kindle, and I'm alternating fiction/non-fiction with Catch 22. I read Selfish Gene for awhile, but it's the 30th anniversary edition, so most of it was prefaces and forwards.
MagnumCT on
0
augustwhere you come from is goneRegistered Userregular
I have seen five different books with Wanderer Above the Mist as the cover. This is number six!
My favorite is The Last Man as I think it fits it most thematically, but it varies. I like it least on Thus Spoke Zarathustra, but I don't like the big N all that much.
How does the Kindle handle footnotes? I am reading Infinite Jest and I think the dictionary lookup feature would be nice, which is damn unusual for me. It is also massive, and condensing it down to my kindle would be a lot more comfortable to read.
I don't know. I didn't read it. I just searched for it. It has mostly favorable reviews on Amazon.
DouglasDanger on
0
#pipeCocky Stride, Musky odoursPope of Chili TownRegistered Userregular
edited January 2011
GUYS GUYS SHUT UP
SNOOKI WROTE A BOOK
A hot guido was staring at her - in a nice way - from across the room.
Gia smiled at him. His back against the wall, he stood just off the dance floor, thumb in a belt loop. His chest muscles strained the fabric of his black tank top. It fit across a tummy that was hard and flat enough to cut salami on. No tattoos, which meant plenty of empty space on his arms to ink PROPERTY OF GIA. He started as if he could see through her dress, right down to the zebra-print bra and thong set underneath.
“I found him,” Gia said to Bella, draining her Slippery Nipple in one long suck…
Right at that moment, a Deadmau5 mix came on. He was her fave; it was a sign. She stepped onto the dance floor. The music took her over. Dancing had to be Gia’s second favorite way to work up a sweat. It definitely beat going to the gym. For exercise, Gia cranked house music in her bedroom and danced until her legs felt numb. She loved dancing and was talented, too. Gia won a contest while in high school for shaking it the longest and hardest without spilling a single drop of her vodka tonic.
Tonight, she aimed her gyrating hips straight at Salami Boy. The guy could take a hint. In two seconds, he creeped over to her. In five seconds, they were grinding, her butt pressed against his thighs.
She turned around to introduce herself. “I’m Gia,” she screamed in his ear above the music.
“Rocky,” he said, putting a bear paw on her waist and holding her against him.
Rocky in his jeans, thought Gia.
IT'S A BOOK ABOUT A CLASSY LADY NAMED GIA SPUMANTI
Posts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-RzxoEQbvo
Disagree with lots of it but I love his writing and his approach and ideas. Probably the most interesting book I read all year, loved it.
The website I ordered from didn't have a picture or any description at all, really, and I didn't look deeper into it.
As previously stated by me
Fuck.
I was considering this, but I read some reader reviews on Amazon and decided against it. The reviews all said that while he had some good prose, he didn't actually apply science to any questions of morality. He basically promulgated his own opinions as obvious conclusions, without backing them up with any of the advertised scientific thinking. It sounds like you had a similar problem. Might see if I can catch it at the library.
Well that sucks.. Totally should try again though, I have it and it is awesome
About a third of a way through Tokyo Vice, as well. Interesting book about what it's like to work for a Japanese newspaper. I wonder if they're dying as much as their American brethren are?
The other two I don't care for at all.
So I say Treasure Island.
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
Red harvest
It is a prequel to death troopers
I am p excited
I got that for my library and read the description, it looks gloriously stupid.
Gullivers Travels is awesome. And surprisingly readable for such an old book.
I wonder what OT characters they will shoehorn in.
Steam - Talon Valdez :Blizz - Talonious#1860 : Xbox Live & LoL - Talonious Monk @TaloniousMonk Hail Satan
twas a good book
i enjoyed the scenes about the halfway house the most
i am here in a hostel with two days to kill
and the only not-book-about-god in english is the girl with the dragon tattoo
so i guess that is what i am reading
ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
I still haven't opened Gardens of the Moon.
yeah like i said, i think it was a book that started as a really cool idea and then fell short in the execution
it makes me wonder whether i would like the forever war better, since i hear they're similar
it's decent but really fucking slow for like the first 2/3.
While that was my exact problem with it, you soon realise his aim is to shift the taboo rather than provide a specific scientific framework. His point is this is such an under-explored area and idea, that he is open to suggestions on the approaches, rather than just steamrolling into them himself. He offers a lot, and I think as a philosophy student I loved the book because it was like having a big juicy steak with beer after being on a strict diet for years.
While it is almost entirely an opinion piece, he doesnt really go a page without hedging his bets constantly and providing every opportunity for caveats with his ideas. I think his main argument is one from principle, hes asking the question rather than providing the answer (although of course he does sway in and out).
Its a fascinating read and the guy will be publishing some neurobiological findings soon! So he's not all bells and whistles, but still your concern is pretty much spot on, but it doesnt stop it from being a confronting and thought-provoking read.
Of course if you out and out disagree with him theres nothing in the book thats going to change your mind, but I really cant think of anyone else who has made or is making the same kind of arguments with the same clarity and sense of drive and tenacity. I think by the end of the book I disagreed with him less? If that makes sense, because you get a clearer picture of what hes advocating and why and a lot of it is entirely justified, if even though he does so largely through metaphor and analogy.
I think my favourite thing about the book is hes trying to bring morality back into reality and engage with it as something practical and useful to human lives. Its like hes rescuing it from nebulous quandary of irrelevance it faces in the various branches of philosophy. You either hate this on principle or love it to death. I love it to death, but I still find myself conflicted. Its difficult to trust an idea when you find it so tempting I guess :P
He, like me, gets frustrated that when you try and discuss the practicalities and evidence for moralities, you get treated like a religious fundamentalist, as if the only people that are allowed to be confident in moral assertions are fundamentalists. In no other field of thought is this attitude applied, and its detrimental to our understanding and furthering of morality, and therefore human (and animal) experience.
We are forever trying to justify basic assertions on morality, a process that seems to have resulted in everyone throwing their hands up in the air and saying, its too difficult or dangerous, therefore there is no answer. Which is the equivalent of still not believing in germ theory because some people still believe in witchcraft, or the mountain of evidence is not quite enough and we shouldnt be too confident, like we need to convince some cosmic uber-peer-review process before it is considered worth combating contagious diseases.
It was okay, I guess.
I have seen five different books with Wanderer Above the Mist as the cover. This is number six!
My favorite is The Last Man as I think it fits it most thematically, but it varies. I like it least on Thus Spoke Zarathustra, but I don't like the big N all that much.
Gosh it's popular to put on books.
Really interesting stories!
Now to start up Unseen Academicals to balance out the rest of the Deathbird Stories.
I have so much trouble reading Gulliver's Travels. Every page requires me to open three more history books.
What is this
Tell me about it
was good
Okay sure
Is it any good?
I don't know. I didn't read it. I just searched for it. It has mostly favorable reviews on Amazon.
SNOOKI WROTE A BOOK
IT'S A BOOK ABOUT A CLASSY LADY NAMED GIA SPUMANTI
Need some stuff designed or printed? I can help with that.
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
although my satan has been in contact and is working on it.
Need some stuff designed or printed? I can help with that.
In other news, Moby Dick is pretty excellent and I am sad that I spent so long refusing to read it.
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
Need some stuff designed or printed? I can help with that.