Post: #26

(08-14-2014 01:15 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  I have no desire to read any of these books!

This gave me a HUGE HUGE LAUGH... thank you Gio.

You amaze me each time.

Just keep being yourself, please.

Post: #27

Gio, I posted this to BB some time ago in behalf of Epicurus:

/thread-36197.html
post #22

Epicurus was not a political animal. His definition of happiness dramatically differed from Aristotle's ethical and social activism. Epicurus saw the political life as adding to the agita that would detract from his serene pursuit of modest pleasures. He was a stay-at-home kind of guy.

“Live unnoticed” was a main precept of Epicureanism. He and his followers were laid-back and low profile.

Epicurus lived and died quietly in a home with a garden outside of Athens, where he received guests and taught students. The Garden and its teachings and traditions lasted for almost 500 years.

Epicurean communes were quite egalitarian. Men and women were treated as equals, and socioeconomic distinctions were ignored. Even the slaves were treated with equanimity. This was unheard of in the Greco-Roman world, and some might argue that it isn't even completely practiced today. Needless to say, they were regarded as outcasts and oddballs, but they probably did not worry too much about that because they had little use for mainstream society.

Meanwhile, over in Rome, Epicureanism was taking on a decidedly different bent — the one it continues to be known for to this day. However, whether it be an orgy in Caligula's palace or a toga-party in a contemporary frat house, those who would call themselves Epicureans bear no resemblance to the man or his philosophy.
http://www.netplaces.com/philosophy-book...nciple.htm

"Stay at home kind of guy" reminds me of Curdguy.

Here is some stuff about his philosophy in general:
http://www.epicurus.info/etexts/Lives.html

###############
Gio you remind me of the "Seawolf" by Jack London. The guy in the book is a natural alpha from a poor background. He starts reading books but they became his downfall because it made him weak. Reading about morals took him his natural amimalistic energy.

This is what I thought of you when I read many month ago that you never read a book. Normally I would say bad decision because books are important at least to impress people and chicks. It´s like abs and more.

But as you said it creates a distance to yourself (animalistic self) and the disadvantage is you become slow and not authentic.

My background is turkish so some distance to books might be genetically. Many turks hate books. Maybe that´s why they are naturally horny all the time.

I like how you are delibarately different.

Post: #28

(08-14-2014 02:13 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

(08-14-2014 01:15 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  I have no desire to read any of these books!

This gave me a HUGE HUGE LAUGH... thank you Gio.

You amaze me each time.

Just keep being yourself, please.

Lizard, you can do it better. You could write about the merits of not reading books. Now it´s obvious it´s not your natural perspective but I think you would make an interesting job. Gio, might like it, too.

Post: #29

(08-14-2014 02:35 PM)Bill Wrote:  Gio, I posted this to BB some time ago in behalf of Epicurus:

/thread-36197.html

Thank you!

I will skim through that looking for concepts that excite my mind.

(08-14-2014 02:35 PM)Bill Wrote:  they had little use for mainstream society

I like it already!

(08-14-2014 02:35 PM)Bill Wrote:  Gio you remind me of the "Seawolf" by Jack London. The guy in the book is a natural alpha from a poor background. He starts reading books but they became his downfall because it made him weak. Reading about morals took him his natural amimalistic energy.

I can really relate to that.

Thank you for sharing that.

(08-14-2014 02:35 PM)Bill Wrote:  you become slow and not authentic.

Bill,

You have identified and described things about myself that even I was not aware of!

+1 from me!

(08-14-2014 02:51 PM)Bill Wrote:  You could write about the merits of not reading books.

I wouldn't call it "the merits of not reading books".

I would call it "Exploring and Discussing Learning Strategies that are possibly more effective than reading"

*****

I remember the famous soccer phenom Freddy Adu. He was asked how he got so good at such a young age..

His answer:

"I never had any coaches. I was forced to learn everything on my own. I didn't have to wait for coaches to teach me, I learned at my own speed. I was not limited by their expectations and teaching methods"

I thought that was great.

Again, don't get me wrong.. I believe that reading is very important and all young men should try to embrace it.

It's just not my preferred method of learning.

I like to do it, talk about it with others who have done it, try again, observe others doing it, try again, then, read about it.

MY WAY IS NOT THE BEST WAY! IT'S JUST MY PREFERENCE. EVERY MAN SHOULD FIND HIS "BEST" WAY TO GO THROUGH LIFE.

Thanks guys!

I am learning from you.

Post: #30

I definitely believe that we can train our minds much better, and efficiently than we can train our bodies. There is plenty of ways of doing this whether from using CES devices, nootropics, meditation, learning new things and practicing new and constructive habits.

Post: #31

(08-14-2014 02:51 PM)Bill Wrote:  Lizard, you can do it better. You could write about the merits of not reading books. Now it´s obvious it´s not your natural perspective but I think you would make an interesting job. Gio, might like it, too.

Thanks, and you're right... maybe I will.

Post: #32

(08-14-2014 01:15 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  I want to view the world through my "lens" -- "unfiltered" -- without the influence of anyone else.

I really enjoy your perspective on this.

Just pointing out though, if you watch TV, movies, listen to podcasts or even read this forum then you are already being influenced, all the time. Thus, your fear is kind of irrational, which you admit.

Also, don't give us the "my world view is unfiltered" or "pure" story unless you are out living in the jungle with no human contact.

Personally, I'd much rather throw out my TV and read good books.

Most popular media is there to brainwash the masses. It's fucked up just how much conditioning is going on. Now THAT is scary. Books, especially older ones, give you different perspectives you would never have considered.

Imagine how amazing it would be to talk to a Roman who lived 2,000 years ago. What were his thoughts on women? How did he live? What were his philosophies? Read a good book from that time and it feels like the author is sitting there talking with you. And that's a cool thing.

Post: #33

Giovonny Wrote:"A conversation with one wise man is better than reading 10 books"

Interesting. Though I am an avid reading, I don't disagree.

I suppose it would depend on the quality of the 10 books in question. Although I've gotten better (through improved heuristics) at identifying whether a book will be worthwhile before I invest any significant time on it, I will still invariably waste time on worthless books. So if we're talking about useless drivel (e.g. most business books), then conversing with one wise man is better than reading 100 or even 1,000 books.

But the problem with conversing with wise men is that wise men are exceedingly rare. The benefit of a book is that it's basically a conversation with a wise man on demand, assuming that the book was written by a wise man. Granted, you can't actually speak to a book. However, I listen way more than I talk when engaged with someone wiser than me anyway. And a good book anticipates the questions that you would've asked and answers them.

For example, I've never had a conversation with Nassim Taleb, but his ideas have changed my life by opening my mind to realities that it had not previously considered (and probably would not have considered without his pointing them out).

Post: #34

(08-15-2014 04:54 PM)Peregrine Wrote:  For example, I've never had a conversation with Nassim Taleb, but his ideas have changed my life by opening my mind to realities that it had not previously considered (and probably would not have considered without his pointing them out).

Funny you should mention it, I'm currently reading The Black Swan and I'm blown away by the ideas he presents. Highly, highly interesting.

Post: #35

(08-14-2014 08:36 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

(08-13-2014 08:40 AM)Cyr Wrote:  This past year, I have done a lot of reading and thinking. I would like to think that I have engaged with a lot more material than my contemporaries and worked my brain much harder, for longer.

Do you think this results in a quantifiable improvement in cognitive functioning? Aside from reading a book and knowing more about the contents of the book, does reading and thinking about ideas make us smarter in general?

I used the exercise analogy in the title, because someone who works out and is athletic is instantly recognisable. Do you believe that the same is true of someone who 'exercises' their mind? This is particularly relevant as the difference in mental exertion often dwarfs differences in physical exertion- a professor or thinker may read one hundred books in a year and constantly be thinking and weighing up different ideas in his head, whereas many people only rarely think deeply and truly exercise their minds in day to day life.

Interesting questions

1) we basically measure intelligence as the ability to recognize patterns.

So reading, learning new skills is basically the chore of learning a new pattern.

a) If you have more patterns at your disposal, that means you can solve a given set of problems faster. Learning a new language, or learning to play guitar can unlock things in other avenues of life.

b) And then there are people who are able to figure out new and unfamiliar patterns faster than others.

It's my guess that for a lot of people, "b" category folks - people who can find patterns in novel situations are considered "smarter" than people who are just well versed in a lot of stuff.

In real life, I don't know how you would differentiate those people.

This whole argument is a bridge made of popsicle sticks.

2) Can people tell you're sharp?

The thing with exercise and lifting weights

You can tell someone's fit, if they're jacked wearing clothes.

Can you spot someone that can lift a ton of weight?
Can you tell if someone has "6 pack abs" with their shirt on?

Compare your typical "pull up bar" athlete to sprinter.

The sprinter is going to look athletic. The guy doing faux gymnastic stunts looks like a skinny teenager often times.

It's the same with intelligence/being smart.

The smart person has to take off the shirt to show you their abs.

The wise person sometimes realizes that it's best to shut the fuck up.

Great question.

Lemme throw this one out

When is it a good idea to demonstrate your intelligence?

I'm trying to think of a non-professional situation where flexing your mental skills is beneficial.

As the great Kris Parker once opined, "Bad Boys move in silence"

WIA

WIA, I've been thinking about the bolded question over the last couple of days:
-When you're trying to scam someone/ pull the wool over their eyes. You can hide what you're doing behind the illusion of being really smart? This may also make them more likely to believe you to begin with.
-When you're meeting/ trying to impress high value or established men. This is probably more relevant to me as a younger guy than someone who is in their 40s, but next year I'll be working in a consulting firm (as an intern before university), and hopefully developing mental skills will help me build high-up connections.
- Probably the most compelling argument is the fact that just knowing you have those mental skills can give you confidence (although this is mainly relevant in professional settings). I guess its like having a big dick- when you're meeting someone new, they won't know, but it can give you confidence. You could extend this to most 'serious' meetings you had outside of a professional setting (e.g negotiating buying a house etc..).

Post: #36

Yes. I studied law awhich is essentailly 4 months without any cerebral activity and than 8 weeks of hardcore studying, and repeat each semester.

After a few weeks back to the studying you feel you can concentrate longer/better and information is stored faster then when you started after doing nothing.

So yes, I think you can train your brain just like your muscles.

Post: #37

The thing is - just as we can train bodies to either lift heavy weights or run marathons we can also train our minds in different directions.

And just as running for endurance and lifting for strength are somewhat counterproductive so is probably developing different talents of mind.

Social intelligence and ability to solve complex math in head doesn't go well together from empirical evidence.

But this probably goes deeper than that. Most usually it takes form of us training our minds to rationalize our chosen adaptions and maladaptions faster and more convincingly.

Which leads to more trained minds being more distant from another and hate each other. On the other hand we say that great minds think alike ... meaning that there is some objective truth nevertheless... but still we have many great philosophers and even scientists fighting ... each finding great arguments for their mutually exclusive theories .. the mind is really a fascinating thing.

Post: #38

(08-14-2014 09:29 PM)dreambig Wrote:  don't give us the "my world view is unfiltered" or "pure" story unless you are out living in the jungle with no human contact.

Hahaha!

Yeah, good point! Looking back at what I wrote, that does sound a little silly!

(08-15-2014 04:54 PM)Peregrine Wrote:  The benefit of a book is that it's basically a conversation with a wise man on demand

Well said.

(08-15-2014 04:54 PM)Peregrine Wrote:  For example, I've never had a conversation with Nassim Taleb, but his ideas have changed my life by opening my mind to realities that it had not previously considered.

I actually tried to read "The Black Swan" once..

I thought it was boring, dry, repetitive, and full of assumptions.

I only made it about half way through.

But, there are other authors who have inspired me and stimulated my mind in the way Taleb has for you.

(It's very possible that I just have bad taste in books)

***

All that said,

I appreciate you guys educating me on this matter.

I think NOT reading could be a major weakness of mine.

I'm going to try again.

Post: #39

Gio, honestly, I wouldn't change a thing if I were you.

You don't have a "major weakness"... your thinking and apprehension of the world is of an exceptionally high quality -- about as high as it gets. You have nothing to worry about.

You have the heart and mind of a poet, and prose is a little too slow for you.

And while some books are enjoyable, and some very few are great, the vast majority is terribly overrated, including many of the most famous and highly regarded ones.

"A conversation with a wise man on demand" -- it's rarely that because almost all writers are not wise men. It is a common mistake to think that writers have some special knowledge or insight about the world. Very often it's the exact opposite -- they are the ones who know least. This is an important point, and I may do a longer post about it some day.

Only pick up book reading some idle day if you're in the mood for it. It might be a fine thing for you to do in your sixties, for example.

"I decided to read a few books in my sixties..." -- that has a very seemly ring to it.

Then in your seventies you start watching movies and that blows away all the books you've read in your sixties...

Post: #40

(08-18-2014 04:03 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  prose is a little too slow for you.

Yup!

That is a big part of why I don't often enjoy reading.

It takes most authors a page to say something can could be said in a sentence.

I remember when Malcolm Gladwell became popular. Many people said that I should read his books.

I tried. They were very boring and repetitive to me.

Someone asked me what I thought of "Blink", "Outliers", and "The Tipping Point"..? All books that I tried to read but stopped due to frustration from lack of stimulation.

I remember saying -- "They would have been great if they were 5 page essays".

I honestly feel like the information in those books could have been better presented if they were written as 5 page essays. But, of course, you can't make any money publishing 5 page essays!

(08-18-2014 04:03 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  And while some books are enjoyable, and some very few are great, the vast majority is terribly overrated, including many of the most famous and highly regarded ones.

I agree.

That said, I could really see myself getting into books as I get older.

Right now, I am having too much fun experiencing the world first hand.

Eventually, I will compare my experience with the experience of other men.

Right now, I feel like my life is a living book and I am the author.

Post: #41

If you enjoy reading, then do it. Novels can introduce you to different ideas, different modes of thought, different experiences. I'll never live in the Yukon during the Gold rush, so Jack London told me something I'll never know about. I just read several memoirs of Gulf War II from soldiers and journalists on the ground because I'll never experience that either. But...

(08-14-2014 01:15 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  I have no desire to read any of these books!

...reminds me of a book I read once.

Quote:There are nowadays professors of philosophy, but not philosophers. Yet it is admirable to profess because it was once admirable to live. To be a philosopher is not merely to have subtle thoughts, nor even to found a school, but so to love wisdom as to live according to its dictates, a life of simplicity, independence, magnanimity, and trust. It is to solve some of the problems of life, not only theoretically, but practically. The success of great scholars and thinkers is commonly a courtier-like success, not kingly, not manly. They make shift to live merely by conformity, practically as their fathers did, and are in no sense the progenitors of a noble race of men.

Thoreau's words always stuck with me. The first line is something I remind myself of all the time. Or you could go Tom Waits:

Quote:Don't let nobody go there for you
Don't be satisfied with a second-hand life
Don't let nobody stifle or bore you
Handle your troubles or take on your strife
Don't let nobody live your life for you
Not your friends, not your kids, no not even your wife
If you want to know where the rainbow ends
It's you who've got to go there and find it my friend

I used to love reading books. I also deeply regret spending my 20s and 30s in all kinds of misguided pursuits. These days, I don't feel bad about dumping a book 20 pages in. Life is too short for slogging through boring literature in pursuit of some abstract truth.

Post: #42

If you don't want to read entire books, this might be for you:

Post: #43

(08-18-2014 04:03 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  Gio, honestly, I wouldn't change a thing if I were you.

You don't have a "major weakness"... your thinking and apprehension of the world is of an exceptionally high quality -- about as high as it gets. You have nothing to worry about.

You have the heart and mind of a poet, and prose is a little too slow for you.

And while some books are enjoyable, and some very few are great, the vast majority is terribly overrated, including many of the most famous and highly regarded ones.

"A conversation with a wise man on demand" -- it's rarely that because almost all writers are not wise men. It is a common mistake to think that writers have some special knowledge or insight about the world. Very often it's the exact opposite -- they are the ones who know least. This is an important point, and I may do a longer post about it some day.

Only pick up book reading some idle day if you're in the mood for it. It might be a fine thing for you to do in your sixties, for example.

"I decided to read a few books in my sixties..." -- that has a very seemly ring to it.

Then in your seventies you start watching movies and that blows away all the books you've read in your sixties...

Lizard is warming up.

I think for example Taleb is overrated. He has some catchy phrases but that´s all. I mean the black swan thing. Do people really don´t know that "shit happens" and things are mostly unforseeable? Did they found it out only with the help from Taleb?

"Living" in the sense of being full of life and reading at the same time is difficult in my opinion. "Living" is an archaic feeling where you are full of emotions. Laughing crying dancing are easily done. But after reading some stuff one gets so disconnected with life and with ones own body it becomes difficult to find the feeling of living again.

Post: #44

Breakthroughs often come from something you have thought of combined with something someone else has thought to form One Great Idea. Linking your half of a good idea with someone else's half of a great idea can meld into something fascinating.

Exposing yourself to different ideas is good. It allows you to have more to connect within your mind to come up with something interesting and novel.

A brain can atrophy. Have you ever met someone who does nothing besides work and watch stupid videos on Youtube; who does nothing to challenge his mind in any way? If you point out something insightful they look at you like you're a different species.

Post: #45

Anyone tried using Nootropics like Piracetam, Adrafinil or Noopept to train their mind?

Post: #46

I think what also plays a role is whether or not you are truly pushing your mind, like what someone does in the gym to get stronger

Post: #47

Good stuff Giovonny. When I was first getting to know one of my really good friends, I asked if he'd read this certain book (can't remember now). He said, "just for future reference, I've never read a book in my life, so no need to ask that again."

This is a guy who recalls things better than almost anyone I know. For this reason, he also has common sense, as common knowledge about things (people places situations) are right at the tip of his memory. He's a natural.

For this reason, he also has no knowledge of books (obviously) or any depth of knowledge outside his own experiences. Also, despite his high sense of empathy, it's fairly limited to his cultural experiences ("normal" midwest life). Incidentally, studies show reading fiction books increases people's ability to empathize with others.

All that said, reading or not reading books doesn't make you a better or worse person or more or less successful, necessarily, so congrats if you don't read and are naturally good at life. I'm not trying to patronize either. Part of me is even envious of that.

(08-14-2014 01:15 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  Generally, I don't want to know the perspective of another man before I first form my own perspective.

Your own perspective is already formed based on others to some degree. Your genetics and the way you were formed a incredibly impactful on how you process your experiences. If you were born to a couple Somali pirates, or even if you kidnapped at the age of 2 by Somali pirates, you're brain would process experiences differently.

(08-14-2014 01:15 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  Generally, I don't like to form opinions, perspectives, and mindsets based on the experiences and views of other people.

You won't form opinions and perspectives based on the experiences and views because you read a book...unless you do the same with all your other inputs (RVF, TV, news, billboards, friends, acquaintances, etc).

(08-14-2014 01:15 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  I want to write my own verse before I study the verse of anyone else.

Not a bad way of going about things. Too many people study others' stories, then (years later, maybe) write their own. So do it. Write a verse, then study someone else's.

In regards to the wikipedia article you "love reading", presumably in place of books, all I can say is it's not the same. I'd say this is my primary response to your post. I love reading RoK and RVF. I love reading internet articles. I love reading summaries of books. But they're nowhere near the same as reading a real book...or even skimming a real book.

Post: #48

(08-19-2014 12:31 PM)Bill Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 04:03 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  Gio, honestly, I wouldn't change a thing if I were you.

You don't have a "major weakness"... your thinking and apprehension of the world is of an exceptionally high quality -- about as high as it gets. You have nothing to worry about.

You have the heart and mind of a poet, and prose is a little too slow for you.

And while some books are enjoyable, and some very few are great, the vast majority is terribly overrated, including many of the most famous and highly regarded ones.

"A conversation with a wise man on demand" -- it's rarely that because almost all writers are not wise men. It is a common mistake to think that writers have some special knowledge or insight about the world. Very often it's the exact opposite -- they are the ones who know least. This is an important point, and I may do a longer post about it some day.

Only pick up book reading some idle day if you're in the mood for it. It might be a fine thing for you to do in your sixties, for example.

"I decided to read a few books in my sixties..." -- that has a very seemly ring to it.

Then in your seventies you start watching movies and that blows away all the books you've read in your sixties...

Lizard is warming up.

I think for example Taleb is overrated. He has some catchy phrases but that´s all. I mean the black swan thing. Do people really don´t know that "shit happens" and things are mostly unforseeable? Did they found it out only with the help from Taleb?

"Living" in the sense of being full of life and reading at the same time is difficult in my opinion. "Living" is an archaic feeling where you are full of emotions. Laughing crying dancing are easily done. But after reading some stuff one gets so disconnected with life and with ones own body it becomes difficult to find the feeling of living again.

(This isn't a discussion on Taleb, so I'll leave this as a side note: His ideas cannot be distilled down to "shit happens" and "things are mostly unforeseeable". This is more apparent if you work through his technical writing and the works of a guy he's partnered with on occasion - Yaneer Bar-Yam, a physicist studying complexity. We can agree to disagree though.)

I agree with your second thought. I'm almost completely weighted towards being disconnected from life and body in favor of introspection and abstract thought. It's a disposition that my parents tell me I've had since I was very young (i.e. three to five years old). I wonder if it's possible to learn how to live in the moment.

Post: #49

(08-26-2014 10:26 PM)Peregrine Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 12:31 PM)Bill Wrote:  

(08-18-2014 04:03 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  Gio, honestly, I wouldn't change a thing if I were you.

You don't have a "major weakness"... your thinking and apprehension of the world is of an exceptionally high quality -- about as high as it gets. You have nothing to worry about.

You have the heart and mind of a poet, and prose is a little too slow for you.

And while some books are enjoyable, and some very few are great, the vast majority is terribly overrated, including many of the most famous and highly regarded ones.

"A conversation with a wise man on demand" -- it's rarely that because almost all writers are not wise men. It is a common mistake to think that writers have some special knowledge or insight about the world. Very often it's the exact opposite -- they are the ones who know least. This is an important point, and I may do a longer post about it some day.

Only pick up book reading some idle day if you're in the mood for it. It might be a fine thing for you to do in your sixties, for example.

"I decided to read a few books in my sixties..." -- that has a very seemly ring to it.

Then in your seventies you start watching movies and that blows away all the books you've read in your sixties...

Lizard is warming up.

I think for example Taleb is overrated. He has some catchy phrases but that´s all. I mean the black swan thing. Do people really don´t know that "shit happens" and things are mostly unforseeable? Did they found it out only with the help from Taleb?

"Living" in the sense of being full of life and reading at the same time is difficult in my opinion. "Living" is an archaic feeling where you are full of emotions. Laughing crying dancing are easily done. But after reading some stuff one gets so disconnected with life and with ones own body it becomes difficult to find the feeling of living again.

(This isn't a discussion on Taleb, so I'll leave this as a side note: His ideas cannot be distilled down to "shit happens" and "things are mostly unforeseeable". This is more apparent if you work through his technical writing and the works of a guy he's partnered with on occasion - Yaneer Bar-Yam, a physicist studying complexity. We can agree to disagree though.)

I agree with your second thought. I'm almost completely weighted towards being disconnected from life and body in favor of introspection and abstract thought. It's a disposition that my parents tell me I've had since I was very young (i.e. three to five years old). I wonder if it's possible to learn how to live in the moment.

I think it´s possible. One way could be to change the environment. Many people from third world countries are living more in the moment without much reflection. When you are dealing with them you probably adapt to their way of life. But it´s also a risky business.

This reminds me of Darwin who was a scientist who lead a rather calm life, then when he started his journey on the ship he was in an adventure. He was lucky that it was even beneficial for his health because of the the dynamic lifestyle on the ship.

I think talking, singing, dancing and sports are things which brings one into that direction. But this comes with a price you lose other things while doing these things.