Post: #626

Disappearance at Devil's Rock by Paul Tremblay-

I read his last book before this one, called A Head Full of Ghosts- that was a great story. I don't know if I'd really call his stuff "horror" even though it deals with typically horror themes. I'd recommend Head Full of Ghosts to everyone though.

Devil's Rock- that's another "story" entirely. Its well written, but the plot just goes nowhere and has such a lame wet fart of an ending. Trying not to spoil anybody who may be thinking of reading it, but if you've ever seen the horror movie "Lake Mungo", then trust me, you've already read Disappearance at Devil's Rock.

Its a shame too, that movie is great drama/horror. This book, honestly, I almost feel was directly stolen from the movie.

I'm back to reading Joe Lansdale for a while now I think- got to talk to him at a book signing a week ago and he said there will be more western/dramas involving Nat Love to come in the future. Think I'll re-read Paradise Sky- great great story for anybody into that genre.

Post: #627

"The History of the Byzantine Empire" by Charles Oman.

References to this book have been making the rounds lately, so I read it. It's a buck or so on Kindle, so why not.

The book covers the entire span of Constantinople from Constantine's founding to the Ottoman conquest, with a little history of pre-Constantinian ur-Byzantium to give context. So it doesn't go into great depth anywhere, but is a great introduction to that portion of European history if (like me) it's a blank spot on the map of your general historical knowledge. About all I knew going in was the fundamentals (founded by Constantine, conquered by Turks, a few episodes and personages in between) and a bit about its role in the Crusades from Mackay's "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds".

As a broad overview, it's well-written and keeps up a consistently fast pace through a milennium-and-a-half of history. Read it in about 5 hours. Again, it's not a very deep history, but that's not its purpose or value.

As for the content, I went in thinking of Byzantium/Constantinople as a gloomy, superstition-plagued den of bureaucratic and theological intrigue. Not far off the mark. By the end the incessant slitting of noses, cutting out of tongues, and putting out of eyes made me deeply loathe the place. Worse, it was hard to have respect for a civilization that was perpetually on the verge of collapse from sabotaging itself only to recover at the last second just enough to stave off the decline for another generation or two. Rome in contrast seems to have experienced a long, gradual rise followed by a meteoric ascent and a rather abrupt decline to oblivion, versus Constantinople starting kinda high (qualified because it was the artificial result of Constantine cannibalizing the best of his entire empire to build his New Rome) and then experiencing an inexorable decline briefly reversed or halted at intervals by less and less effective interventions by less and less great leaders. By the end, like Oman, I felt no sympathy for the rump state that was conquered. There really was nothing left by then of whatever greatness it once possessed.

The reason it's been getting quoted lately is Oman's take on the reasons for the decline and/or the lessons one can draw from Byzantine experience. The oft-cited reference is to Valens' early and ill-considered choice to allow the Goths refuge in the Empire (and then to betray them, as Eastern Emperors were in the habit of doing). But there are less-cited lessons in the same vein. Over the centuries, Byzantium's defense relied increasingly on foreign auxiliaries and mercenaries rather than the native-born Greeks. This hints at the decadence of the empire that over time fewer of its own native populace were willing or able to defend it or saw value in the martial virtues, and also of the foolishness of the leaders that they hired troops whose loyalty depended on pay rather than patriotism (which bit several of them in the ass at key moments in history). The leaders often seemed contemptuous of and disconnected from their subjects, and there really doesn't seem to be (in Oman's telling of it) much spirit of patriotism and national identity in the empire at all - more a fatalism and acquiescence among the provincials to their rule by Constantinople. It was an empire that nobody seemed to believe in beyond the real estate involved.

Post: #628

"The Psychology of Revolutions" by Gustave le Bon.

Discovered le Bon from discussions here about "The Crowd". Both excellent and insightful books. "TPoR" reviews the French Revolution and the psychology behind it happening and behind how it unfolded. Interesting lessons (especially at the end in his conclusions section) applicable to current politics despite having been written just over a century ago. Especially liked the prediction (this circa 1910) that a war was looming in Europe, and it would be over access to colonies and resources, and over growing populations driving a need for more farmland - in other words, predicting WWI as "a war of colonial redistribution" (as it was described in one of my college courses) and WWII as motivated by the desire for Lebensraum.

The most pertinent lessons, though, are in how the French Revolution ended up forgetting about "Fraternite" and "Liberte" while focusing on the more readily achieved (by leveling everyone down) "Egalite". This eventually spawned socialism, which he saw at the time of writing as destroying the social cohesion of France over the preceding century in an ever-escalating orgy of partisan and class hatred.

Post: #629

(11-28-2016 10:10 PM)therealpoder Wrote:  Adios America: The Left's Plan to Turn America Into a Third World Hellhole by Ann Coulter

I thought this was a excellent book. Coulter argues against immigration, both legal and illegal, due to cultural reasons. Her basic argue is that immigrants that are coming to the US are not from the west, but from poor third world countries, and they are importing their bad habits and leftists beliefs in the form of voting for the Democrats. She does note how immigrants are harming the environment, reduce workers wages and displace workers but her argument primarily rest on culture. She writes in a blunt, comedic style so this is an enjoyable read.

To any Trump fans/haters, this should be a must-read. Read it and hear the Mexican-poured concrete foundations of the Trump Wall. This book puts deeply documented realities into the regular-speak for us simpletons:

90 pages of smaller print source annotations
against
280 pages of large print content text.

Say what you want about Female Typists, etc., but:

1. Highly Recommend this book to anyone that has misgivings/gut instincts that our current immigration system is ..... curious.

2. WBLSPPD. Would Band Like Steel Post Pile Driver.

Post: #630

Victory Secrets of Attila the Hun by Wess Roberts, Ph.D. (1993). It provides some historical anecdotes from Attila's invasion of the decaying Roman Empire. Then, it follows each anecdote with a mock speech told from the perspective of Attila. The speeches are filled with lessons aimed at the aspiring businessman and leader.



The book was pretty popular in the early 1990s. Pat Riley, former coach of the LA Lakers, was even a big fan. It has some great quotes:

“Warriors with high potential turn down assignments that don’t offer an opportunity for them to learn and grow.”

“A warrior with high potential is quick to leave a poorly led tribe.”

“A chieftain doesn’t waste time by trying to learn more lessons from an experience than it contains.”

Unfortunately, these quotes were overshadowed for me by the tinges of Cultural Marxism. For example, he portrays Attila as a wise, kind and strong leader - this contradicts the well-documented history of the leader's barbarism (skinning people alive, for example). Also, it portrays the Roman as brutal and incompetent - if they were so incompetent, how did they conquer the world? It's clear that Roberts was schooled in the anti-West propaganda that has infiltrated our colleges.

The book is a good read for the quotes; but I disliked the revisionist view of history.

Post: #631

Griffinmill had this as a stand alone thread in EE. Hope he doesn't mind me placing it here so it doesn't get lost. With due respect to mods' rules.

(03-26-2017 10:47 AM)griffinmill Wrote:  

I've just finished a new book called The Campus Rape Frenzy which is a horrifying look at the way university campuses in the United States have rode roughshod over due process to find young men guilty of rape.

Obama shares a lot of the blame for this hysteria. It was his administration that distributed the Dear Colleague letter which promoted the idea of widespread campus sexual assault, and pressed universities to tackle this "problem". The universities duly kicked into overdrive lest they face a Title IX lawsuit by a "victim" who maintains their cases wasn't dealt with properly.

Most of the stories share a similar theme: a girl gets drunk, has sex, regrets it for whatever reason, and is then encouraged to believe that what happened to her was rape. Some of the stories are ridiculous. Like the girl who was convinced by a radical feminist professor that it was actually sexual assault when she was touched in bed the next morning by the man she had slept with the night before.

Yes, really.

It's an excellent way for a girl to get revenge on a boy who didn't return her call. His academic career will be pretty much ruined by an allegation, not to mention his life prospects in general. The panel of adjudicators only need to "determine" it was at least 51% likely the "victim" is telling the truth, and some campuses even put the burden of proof on him! He needs to prove she gave affirmative consent, and short of filming the encounter, that is an impossibility.

Another startling find in the book is the amount of exculpatory evidence (for example, the "victim" texting the boy for weeks, months after the alleged assault) that is not even considered by a panel of nearly all-female adjudicators. They are simply not interested in most of the evidence that could prove his innocence.

Some excellent takeaways from the book:

If campus sexual assault is so pervasive and widespread, why wasn't Obama urging the incidents of criminal sexual behaviour be handed over to the proper authorities? Time and again the book details how the universities want to handle this in-house, and not involve the police. If 1-in-5 women were being murdered on campus, would the police and Obama trust a university panel of adjudicators to handle this widespread crime epidemic on their own, and simply expel the murderer?

Many of the cases detailed in the book show how the women was drunk at the time of the rape. Any attempts to curtail a woman's binge drinking and encourage sensible alcoholic consumption is labelled "blaming the victim". The night of sex usually involves two drunk parties, and since the policies are gender neutral, the boy could allege she raped him. In essence, and in the eyes of the law, they raped each other.

All in all, this great book exposes a very damaging culture of victimhood that has grown up on university campuses for gradual roll-out across the world. Women are encouraged to get blind drunk and be wildly promiscuous, and if they feel yucky after they are then encouraged to assume the role of a weeping child without agency, which massages a woman's primal need for attention and sympathy, and also, crucially, crosses this one sexual encounter off her lifetime cock carousel count.

Post: #632

"Corrosion"/"The Corroding Empire" by Johan Kalsi/Harry Seldon/????

The source of some mirth over the past couple of weeks at the expense of the execrable John Scalzi, it's actually quite good. It probably could have benefited from a clearer presentation of the framing device - you're left to figure that out on your own, which isn't difficult but isn't as satisfying as knowing what was intended and having a "path" through the fictional terrain to understand how it all fits together and where it's going.

The vignettes themselves are well-written and in several cases brilliant. Each is very different in tone and subject matter and writing style, so you sense the pseudonym covers the contributions of several writers - almost like Black Mirror, a common general premise tying together extremely diverse stories. The world-building is pretty well done - like all far-future stories there's a bit more suspension of disbelief required than usual (for example, the usual conceit that thousands of years from now people will not be as incomprehensible to us as we would be to a time-traveling Sumerian), but starting from that conceit the names, culture, etc. change quite a bit over the course of time.

There are a number of other identifiable influences, from to Asimov to zombies. Having just re-read Foundation last fall, I can see the intentional resemblance there. But Corrosion is actually more interesting - I read it straight through in a couple hours, but I spent a full week suffering my way through Asimov's boring 'classic'.

Post: #633

The Gene, by Siddhartha Mukherjee

Even if you retain only a quarter of the information in this book, it is well worth your time. While I find gene therapy, treatment, medicine, etc. interesting, I am by no means any sort of expert in science, but I was able to follow all the discussion here easily.

Mukherjee includes numerous real life examples of individuals suffering from diseases that stem from gene mutation that allow us to relate to the potential impact of gene treatment and provides emotional investment in the narrative for the reader. For those of you on the fence about stem cell research, please note that Mukherjee is sensitive to differing opinions and does not try to make dissenters feel stupid. Also, the author handles the material with great objectivity and the moral implications of the science are also covered in careful detail.

Post: #634

Hi all,
I am just about to finish "The Exit" by Helen Fitzgerald.

Post: #635

How to Get Filthy Rich in Rising Asia by Mohsin Hamid

Quick read, interesting story set in what is probably a large city in Pakistan, although not it's not clear. Recommended.

Post: #636

I just finished reading Once Upon A Time In Russia by Ben Mezrich.

I was travelling while I read the book, and it's a good sort of book for that, the chapters are short and it's written in a way that makes the book easy to put down and pick back up again.

The book is a story about the rise of oligarchs in Russia during and after the perestroika era, particulary concentrating on Boris Berezovsky. It was interesting to read about the conditions and the people who shaped Russia and made it what it is today. The ruthlessness of these men is chilling and the amount of money they dealt with is mindblowing. Berezovsky made a lot of money from selling cars and parlayed that into having control of the aluminium industry and the Russian media as well as getting boat loads of money from Roman Ambrimovich who owned most of the Russian oil industry (and needed Berezovsky's protection).

It was interesting to read about Alexander Litvinenko (the Russian who was poisoned with Polonium) who was Berezovsy's right hand man and who had followed him into exile in the UK.

Another interesting aspect to the book is that it explains how Putin, a nondescript ex-KGB agent ascended to power and eventually turned on the oligarchs who had propelled him there in the first place. Despite all of his money, Berezovsky's hubris eventually led him in a collision course with Putin, and to his eventual demise. Putin is a tough nut.

All in all, I'd recommend this book, it's easy to read, the subject matter is very pertinent to what's going on in the world, and it showed a side of Russia that most people don't really think a lot about.

Post: #637

Islam Book Reviews

During the past month, I decided to read books about Islam. I hardly knew anything about the religion.

I remembering seeing a thread title saying that "Islam Is Worst Than Communism" or something along those lines and thought that it went overboard with the title. However, after reading a few books and watching dozens of youtube videos, that title was 100%. Islam is evil

Factual Persuasion by Bill Warner

This book is designed to teach you how to talk to people you know about Islam and explain to them why it is bad. It is a short book and can be read in an hour. Since 90% of people know little to nothing about Islam, if you read the Qu’ran can and cite some of its most egregious verses and ask them to defend such statements, you are already equipped to win a debate. This is a useful book to use to speak to your friends and close family members as to why Islam is bad. I suspect a lot of people already think that something is off about Islam due to constant terrorist attacks and lack of human rights in Muslim majority countries. So after a brief discussion, you can convince most people……..or they will stick their fingers in their ears and call you an Islamophobe. This book can be read in an hour or so.

Sharia Law for Non-Muslims by Bill Warner

This book is a brief guide to aspects of Sharia Law such as women’s rights, the family, family, jihad, kafirs and dhimmi. If you are looking for a comprehensive guide to sharia law this is not the book for you. You may want to purchase Reliance of the Traveler (I haven’t bought it yet). But if you want a brief guide to some of the topics of sharia law that have relevance to non-Muslims, this is a solid book to read. Again, this is a book that can be read in an hour or so.

The Truth About Muhammad by Robert Spencer

In order to provide insight into Islam and the actions of many of Islam’s controversial followers (i.e. terrorists), Spencer writes to book to shed life on the life of Muhammad by using the Qu’ran, the Sunah, and other respected biographers to explain his life. I thought the book was excellent. From this book you learn that Muhammad was a tyrant and warlord. Since Muslims view Muhammad as a perfect model of conduct, you can see why this is problematic. The research of the book is incredible. While many of Richard Spencer’s critics dismiss him as being an Islamophobe who knows nothing about Islam, the sources he cites shows that he knows more about Islam than 99.9% of people.

They Must Be Stopped By Brigitte Gabriel

This would be a book I would recommend to someone if they wanted to know why Islam is a threat to the west. Brigitte Gabriel lived in Lebanon while her country was being taken over by the Muslim so it is difficult to dismiss her as an Islamophobe, although, many people do anyway/ It briefly describes Islamic terror from the time of Muhammad to now, argues that what is considered “radical” Islam is simply Muslims actually following what Islam teaches, she points out how the goal of Islam is to have everyone in the world under Islamic rule, points out how Islam is making inroad into Europe (the book was written in 2008), how America is being Islamized through political correctness and by gradually granting Muslims all of their demands. She concludes the book by writing how Islam can be stopped, at least on the grassroots level in America.


Islam and Terrorism by Mark Gabriel

This also is a great book if you want to answer the questions “Why do they hate us?” and “What do they want?” He answers the question the same as Brigitte Gabriel, Muslim fundamentalists hate you because you are not Muslim and they want to recreate the Caliphate having everyone ruled under Sharia law. This book mentions the calls for jihad in the Qu’ran and the Sunah and how major Islamic scholar have interpreted these calls for jihad. This book also mentions the Three Stages of Jihad as stated in this video:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ERou_Q5l9Gw

This too is a book I would highly recommend.

Islam: Religion of Bigots by Robert Spencer

This is a pamphlet that can be downloaded on his website. This pamphlet focuses on how non Muslim are treated in Muslim countries and the answer is: not well. He mentions the persecution of non Muslims, how the major theoreticians of Islam support it and quotes the Qu’ranic support for their positions. Good pamphlet.

The Violent Oppression of Women in Islam by Robert Spencer and Phyllis Chesler

This also is a pamphlet that can be downloaded on Robert Spencer’s website. This pamphlet explains how women are treated in Muslim countries and mentions female genital mutilation, wife beating, easy divorce and polygamy for men, child marriage, rape, etc. Since Spencer and Chesler are just laying out facts and how the Qu’ran and Muslim authorities support this, there is not much to dispute.

Post: #638

Read a few books recently. Will be working my way through them.



Interesting ride, this was, and well worth a read for those of us who want a more big-picture view of where science is/was 20 years ago and where it is seen as going.

Consilience, in essence, is about the slow reduction of all branches of knowledge back to a single whole which can be explained by simple principles. In particular, it involves drawing religion, ethics, the madness of postmodernist social science, the arts, and literature back in the direction of biology and chemistry. Wilson (whose chief contribution to science was the discovery that ants use pheromones to communicate) proposes this will eventually happen by the mechanism of slow, plodding, step-by-step isolation of factors affecting complex biological systems via experimentation. As these factors are isolated, more and more consilient -- i.e. applying across several disciplines -- principles will be discovered. Eventually, in the distant future, the biological/genetic basis for the arts and literature if not religion (as opposed to the existence of God) will be winnowed out as well, chiefly as we better come to understand how genes, epigenetic rules, and environment interact.

Wilson does not say this will be easy or done anytime soon, necessarily. He was overly hopeful given the book dates from 20 years ago and gene therapy was first starting to kick off. He best expresses the scientific process and how he sees consilience advancing in an arresting metaphor.

The physical world, and biological human nature, is the Minotaur's labyrinth. Close to the entrance to the labyrinth are things such as Newtonian physics, basic biology, and so forth. The scientist is Theseus armed with Ariadne's thread: setting out from those fundamental building blocks of science, Theseus is free to walk step by step into the labyrinth, probing deeper and deeper into the maze, with the thread showing him where he has come from. If he wanders up a blind alley or so, he can work his way back to the last crossroads he encountered and try another route. By this method, Theseus can work his way right into the centre of the maze, and then walk out again by following the thread back through the maze, seeing clearly the path that led him there right back to the first fundamentals near the entrance to the labyrinth. It is all the one structure, all accessible from the one entrance point, from the wider principles that underly all the disciplines, reflecting in a way the dream of the Theory Of Everything - uniting disparate bodies of knowledge in one principle.

(In passing, this sparked off a similar insight from Edward de Bono on creativity: because we are obsessed with Greek forms of logic, all our great insights appear obvious in hindsight, just as the path back from the centre of the labyrinth appears obvious because you have Ariadne's thread to guide you back. It's the step forward, the step of insight, that is a hell of a lot harder. But de Bono also uses the idea of metaphor or recasting problems in other forms to find solutions as fuel for creativity, which itself is a consilient idea.)

The book delivers a head shot to postmodernism, which is a good thing. Postmodernism -- that all narratives are just constructs and we make up our own story and societal rules as we like -- is not reflected in scientific reality (similar to how gender has nothing to do with biological sex). Some of the organising rules of society appear to be prescribed by epigenetic rules that our species has followed since our brains developed a seemingly pointless excess of white matter. Human beings thrive under certain forms of government and wither under others; even some of our religious gestures, such as bowing, kneeling, etc., may well be reflections of epigenetic rules of how we defer to authority.

It also takes aim at most of the social sciences, putting pretty bluntly that most of the time they're driven by social agendae and what I'm adopting as an awesome put-down for many social sciences from here on in: "folk psychology".

In particular he pleasingly shreds Sigmund Freud with one observation: The Westermarck Effect militates heavily against if not outright disproves Freud's theory of the Oedipus complex, i.e. the idea that all children want to fuck their parents and we just repress this instinct, thus causing our fucked-up natures in adulthood. The Oedipal impulse is a load of shit, and always was. It was disproven by rational, analytical science: the Westermarck Effect is the scientific observation that children have an inborn and likely genetic aversion to mating with close biological relatives. Most of Freud's theories were based around his distorted idea of sexuality, and consilient, biological science destroys it. Pretty much all of the social sciences are similarly tainted, with the notable exception of the still-incomplete and malfunctioning school of economics, which fails mainly because it still refuses to engage with the biological and molecular chemistry worlds on how interactions happen.

He also covers the literature and arts. Art itself may well have biological or genetic expressions in that our instinct/desire/capacity for innovation could be an epigenetic rule we are predisposed to follow right out of our genes ... which the arts reflects. Metaphor, for example, is theorised as pleasurable to human beings (recall your Aristotlean Poetics - human beings according to the philosopher enjoy drama and metaphor because they enjoy understanding) because it engages several neural pathways, it grows the brain ... a useful evolutionary adaptation.

He eventually gets to religion and covers the subject at least with a bit more sensitivity than a blowhard like Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris does. Wilson doesn't believe in a personal God, but he pronounces pretty stridently that you don't toss out religion casually. It does fill some basic and essential needs in humanity, needs that science simply does not meet, and much investigation of religion is required to see what the biological or genetic basis for it is.

It's worth a read I think for any of the atheists or the agnostics here, and I think for those who believe in God you'll not find anything objectionable here. Wilson doesn't quite replace God with science, though I think his faith in science's ability to work everything else is amusingly religious in tone. And it is worth the read if only for the sense of optimism it gives you. It's an overview of the labyrinth, which is always a useful thing.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #639

"Master and Commander" - Patrick O'Brian

I read this series about ten years ago and liked it then and even more now as I have caught more of what is going on. It takes place during the Napoleonic war where the two main characters is a British Naval Captain(Jack Aubrey) and his friend who happens to be a physician(Steven Maturin) that he offers the warrant of Ship Surgeon aboard his vessel, sail in the Mediterranean sea. While there is plenty adventure at sea, there is equally enough turmoil on land as Jack tends to get into a lot of trouble ashore either with his dick, ego, or pocket book. It is a difficult read given the advanced vocabulary as well as the subtle writing style of Mr. O'Brian, but entertaining nevertheless for those who want to read an adventure at sea.

Post: #640

"The Way of Men". Second reading, and it holds up well.

It's not quite as rich as "The True Believer", for example, but it's in the same rare category: books filled with distilled insights into their subject, whose authors present those insights succinctly and without apology.

Part of what I like is that quite a few of his observations dovetail with and expand on things I've noticed over the years: the stupidity of popular culture, the emptiness of sports fandom, the absurdity of spectator sports, etc. Like Hoffer's book, reading "The Way of Men" has what I imagine is the 'feel' of the speech Galt gives to the various strikers in "Atlas Shrugged": a mix of things you already know but never noticed consciously or put together coherently, and things that in hindsight seem like simple truths you've always known despite being perfectly aware you didn't.

Contrast this with the vast number of political and sociological books, where you're lucky to find a single nugget of wisdom or truth among all the ghost-written self-fluffery and tedious agenda-pushing and risible narrative-maintenance. (I have a whole shelf of those, 90% of which are unfinished and unreadable.)

Other books I'd put in that rare category: "The Road to Serfdom", "The Closing of the American Mind", "The Crowd", "The Prince", and "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds".

Post: #641

I promised myself that A Guide to Rational Living would be the last self-help book I read since most self-help books today suck, but a friend of mine recently suggested I read Who Moved My Cheese? and I'm happy I did. It's a short, quick read, but - and I don't use this word lightly, especially when it comes to "motivational" or self-help books - it was surprisingly profound. The message isn't anything new; in fact, it's been done to death in most self-help books, but the execution of the story is what makes it unique I think. We can all relate to the characters, especially Hem. Highly recommended book.

Post: #642

"Bullshit" by Harry Frankfurt.

Super short book - probably between 30-35 full size pages. Read the entire thing before my tea got cold at Barnes and Noble.

The purpose of the book was to investigate the following:

1. What is bullshit?
2. What is the purpose of bullshit?
3. How is bullshitting different than lying?
4. Why is there so much bullshit in the world? (I did not feel like this was actually answered by the author aside from two sloppy paragraphs on the last page).

The first third of the book defined what "bullshit" is. I felt this part was useless and very boring, nothing more than over-educated Harvard professor using fancy five syllable words and basking in the freedom to use a curse word.

The rest of the book I thought was pretty interesting. Although it was somewhat difficult to follow at points, the author used several examples to differentiate the value of lying vs. bullshitting.

In short, a liar knows what the truth is, and deliberately decieves the audience in order to avoid the consequences of the truth. By doing so, the author argues that the liar actually respects the importance and power that the truth holds.

What a bullshitter says is neither truth nor falsehood. The bullshitter does not respect the truth, and does not care about the accuracy of his statement. His only concern is of his own image, and deceiving the audience as to who he is or what his thought processes actually are.

Although it is widely accepted that bullshitting is not as bad as lying, the author argues that the deceit of the bullshitter can be just as harmful, or in some cases more harmful, than the deceit of cold-blooded liar.

Overall: Read the first few pages, scan past the drawn out definition section, and get to the good stuff on page ~25 and beyond. It's an interesting view and argument, and provides some insight as to why people run their mouth so much when they are not qualified to.

Post: #643

This was a decent dash of cold water after Consilience's optimism about our genetic future.

I have always liked Michael Crichton's books, even if his style is predictable: he picks a subject of public hysteria and constructs a novel around it, with one put-upon figure as the obvious protagonist and kicking the antagonists in the balls by the end. This one is a lot less focused than, say, Jurassic Park or Rising Sun, and it suffers for readability as a result.

Next is a bit odd. Honestly the best part of the book is the Author's Notes at the end, which sum up the salient issues of genetic mutation. An aspect of his biggest warning bell, the patenting of human genes, has at least been heeded: Next was written in 2006 and the US Supreme Court ruled patenting human genes unlawful in 2013. This is significant since it means you can't patent diabetes, or whatever other disease you might pick, and thereby prevent the cure being created...though you can patent a gene that you alter somewhat, which is still a bit dubious to my mind.

But the other elements of his warnings don't appear to have been heeded. In particular, the Bayh-Dole Act is still in effect, of which he says this:

Quote:In 1980, Congress decided that the discoveries made within universities were not being made widely available, to benefit the public. To move things along, it passed a law permitting university researchers to sell their discoveries for their own profit, even when that research had been funded by taxpayer money.

As a result of this legislation, most science professors now have corporate ties—either to companies they have started or to other biotech companies. Thirty years ago, there was a distinct difference in approach between university research and that of private industry. Today the distinction is blurred, or absent. Thirty years ago, disinterested scientists were available to discuss any subject affecting the public. Now, scientists have personal interests that influence their judgment.

Academic institutions have changed in unexpected ways: The original Bayh-Dole legislation recognized that universities were not commercial entities, and encouraged them to make their research available to organizations that were. But today, universities attempt to maximize profits by conducting more and more commercial work themselves, thus making their products more valuable to them when they are finally licensed. For example, if universities think they have a new drug, they will do the FDA testing themselves, and so on. Thus Bayh-Dole has, paradoxically, increased the commercial focus of the university. Many observers judge the effect of this legislation to be corrupting and destructive to universities as institutions of learning.

Bayh-Dole was always of uncertain benefit to the American taxpayers, who became, through their government, uniquely generous investors. Taxpayers finance research, but when it bears fruit, the researchers sell it for their own institutional and personal gain, after which the drug is sold back to the taxpayers. Consumers thus pay top dollar for a drug they helped finance.

Ordinarily, when a venture capitalist invests in research, he or she expects a significant return on investment. The American taxpayer gets no return at all. The Bayh-Dole legislation anticipated that the public would receive a flood of marvelous life-saving therapies such that the investment strategy would be justified. But that hasn’t happened.

Instead, the drawbacks far outweigh the benefits. Secrecy now pervades research, and hampers medical progress. Universities that once provided a scholarly haven from the world are now commercialized—the haven is gone. Scientists who once felt a humanitarian calling have become businessmen concerned with profit and loss. The life of the mind is a notion as quaint as the whalebone corset.

All these trends were perfectly clear to observers fifteen years ago; no one paid much attention back then. Now the problems are becoming clear to everyone. A good first step toward restoring the balance between academia and corporations will be to repeal Bayh-Dole legislation.

All in all I mostly recommend the Author's Notes. Don't be afraid to skim-read the book, it's not that impressive even if it is thought-provoking.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #644

(04-28-2017 07:45 PM)Bluto Wrote:  "Master and Commander" - Patrick O'Brian

I read this series about ten years ago and liked it then and even more now as I have caught more of what is going on. It takes place during the Napoleonic war where the two main characters is a British Naval Captain(Jack Aubrey) and his friend who happens to be a physician(Steven Maturin) that he offers the warrant of Ship Surgeon aboard his vessel, sail in the Mediterranean sea. While there is plenty adventure at sea, there is equally enough turmoil on land as Jack tends to get into a lot of trouble ashore either with his dick, ego, or pocket book. It is a difficult read given the advanced vocabulary as well as the subtle writing style of Mr. O'Brian, but entertaining nevertheless for those who want to read an adventure at sea.

I have all 20 of these books in a box somewhere in a friends loft. Extraordinary series of books, amazingly well written and good fun.

Post: #645

A couple of books for you that I just got through.

The first one lasted me all ski season as I could only read about 3 pages at a time before I feel asleep at night, Diplomacy by Henry Kissenger.

The book itself was relatively interesting, covering pre Great War Europe and the balance of power systems that kept everyone from going to war all the time. It covers the politics leading up to ww1 and 2 and then switches tack to US and French involvement in Vietnam. Would be interesting to anyone wanting to know about historic Europe and why things are the way they are.

Interesting read but really really heavy going. I was relieved when it was all over.

After that, I wanted something lighter so I read a mountaineering classic, The White Spider by Heinrich Harrer.

Mr Harrer was one of the four climbers who made the first successful ascent of the north face of the eiger mountain in Switzerland.

If you want to know the challenge, Google some images of it, it's basically 4000m of sheer rock and when these guys successfully climbed it in 1938, there was a lot more ice on it than there is these days. They did it with minimum equipment and one slip more or less meant you died, especially as they were climbing blind effectively as they were finding the route also.

The book outlines,p not only their successful attempt but all of the tragedies of those early attempts as well as detailed reporting on the first 20 or so successful climbs.


Going heavy again with my next books, waiting for a copy of the gulag archiplegio to arrive and just downloaded Orwell's Road to Wigan Pier. Was recommended these two on a Jordan Peterson podcast I listened to recently about the evils of socialism.

Post: #646

Slightly off topic, but is there an audio version of How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World (Harry Browne)? I have the PDF but I'd prefer to listen to someone reading it.

Post: #647

Bushido: The Soul of Japan



A very interesting read for a +100 years old book. It is interesting how the author, who while japanese was very well versed in western clasical education, try to explain in an easy way the spirit of Bushido, and how his country was moving from a feudal state to a modern state, all while they try not to lose their spirit.

Post: #648

The Fifth Heart, Dan Simmons.


Dammit. That's basically the one-word review.

I've not read a lot of Dan Simmons' earlier stuff. It's meant to be impressive. That said, I have read his best: his first novel, Song of Kali, and his Hugo-winner, Hyperion, which you would be damned foolish to miss if you have any interest in the fantasy/sci-fi/horror ghetto.

But I have read his more recent books -- The Terror and now The Fifth Heart -- and I think I can confidently say his problem is that he wants to be more than he can ever be. He wants to make commercial literature that's more literate, even though he's not in the same genre/neighbourhood as pretentious fuckwits like Don DeLillo or Saul Bellow and he's never going to be. He also strikes me as a guy who researches way too much and then wants to show off too much of that research in his books. The Terror was basically meant to be like Moby Dick in execution: massive detail mixed with a horror story. It was a horrible slog to get through and massively overstuffed with detail, presumably for verisimilitude.

The Fifth Heart is a historical fiction novel which shoehorns Sherlock Holmes (among others) into the story. If you know your late 19th century Eastern-Seaboard US history, this book will probably be a delight. Everyone from Samuel Clemens to Teddy Roosevelt makes a cameo in this book, and it sheds some light on the early years of Grover Cleveland's Presidency as well as some interesting events like the Haymarket Massacre. If you have an interest in the bones of the early 20th century, this is a nice ride through Washington, New York, and Chicago of those periods. But it also isolates: if you're not American you probably won't get the full impact of some events or characters (I know I didn't - unless I'd been on this forum the presence and significance of Teddy Roosevelt in the story would have gone right over my head).

And it's cringe-y because the central conceit of the novel, which is featured right there on the front page and is meant to be its selling point, is the teaming up of Sherlock Holmes ... and the writer Henry James (who wrote really dense books like Portrait of a Lady, The Ambassadors, and The Turn of the Screw and who Simmons respects deeply when you read his website for a while). It looks like a silly combination on the front cover the book ('SHERLOCK HOLMES! HENRY JAMES! THE MYSTERY OF A CENTURY!') and for all Simmons' efforts I don't think it ever really escapes its silliness.

Simmons does try to inject some fourth-wall banging in order to make this work. As a subplot, he has Sherlock Holmes investigating the possibility that he might in fact be nothing more than a fictional character. I know this idea sounds really stupid on the page, and it's a credit to Simmons that he makes it seem not quite anywhere as stupid a proposition once we're in the book (William James' ideas on psychology and American Indian traditions of "singing" someone into existence come in to support this ludicrous idea; even Mark Twain does a major push on the fourth wall by mentioning that he is just a side character in this story being told by a not-very-talented author, haw haw haw) but I wonder whether Dan might've done better if he'd just dared to not even mention the fact of the historical anachronism and just fucking gone for it.

The problem is twofold when you've got Henry James wandering around after Sherlock Holmes, filling in as Holmes' Watson in what appears a bit of a historical blind spot about James' life. The problem is the same with all authors who try to portray a highly intelligent character: James is portrayed no more intelligent than Simmons, and James himself was unrelentingly a fucking bore, entirely cerebral, difficult to get an emotion out of (a pretended confrontation between him and fiery Teddy Roosevelt is ludicrously bad.)

There are still some signs of life in Simmons, though. He makes a pretty potent allegory of the anarchist threat of the time among German immigrants to the US and the threat posed by Islamic terrorists in our own day. He also points out - something I'll have to look into - that it's possible weapon manufacturers may have incited World War 1.

Basically, this book isn't what I have been hoping for from Simmons. It's better than the slog of The Terror, but it's just way too fascinated with the time period and contains way too much of Simmons being determined to show his work. Pass, unless you really like Sherlock Holmes stories.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #649

I ve just finished "Attract the right girl" by Bruce Bryans.
The book gave me perspectives on attracting the right girl instead of trying to force the ones with maybies. I agree 80 % with the book. The only thing that I don t agree is the writer describes an ideal woman with many qualities which are great BUT one of those qualities is "confidence"...I know many confident alpha females = The truth is it is not sexy at all.... but still it is a great book....

Post: #650

(05-11-2017 03:37 PM)Ski pro Wrote:  A couple of books for you that I just got through.

The first one lasted me all ski season

I have a feeling that you're into skiing.