The Book Thread

Salvador Dali - Diary of a Genius

Never ceases to amuse me - not his ideas themselves, but how everyone perceives and acts around him. I started reading it when I was 12 or so, but thought he was too crazy. Now I admire him, although not agree. Very pleasant and funny to read on a family picnic.
 
Now Reading: Dragonriders of Pern

Never read any of them before, and im not real sure if i like them or not, but i figure if another book i like references the land of Pern, then it cant be all bad.

I havent stopped reading them yet, so i guess it says something. What I do find I hate is that the books use terminology and reference things that completely boggle me, as it offers no explanation for itself. Perhaps i missed an earlier series where these things are explained in more detail.
 
tinkaa said:
Salvador Dali - Diary of a Genius

Never ceases to amuse me - not his ideas themselves, but how everyone perceives and acts around him. I started reading it when I was 12 or so, but thought he was too crazy. Now I admire him, although not agree. Very pleasant and funny to read on a family picnic.
Click to expand...

Tinkaa, Yes!

I am a huge Dali fan and this did not suprise me.
 
tinkaa said:
Nice thread!

Last read: Freud: Little Hans, The Wolf-man, Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality

Currently reading: Veber: Aesthetics.
Click to expand...

I have to say I find it very odd that people still take Freud seriously today (not saying you do) when in respectable scientific communities he is generally regarded as a quack. Freudian theories were not supported by any known fact even after a hundred years of research and thousands of books and journals published on the topic. This fault is not specific to Freud himself, as most leading psychologists of his era essentially used the same formula to characterize certain psychological behaviors - that is, observe a psychological behavior, think up a cause that *might* be true, and present this as fact just because it made sense and it was not scientifically refutable at the time. Some of them are still not refutable by nature, they are simply claims that are not falsifiable - this does not make them true, however. Freud's greatest ally is the fact that psychology is a very inexact "science" that in many respects is entirely unquantifiable, meaning that if I say "The reason why so many young women today adopt self-destructive lifestyles is because of the rising acceptance of homosexuality," you can never actually prove me wrong even though the concept is rediculous on its face.
It may not surprise you to know that I hold a certain contempt for psychology because it is a science that is so incredibly unscientific, with many well-regarded concepts being whatever idea is popular at the time (The American Association of Psychologists actually votes these things in, as opposed to proving them through exhaustive study). Thankfully, at least some of it is scientific, especially as we gain a greater physiological understanding of the human central nervous system, and where Freud CAN be disproven, he has been, over and over and over again.

Still, Freud is the biggest name in psychology, any layman, high school student who takes a psych class, or self-styled "home psychologist" (you know the type) who thinks "psychology!" thinks of Freud at some point. He is quoted often, and just as frequently his quotation is regarded as fact. Freud said it, so it must be true!
And yet how easily everyone forgets his more wild concepts, such as the gem where Freud believes all women suffer from penis envy, and the one about how schizophrenia is the result of narcissism and can be cured through repeated dialog with your shrink.

I suppose I am derailing my own thread, I just find it a little bit disgusting that someone who can be demonstrated as a fraud in so many ways still permeates our culture so much. We've all heard or even used the terms "Freudian slip" "penis envy" "Oedipus Complex" and "anal retentive", just to name the references that first come to mind. I guess because they're all either sexual or scatological, so we we can't resist using them.

Oh well. I believe we all live in a state of perpetual ignorance of a great many things, for many this is just another one of them.

Just to be on-topic, I'm currently working on Frank Herbert's "The White Plague," and must admit I am making slow progress because the book plods along with some fairly slow pacing.
 
Last edited:
Currently Reading:
Jacqueline Carey - 'Kushiel's Avatar' (book 3)
Dr. Seuss - 'Hop On Pop' & 'Mr. Brown Can Moo. Can You?' (Repeatedly... I have a 2yr-old... heheheh)

Last Read:
Jacqueline Carey - 'Kushiel's Chosen' (book 2)
Jacqueline Carey - 'Kushiel's Dart' (book 1)
Anne McCaffery - "The Dragonriders of Pern" compilation (Dragonflight, Dragonquest, The White Dragon)

All-Time Favorites (in no particular order):
Terry Goodkind - "Sword of Truth" Series
Though, honestly, I can only list a few of the books as worthy of making the series hit this list. Namely: "Wizard's First Rule"(#1), "Stone of Tears" (#2), and "Faith of the Fallen" (#5)... though he does get a bit preachy in 'FotF', I can't deny enjoying the read.​
Robert Jordan - "Wheel of Time" Series
Even with the massive slow-down to the story in the middle volumes, this is my favorite series to date. I have always been one to prefer too much detail to none at all (which is how I can read old-school Tom Clancy, while my friends can not), and Jordan fed that preference with aplomb... from societal garb to the nuances of the world's cultures and character interactions.​
Patrick Rothfuss - 'Name of the Wind (The Kingkiller Chonicle, Day 1)'
From reading the dedication at the opening of the book, I knew that I'd be buying the novel. On reading the first page... I re-read the paragraphs aloud to myself, while standing alone in the middle of Borders, and then carried the hardcover to the checkout without pause. (I don't buy hardcovers often...) Why this novel hasn't been picked up in audio format is beyond me, as the writing almost begs to be read aloud. My only disappointment is that it is the first of a three-part series... and this is literally the author's first novel. The second is due for release in 2009. ::sigh::​
Douglas Adams - "Hitchiker's Guide" series
I've read and re-read these books from the original paper-back releases, to multiple incarnations of the collected series hardbounds. (my last was destroyed by an attack by an errant McDonalds soda cup... to be replaced by the leather-bound, gold-leaf edition by my loving wife.)​
Orson Scott Card - 'Ender's Game' / 'Ender's Shadow'
These two should be compiled into a singular volume... perhaps including any other 'perspective rewrites' that Card should happen to complete. (I've read that originally 'Shadow' was to be written by another, under Card's supervision, but he got drawn into the outlining, and began writing it, himself... the concept was for the main core of the Dragons were to be re-portrayed through the eyes of different authors. I wonder if it will ever be done...)​
Frank Herbert - 'Dune'
I couldn't get into the sequals, but I consider the depth of the original to stand well enough on its own, without need to go further into the mythos of the galactic intrigues of the setting.​
 
Severien said:
I have to say I find it very odd that people still take Freud seriously today (not saying you do) when in respectable scientific communities he is generally regarded as a quack.
Click to expand...

My incentive for reading some of his works was coming across his essay about Michelangelo - it was by far the most interesting that we had to read for an exam in Art History, especially considering history never was one of the subjects I liked. It was an interesting way to look at his work, but not neccessarily a correct one. Sadly I disliked the professor so much that I didn't go to more than just four lectures, so I never found out why exactly we even had to read it, it didn't quite fit in the context.

I read a few more of Freud's essays because I found them intriguing, not because I would follow his discoveries (we weren't taught a lot about him in high school, we just briefly mentioned Oedipus/Electra's complex and the subconscious - we were taught about psychology from a historical point of view and were never told some theories are more true than others, but rather evaluated the pros and cons of each).

I wouldn't find reading as entertaining if I only read about proven facts or if I knew beforehand I will agree with what's written, that would just eliminate the thinking and make me forget what I just read in matter of hours.
 
Last read:
Nietzsche - Twilight of the Idols
Erjavec, Kreft, Paetzold - Culture as Alibi

Too bad I can't access the original works that served as basis for the latter. The reader made so many grammatical mistakes I was really disturbed. My knowledge of the language was better when I was 12 years old - and I'm supposed to take those essays as serious work? Sucks to live in a small country. Can't even get Hegel's Aesthetics in any other language than Serbo-Croatian :tinfoil:
 
Severien said:
I have to say I find it very odd that people still take Freud seriously today (not saying you do) when in respectable scientific communities he is generally regarded as a quack. Freudian theories were not supported by any known fact even after a hundred years of research and thousands of books and journals published on the topic. This fault is not specific to Freud himself, as most leading psychologists of his era essentially used the same formula to characterize certain psychological behaviors - that is, observe a psychological behavior, think up a cause that *might* be true, and present this as fact just because it made sense and it was not scientifically refutable at the time. Some of them are still not refutable by nature, they are simply claims that are not falsifiable - this does not make them true, however. Freud's greatest ally is the fact that psychology is a very inexact "science" that in many respects is entirely unquantifiable, meaning that if I say "The reason why so many young women today adopt self-destructive lifestyles is because of the rising acceptance of homosexuality," you can never actually prove me wrong even though the concept is rediculous on its face.
It may not surprise you to know that I hold a certain contempt for psychology because it is a science that is so incredibly unscientific, with many well-regarded concepts being whatever idea is popular at the time (The American Association of Psychologists actually votes these things in, as opposed to proving them through exhaustive study). Thankfully, at least some of it is scientific, especially as we gain a greater physiological understanding of the human central nervous system, and where Freud CAN be disproven, he has been, over and over and over again.

Still, Freud is the biggest name in psychology, any layman, high school student who takes a psych class, or self-styled "home psychologist" (you know the type) who thinks "psychology!" thinks of Freud at some point. He is quoted often, and just as frequently his quotation is regarded as fact. Freud said it, so it must be true!
And yet how easily everyone forgets his more wild concepts, such as the gem where Freud believes all women suffer from penis envy, and the one about how schizophrenia is the result of narcissism and can be cured through repeated dialog with your shrink.

I suppose I am derailing my own thread, I just find it a little bit disgusting that someone who can be demonstrated as a fraud in so many ways still permeates our culture so much. We've all heard or even used the terms "Freudian slip" "penis envy" "Oedipus Complex" and "anal retentive", just to name the references that first come to mind. I guess because they're all either sexual or scatological, so we we can't resist using them.

Oh well. I believe we all live in a state of perpetual ignorance of a great many things, for many this is just another one of them.

Just to be on-topic, I'm currently working on Frank Herbert's "The White Plague," and must admit I am making slow progress because the book plods along with some fairly slow pacing.
Click to expand...

You mean like the literal hundreds of scientists that while they may have had wrong &/or crazy ideas formed the very basis and provided the impetus for study of the sciences we use today quacks?

Or just regular garden variety quacks?
 
Even if quack is an unfair description of Freud, it does not mean you can take disproven psychological theories seriously.

Its like saying "Hey, that J.J. Thompson guy was a pretty good scientist. The plum pudding atomic model must be true!"

My post was not so much intended to hate all over Freud so much as it was to hate all over those who interpret anything he ever said dogmatically.
 
Last edited:
Severien said:
Even if quack is an unfair description of Freud, it does not mean you can take disproven psychological theories seriously.

Its like saying "Hey, that J.J. Thompson guy was a pretty good scientist. The plum pudding atomic model must be true!"

My post was not so much intended to hate all over Freud so much as it was to hate all over those who interpret anything he ever said dogmatically.
Click to expand...

Except of course that psychological theories take culture and society into account, and the victorian mindset was DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT. Taken in terms of that, a good bit more of what he says makes a form of sense.

Also, it is damn near impossible to prove or disprove a psychological theory.

Interpreting anything anyone says dogmatically is a mistake, doesn't mean everything the individual they're worshipping said is bunk.
 
All Time Favorites:

Harry Potter 3,4,5,7 - J.K. Rowling
Lord of the Rings - J.R.R. Tolkien
Airframe - Michael Crighton
Sphere - Michael Crighton
Boy's Life - Robert McCammon
Swan Song - Robert McCammon
Angels and Demons - Dan Brown
Da Vinci Code - Dan Brown
The Heir to the Empire - Timothy Zhan
The Last Command - Timothy Zhan
Mission Comprimised - Oliver North and Joe Musser

the Malleus Maleficarum is kinda interesting also
 
Recently Read:

Hegemony or Survival - Noam Chomsky
Oil on the Brain - Lisa Margonelli
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man - John Perkins
The Leviathan - Hobbes
 
So i found a cache of gift cards to Borders, and got a bunch of Feist books, which i enjoy, to fill in the gaps of what I had. And im reading the first of two in the "Krondors Son's" collection, and for some reason, either Feist was drinking heavily or something good was transpiring in his life at the time, but the characters are all whimsically sarcastic and making me laugh constantly. None of the books in the Riftwar Saga, Riftwar Legacy, or the Serpentwar Saga tickled me near as much as "Prince of the Blood" is.
 
Ikaa|LoveYums said:
So i found a cache of gift cards to Borders, and got a bunch of Feist books, which i enjoy, to fill in the gaps of what I had. And im reading the first of two in the "Krondors Son's" collection, and for some reason, either Feist was drinking heavily or something good was transpiring in his life at the time, but the characters are all whimsically sarcastic and making me laugh constantly. None of the books in the Riftwar Saga, Riftwar Legacy, or the Serpentwar Saga tickled me near as much as "Prince of the Blood" is.
Click to expand...

I'll have to look into those, I'm out of stuff atm, and read a bunch of riftwar saga. Check out Robert Asprin's MYTH series or Piers Anthony's Xanth series. If one is in the mood for silly and hilarious they usually do the trick. Both are pretty reasonably pun heavy, with xanth being the heavyweight contender of fantasy series puns.
 
To few people named

Song of ice and fire by George r.r. Martin yet so I will.

Robert Jordan - "Wheel of Time" Series
Even with the massive slow-down to the story in the middle volumes, this is my favorite series to date. I have always been one to prefer too much detail to none at all (which is how I can read old-school Tom Clancy, while my friends can not), and Jordan fed that preference with aplomb... from societal garb to the nuances of the world's cultures and character
Click to expand...

I love this series too to bad Robert Jordan died. I like George RR Martin way better though.
 
There is 1 book left of Wheel of Time. Jordan's wife has the complete storyline and knows what is suppose to happen, and they have already found a writer to write the last book. So don't give up on the series!

Right now I am reading Piers Anthony's Incarnations series (Death, Fate, Nature, War, etc...)

Favorite Series: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kushiel's_Dart by Jacqueline Carey. It's a historic fantasy, with GREAT political intrigue. Not your standard Fantasy, as it happens in the equivilent of France in the dark ages and no "High Magic", dragons, elves or anything like that. I strongly suggest reading at least the first one. It is beautifully written. It is also not for children!!

Also really like the Wheel of Time, Dune, Foundation (Asimov), Axis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayfarer_Redemption) is good, but semi-predictable, Shanara, all the Valdemar books, Sword of Truth, Feist, and probably many more I can't think of atop my head.

I read TONS of books, 1 a week is generally the minimum, but sometime I run out of books... I literally read everything in the fantasy aisle in our library by the time I was 15. Don't know why I haven't posted to this thread before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom