Post: #726

What I'm reading

Mechanical Engineering 101:
https://www.amazon.com/Mechanical-Engine...eering+101

Good for beginners. Bad page formatting, though. Not that long of a book.

Bachelor pad economics:
https://www.amazon.com/Bachelor-Pad-Econ...+economics

Lot of good advice, still in the first pages

Epistle to Pope Francis:
http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/epistl...rancis.pdf

Extensive letter written by the Orthodox Church where they try to talk some sense into Francis. Really extensive work full of history, facts and inner details about the both Churches. It's also less than 100 pages long.

Post: #727

^ The Epistle to Pope Francis looks fascinating

I'm about 300 pages deep in this:

God's Fury, England's Fire
https://www.amazon.com/Gods-Fury-England...0141008970

I've read it before, but long enough ago that I don't remember much of it.

I'm also towards the end of this:

Reflections of a Russian Statesman
https://archive.org/details/reflectionsofrus00pobeuoft

Highly recommended critique of democracy and 19th century liberalism.

Post: #728

As cliche as it sounds for this forum, I've been reading "Atlas Shrugged" for a while now. The reason why it's taking so long to read is that while the ideas and philosophy are of course fascinating, Rand was such a goddamn AWFUL writer . I find myself cringing at Dagny about as frequently as I find myself agreeing with her.

Post: #729

So I started reading around a year & a half ago. Around that time I was a heavy Ben Shapiro fan. Everything in 'Bullies' made perfect sense to me. Combined with his videos, he confirmed what I suspected and helped get me through the initial, " metamorphosis stage." (I'm only 21 so most of my life I've been tricked into thinking liberal was normal. Shapiro helped open the door out of that realm.)

At one point I was convinced he was a genius. Someone I could fully trust. However I no longer buy what he's selling. I've been off him awhile now. So....

There's 2 purposes for this post.

- Importance of questioning everyone & everything, no matter how much sense you think it makes at the time. In my case, I matured in my reading and didn't stop or expand among similar Shapiro-like writers. (Unfortunately I have a handful of unread books from Mark Levine & Glenn Beck in which I'm not even going to expose myself to such malicious-neocon ideologues.) But that brings me to my next point.

- Anyone have any suggestions for red-pilled/trustworthy authors? People who are consistent in their writings & stand out from the rest. Or just books for that matter.

Recently discovered Roosh and I'm now a frequent reader of ROT and other similar blogs. Extremely thankful to have done so. I plan on reading Free Speech Isn't Free next.

But I'm currently reading a newer book: The Problem With Socialism by Thomas Dilorenzo. A great book for someone who doesn't know much or even has basic knowledge on utopia inspired governments. Especially for someone around my age/younger.

Dilorenzo is great and I suggest his other book: Lincoln Unmasked. One of my favorites ever. Taught me a lot about the first tyrant and the butterfly-effect in which followed his reign.

Another author I suggest is Anthony Napolean Ph.D.
Books: Shadow Men, Marxist Playbook, Progressive Virus - All great sources of knowledge and enjoyable reads. He has a very unique perspective due to his background in forensics/cosmetology Definitely worth checking out.


Subjects I'm interested in:

Economics
Masculinity/Anti-Feminism
Psychology
Advertising/Marketing
Historical/current Propaganda usage

Would appreciate suggestions from fellow like-minded users.

Post: #730

I just finished reading the book The Problem with Socialism by Thomas DiLorenzo. Excellent book.

What I like about the book is that each chapter gets to the point and can be read quickly. You aren't bogged down by boring economics jargon. You don't have to have any knowledge of economics yet you can easily understand some of the more complicated arguments against socialism made by legendary economists such as Ludwig Von Mises and F.A. Hayek. Great book.

Post: #731

Gravity's Rainbow. It's flippin all over the place, yet written so well.

Post: #732

A friend and his stepson both recommended the Iron Druid series. Urban fantasy and storytelling that is good enough to keep me engaged. Not great literature, but a pleasant diversion for somebody like me.

Post: #733

Currently reading Catch-22, but stocked up on Thus Spoke Zarathustra and The Art of War (as per the recommendation of some forum members, thanks RVF!). I'm trying to average a book a week (outside of classes/work) and that'll be quite a challenge, especially when things get hectic.

Post: #734

I just downloaded "Meditations", by Marcus Aurelius

Post: #735

Nietzsche's Twilight of the Idols, or How to Philosophize with a Hammer



Reading Nietzsche so far suggests to me a way to look at people in terms of nature vs. nurture.

Some people respect nature and understand that the hardest thing to do is to control nature, notably your own. Nietzsche's here.

Some people think nature can be controlled. Socrates is explicitly called out on this by Nietzsche, when he brought the cold light of reason to Athens.

Another way to look at it: Can you look at something and just know that it is correct? That it is alpha or beta? Or would you rather discuss it, write a dissertation on it, and build an entire CV out of reasoning and picking apart whether something is good or not.

To Nietzsche, Socrates is subversive. To what extent does reasoning and dialectic become rationalization and hamstering? Anyone can do it-the charm of the idea that we're all rational.

"But Socrates is the father of the dialectic argument! He brought reason to many! He was the gadfly waking up the sleeping horse of Athens, the gadfly..."

And so many kneel to worship this gadfly, this idol of reason. But life experience, Scott Adams, and Nietzsche have been painting a picture to me that people are more irrational than they'd like to believe. Twilight of the Idols indeed.

Post: #736

Just finished "Time Reborn" by Lee Smolin.

https://www.amazon.com/Time-Reborn-Crisi...0544245598

A very accessible book about cosmology, by a cosmologist, that lays out why he believes physics is having such a difficult time finding a "Theory of Everything", and answering questions like "Why is the universe set up the way it is and amenable to complex life, why does time run forward and not backward (because most equations of physics are time-symmetric), is the universe infinite, or finite, and so forth."

The executive summary is that he feels that most of the problems stem from attempting to apply the "physics in a box" type of theories and experiments that work well in our little corner of the universe to the Universe as a whole. There's no law that we currently know of which says that quantum mechanics or general relativity have to apply perfectly at very large scales, or over long periods of time. Or that the "laws" of physics and fundamental constants of nature are static and can't evolve over time. It actually could neatly wrap up a bunch of problems if one starts from the assumption that they are not.

He also claims that a new reinterpretation of general relativity called "shape dynamics" could show that contrary to Einstein's belief that there is no "universal clock" to nature and all times are relative, that time is actually the most fundamental quantity of all.

Post: #737

Now reading: Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell.

Up next:
The spirits' book, by Allan Kardec
Fingerprints of the Gods, by Graham Hancock

Post: #738

(08-20-2016 02:25 PM)XPQ22 Wrote:  Just finished "Time Reborn" by Lee Smolin.

https://www.amazon.com/Time-Reborn-Crisi...0544245598

A very accessible book about cosmology, by a cosmologist, that lays out why he believes physics is having such a difficult time finding a "Theory of Everything", and answering questions like "Why is the universe set up the way it is and amenable to complex life, why does time run forward and not backward (because most equations of physics are time-symmetric), is the universe infinite, or finite, and so forth."

The executive summary is that he feels that most of the problems stem from attempting to apply the "physics in a box" type of theories and experiments that work well in our little corner of the universe to the Universe as a whole. There's no law that we currently know of which says that quantum mechanics or general relativity have to apply perfectly at very large scales, or over long periods of time. Or that the "laws" of physics and fundamental constants of nature are static and can't evolve over time. It actually could neatly wrap up a bunch of problems if one starts from the assumption that they are not.

He also claims that a new reinterpretation of general relativity called "shape dynamics" could show that contrary to Einstein's belief that there is no "universal clock" to nature and all times are relative, that time is actually the most fundamental quantity of all.

Scientist observes something strange. Scientist comes up with hypothesis and tests it. Generalizes and publish results. Then observations don't match result. The cycle continues.

An experiment that may work and be reproducible under controlled situations may not be reflective of actual life. Biologists recognize this issue for in vitro experiments and psychologists take to observational experiments to better take down experiments in nature.

As scientists focus on "setting controls" and "eliminating variables," they develop a very specific filter on the world. The problem comes when they want to generalize their findings. They want to shake our view of reality.

A long time ago as a research lab intern, I remember a graduate student telling me that her work has got more and more specific the more years of academia she took on. There she was in her "tiny slice of the world." Maybe, just maybe, she'd come across some Black Swan/discovery that shook our view of reality in her very specific field. What a tiny slice of the world indeed.

(Respect to researchers. It's a lot of work, and fighting for recognition is tough. It's a real tough field and I get the idea everyone's basically hoping to strike gold.)

XPQ22, would you recommend this book to a physicist, someone looking to study science, or a psychologist? Curious.

Quick question: time forward vs. time backward? Wouldn't we perceive "backwards time" as linear and forward anyways? Our conception of time is linear, and backwards or forwards are just arbitrary directions.

Post: #739

The Man w/ the Golden Gun Wrote:  Scientist observes something strange. Scientist comes up with hypothesis and tests it. Generalizes and publish results. Then observations don't match result. The cycle continues.

The problem once you start asking questions at a certain "level" (i.e. cosmology) is that you're pushing the limits of what's testable by a bunch of smart apes living on a rock in one tiny corner of the universe. One of the best ideas for a "grand unified" theory we have right now is string theory, but the problem is that string theory is actually many many theories (I believe it's been proved recently that there are an infinite number of them), all related yet mathematically distinct, but which are all able to spit out universes with features that look very much like our own, given the proper set of initial conditions.

So if the general idea of string theory is correct, which of the (possibly infinite) set of distinct theories is the one that's actually running the show? Scientists aren't sure. And the problem is that it's very difficult to do tests to falsify this one or the other. As far as I know, there's no plausible test we could run using current or very near future technology to sort them, and while many of the versions have solid mathematical grounding, it's finally just math on a sheet of paper. Universes are universes, they don't exist as math in notebooks.

Part of the thrust of the book is the criticism, which isn't new, that if you're not testing theories then you're not doing science, you're doing philosophy. With a bunch of math.

He's also critical of the popular idea that we live in an infinite multiverse. If we live in an infinite multiverse, than every possible universe with every possible initial condition and outcome plays out an infinite number of times. It's the "anthropic principle": the reason our particular universe is set up the way it is is just random, and if it weren't that way we wouldn't be here to speculate about it. He claims this finally makes science meaningless: if everything that can happen does happen, then what's the point in asking the questions. There are no answers.

Quote:XPQ22, would you recommend this book to a physicist, someone looking to study science, or a psychologist? Curious.

It's written for a general audience - there's no math involved. Anyone who's interested in what the men and women who are working at that level are getting paid to do with their time.

Quote:Quick question: time forward vs. time backward? Wouldn't we perceive "backwards time" as linear and forward anyways? Our conception of time is linear, and backwards or forwards are just arbitrary directions.

Most of the equations of physics are "time-symmetric." They don't care whether time in the equations has a positive or negative sign...there's no rule anywhere in Newtons equations, or the equations of quantum mechanics, etc. that says you can't have broken eggs spontaneously leap off the floor and reassemble themselves. But we never see it happen. How come? You essentially have to add a hack which is the 2nd law of thermodynamics, which states that the entropy of a closed system always increases. But why does entropy always increase? This is an open question. He claims that it's probably because of the initial conditions that gave time the arrow that it has, and made entropy what it is.

He lays out a few tests that could be done, or are in the process of being done, to investigate the source of those initial conditions. It's quite possible that our universe didn't simply come into existence out of nothing at the Big Bang, but that universes give birth to other "child" universes via various mechanisms, including black holes. So if our universe had a "parent", then the gravity waves from all the crazy stuff that was going on near the end of the life of the parent should have left an imprint on the microwave background radiation in our own, and through careful study it may be possible to find out what conditions in the "parent" universe were like right before it created ours.

Post: #740

Currently trying to plow through Moby Dick. Although I'm wishing I would have gotten an abridged version like I did with Les Mis. The actual story line is decent in both but man so the authors put in a ton of filler. Overall enjoying it but it makes me wonder how alpha the first whale hunter was. I mean to be in a small row boat with some harpoons and rope see this massive animal and think to yourself " yeah I can do that. I'll catch this leviathan."

Been on a seafaring kick. Read "The Sea Wolf" by Jack London and will probably read two years before the mast next.

Post: #741

I am reading Unlimited Memory by Kevin Horsley. Very compact book, easy reading. I recently had to take a couple of short flights and in the course of about 2 hours have read over half of the book. The first part of the book can be skipped; on the second part it shows a few techniques to remember information. I have found the techniques to be brilliant. Very recommended.

Post: #742

Mark Twain's "A Tramp Abroad", just for fun. But this bit was good:

"Martyrdom is the luckiest fate that can befall some people. Louis XVI did not die in his bed, consequently history is very gentle with him; she is charitable toward his failings, and she finds in him high virtues which are not usually considered to be virtues when they are lodged in kings. She makes him out to be a person with a meek and modest spirit, the heart of a female saint, and a wrong head. None of these qualities are kingly but the last. Taken together they make a character which would have fared harshly at the hands of history if its owner had had the ill luck to miss martyrdom. With the best intentions to do the right thing, he always managed to do the wrong one. Moreover, nothing could get the female saint out of him. He knew, well enough, that in national emergencies he must not consider how he ought to act, as a man, but how he ought to act as a king; so he honestly tried to sink the man and be the king—but it was a failure, he only succeeded in being the female saint. He was not instant in season, but out of season. He could not be persuaded to do a thing while it could do any good—he was iron, he was adamant in his stubbornness then—but as soon as the thing had reached a point where it would be positively harmful to do it, do it he would, and nothing could stop him. He did not do it because it would be harmful, but because he hoped it was not yet too late to achieve by it the good which it would have done if applied earlier. His comprehension was always a train or two behindhand. If a national toe required amputating, he could not see that it needed anything more than poulticing; when others saw that the mortification had reached the knee, he first perceived that the toe needed cutting off—so he cut it off; and he severed the leg at the knee when others saw that the disease had reached the thigh. He was good, and honest, and well meaning, in the matter of chasing national diseases, but he never could overtake one. As a private man, he would have been lovable; but viewed as a king, he was strictly contemptible.

His was a most unroyal career, but the most pitiable spectacle in it was his sentimental treachery to his Swiss guard on that memorable 10th of August, when he allowed those heroes to be massacred in his cause, and forbade them to shed the "sacred French blood" purporting to be flowing in the veins of the red-capped mob of miscreants that was raging around the palace. He meant to be kingly, but he was only the female saint once more. Some of his biographers think that upon this occasion the spirit of Saint Louis had descended upon him. It must have found pretty cramped quarters. If Napoleon the First had stood in the shoes of Louis XVI that day, instead of being merely a casual and unknown looker-on, there would be no Lion of Lucerne, now, but there would be a well-stocked Communist graveyard in Paris which would answer just as well to remember the 10th of August by.

Martyrdom made a saint of Mary Queen of Scots three hundred years ago, and she has hardly lost all of her saintship yet. Martyrdom made a saint of the trivial and foolish Marie Antoinette, and her biographers still keep her fragrant with the odor of sanctity to this day, while unconsciously proving upon almost every page they write that the only calamitous instinct which her husband lacked, she supplied—the instinct to root out and get rid of an honest, able, and loyal official, wherever she found him. The hideous but beneficent French Revolution would have been deferred, or would have fallen short of completeness, or even might not have happened at all, if Marie Antoinette had made the unwise mistake of not being born. The world owes a great deal to the French Revolution, and consequently to its two chief promoters, Louis the Poor in Spirit and his queen."

Don't try to be a saint in the current situation. Germany would be better off if Angela Merkel understood that. But yes, she's the daughter of a protestant priest.

Here's a link. Excerpt is from chapter XXVI. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/5785/5785-h/5785-h.htm

Post: #743

Just finished Nick Krauser's Balls Deep volume 1. He narrates his indulgence into the game, from the beginning (2009) up to 2011. He explains the ups and downs of his journey. Lots of knowledge on inner game, why he adopted his current style of game and most of all about the girls who changed his life. Will be interesting for any newbie and intermediate daygamers out there.

And I am about to finish The Great Gatsby. Real red pill book. How a sigma male ends up as top beta male just for one girl. Also tells how women likes drama and rather stick to an abusive and dominant men rather than a guy who does all for her just to win her over.

Post: #744

The Fish that Ate the Whale

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13166...-the-whale

Historical account of a man (Sam Zemurray) who drove the development of the most influential banana import company in the early 20th century. His behemoth corporation led coups, started wars, and influenced politics heavily. In the days before antitrust laws were fully developed, it's fascinating to read about what this man, and this company did. Easy to read and the story encompasses more than just Zemurray, detailing some very interesting characters along the way.

Post: #745

I have arrived at Chapter 4 of Scott Adams’s Persuasion Reading List and have started reading Impossible to Ignore which gives a thorough insight on how to understand an apply the concepts of retro – and prospective memory when it comes to persuasion.

Very interesting from a wide variety of perspective – from gaming women, to managing a family, selling products, everything really. Very dense and I’m spending more time writing my own notes than I am reading.

Worth the read though and worth a recommendation.

Post: #746

Drugging a Nation: The Story Of China and the Opium Curse by Samuel Merwin. Because it was written a hundred years ago, it's in the public domain, and it's free on Kindle.

I had some vague idea about the Opium Wars and the opium addiction that many Chinese people suffered from, but I had no idea of the enormity of it. During the 19th century, between 30% - 50% of the entire China population (around 150 million people) were addicted to opium. Men, women, children - all were turned to lifeless husks and were selling clothes from their back to buy opium.

I've read 35% of the book so far, and the writer described how the British introduced the opium to China, first by smuggling it, then selling it after the treaties of the Opium Wars. I don't want to spoil it too much, but so far is both haunting and fascinating to read.

No wonder the penalty for drug trafficking in China is death.

Post: #747

(08-20-2016 04:42 PM)Ringo Wrote:  Now reading: Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell.

Up next:
The spirits' book, by Allan Kardec
Fingerprints of the Gods, by Graham Hancock

Outliers: 8/10. Pretty good book.

Now reading Fingerprints - let's see where it goes.

Post: #748

Currently rereading Mastery by Robert Greene. I picked it up cheaply at a book sale, but didn't expect to reread it since it's a rather dense book. I've been going through it with a high level enjoyment, and realizing that this is a very great and relevant book to my life right now. Currently going through all of Greene's work - Just finished 48LoP on Friday. That one was easily one of the greatest books of the past quarter-century.

Post: #749

I've just started Final diagnosis by Arthur Hailey, the first chapter is nice

Post: #750

(08-21-2016 02:40 PM)Razgriz Wrote:  Currently trying to plow through Moby Dick. Although I'm wishing I would have gotten an abridged version like I did with Les Mis. The actual story line is decent in both but man so the authors put in a ton of filler. Overall enjoying it but it makes me wonder how alpha the first whale hunter was. I mean to be in a small row boat with some harpoons and rope see this massive animal and think to yourself " yeah I can do that. I'll catch this leviathan."

There is a chapter in the book (89) entitled "Fast Fish and Loose Fish," which is brilliant. A fast fish is one that has been captured by a boat; a loose fish is one that was captured, but has escaped and is being chased. Melville discusses how this fishing term (captured versus being hunted) is analogous to many things in life: politics, relationships, etc.

His great question at the end of the chapter..."What are you, my dear reader, but a fast or loose fish?"