Reply
Sun 8 Nov, 2009 08:05 pm
I got done with Jonathon Baron's Thinking and Deciding recently. Well I didn't get done with it, there were some chapters I skipped towards the end and I might read those before I return the book this weekend because someone else wants it apparently. It was pretty cool and stuff, taught me more about true skepticism (the organizing principle of the book is "active open-mindedness") and I'm glad I didn't pass it over, since it looked so turgid at the outset, what with the cmr10 typesetting
I was reading War on the Mind. At first it was about some solid cognitive psychology of warfighting but then it descended into more and more psychoanalytic garbage and even the chapter on atrocity became thoroughly unenjoyable after the author mentioned the use of Rorschach blots to figure out who would be more likely to commit an atrocity. Dammit, I was looking for some sound scientific research about how to dehumanize people but to no avail. Maybe I'll be the first to carry it out one day ... I find that learning the methods of rational decision making leads a person to see others as mental children, or even dangerous pests. Under the right circumstances, teaching a person how to think rationally could be used as a means of dehumanization. I can definitely think of some ways that might work now. That might be cool. After all most societies dehumanize people on a regular basis so then it's a matter of figuring out what they do right and then tweaking and extending it
I am currently reading Fundamentals of Natural Computing, having completed the genetic algorithms section and now moving on to neurocomputing. Those first two I was already kind of familiar with but swarm intelligence and the entirely exotic field of immunocomputing come next. Then there's something about fractals which are explained well enough to implement on a computer without any tedious analysis. That's pretty cool. I'm probably going to try the traveling salesman problem with genetic algorithms some time this week in fact. (Oh and btw evolution is a lie: sah-en-tists is STUPID.)
Eh let's see what else
I was also reading but it seems like a pile of thhhhpppBBBBBBtthhhhh, or at least the stupid little dialogues do, and the rest of the book is stuff I know, or don't need to know, or is essentially outdated, so I'm going to return it
How to Solve It by George Polya on the other hand appears to be a legit classic and I'm going to read that for sure. It's not long neither
I'm done with Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications, a thoroughly enjoyable text which is a solid foundation for more advanced readings in cognitive psychology, as in Thinking and Deciding. It is really full of win. Every chapter section ends with a brief summary of what came before. I thought I remembered nothing after I read the book but it came flooding back in my cog sci class and probably improved my test grades. It is a model textbook, exceedingly well written. Among the important take home lessons from this book was that most of what you learn in developing a skill comes fairly soon after inception and then after that it's mostly fine tuning. So if you want to learn several things you can conceivably get pretty good at several rather than just zealously spending lots of time on the one. Another is that becoming skilled at one thing does not readily lend itself to anything without a similar structure. So, while learning Latin would certainly facilitate learning Spanish or a similar language, or Latin loan words, it wouldn't necessarily facilitate learning anything else. The education system tells us otherwise for years and it was awesome to have the illusion shattered
I've got Flight From Science and Reason and Mathematics and War but these are essay compilations, can be read piecemeal, largely uninteresting, so I'm probably just going to pick and choose here. The Lanchester square model from the latter of the two might be useful for a simulation I want to write, pretty cool
There's some other things I want to read, like Neural Network Models of Cognition which I have here by my side. The general plan is neuroscience, cognitive psychology, biochemistry, biologically inspired artificial neural networks and maybe a little skepticism and decision making reading on the side. There's more I'd like to read, you know, but sometimes you just have to prioritize. Career goals and all
@odenskrigare,
I'm about 200 pages from finishing
Anna Karenina.
I'm about 12 (out of 70) hours from finishing
Les Miserables on audiobook.
And for work, well, my reading lately has been a lot of journal articles about H1N1 influenza, Lyme disease, Rickettsia, and Bartonella.
@odenskrigare,
Anna Karenina doesn't have enough cold-blooded slaughter or androids in it
@odenskrigare,
You need to read it in the original Russian, it's full of homicidal androids.
That often gets lost in the amateurish translations.
@odenskrigare,
Studying for a Classics exam I am reading nothing but Plato, Herodotus, Pliny et al.
It will be good to read a living author once my exam is over (or even a recently dead one!)
@Aedes,
Aedes;102556 wrote:You need to read it in the original Russian, it's full of homicidal androids
I thought those were more popular among German writers
@odenskrigare,
You guys read some heavy stuff. As for me... I'm about half way through Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. I have been wanting to read the Harry Potter series for the past five years, but I never had the time. I even went so far as to buy the neat looking hardbound collectors edition box from Amazon a few weeks ago. Now that I have the time, I fully intend to thoroughly enjoy them.
Philosophy is fun to read for a while, but sometimes you have to read nonsense in order to appreciate the pseudo-sensical. LOL!
@odenskrigare,
odenskrigare;102560 wrote:I thought those were more popular among German writers
oh yes, I just can't get enough of Rainer Maria Rilke's
Sonnets to the Orph-Droid.
@odenskrigare,
I think I've only read one book in my entire life, and I don't even remember what it was.
Do you people who read books actually read every word? That's quite a feat. I mean, some of those books are just gigantic. Me? I can only read excerpts of things here and there before I get bored.
I probably should start reading more (well, I read a lot, but I mean I should try to finish a book...).
@odenskrigare,
Zetherin,
I remember a while ago there was this guy on Jeopardy who was a powerhouse as far as answering the questions were concerned. Some news channel did an interview with him after he finished (or lost I dont remember which) and the interviewer asked him how he knew so much. He replied that he very rarely read a book all the way through. Instead, what he did was read a book only for the bits and pieces he wanted, which then led him to another book where he read the bits and pieces he wanted. In that way, he networked his knowledge and drastically increased the amount of diversity in his reading material.
Honestly, it may not be as good to finish a book as to read the book for the relevant information and network with other books with different information. Once you form the fundamental network, you can enrich it all you want by going back whenever you want to get more elaboration on whatever subject you want just so long as you know what to reference and where to look. Actually, putting it down like this, this seems rather fun to try.
@VideCorSpoon,
VideCorSpoon;102617 wrote:Zetherin,
I remember a while ago there was this guy on Jeopardy who was a powerhouse as far as answering the questions were concerned. Some news channel did an interview with him after he finished (or lost I dont remember which) and the interviewer asked him how he knew so much. He replied that he very rarely read a book all the way through. Instead, what he did was read a book only for the bits and pieces he wanted, which then led him to another book where he read the bits and pieces he wanted. In that way, he networked his knowledge and drastically increased the amount of diversity in his reading material.
Honestly, it may not be as good to finish a book as to read the book for the relevant information and network with other books with different information. Once you form the fundamental network, you can enrich it all you want by going back whenever you want to get more elaboration on whatever subject you want just so long as you know what to reference and where to look. Actually, putting it down like this, this seems rather fun to try.
That's a very interesting thought. Perhaps one of us could start a new thread on how to
efficiently read. Besides what you noted, I wonder what current studies there are on the matter.
@VideCorSpoon,
VideCorSpoon;102617 wrote:Honestly, it may not be as good to finish a book as to read the book for the relevant information and network with other books with different information. Once you form the fundamental network, you can enrich it all you want by going back whenever you want to get more elaboration on whatever subject you want just so long as you know what to reference and where to look. Actually, putting it down like this, this seems rather fun to try.
for sure
I remember someone telling me always to "start from the beginning" but I ultimately realized even that's not always useful
many books actually have very little dependency between chapters
in many cases I'll read only half and still walk away with a lot of knowledge
seriously when you are, e.g., reading about behaviorism and you see a chapter about behaviorist views on language, just forget it bro. you don't have to torture yourself by reading something so useless even if the rest of the material is clear
@odenskrigare,
Lets see...
First and foremost I am enjoying
Neurophilosophy: Toward a Unified Science of the Mind/Brain by Patricia Churchland. It's got ALOT of information regarding neuroscience which can seem quite redundant at times (especially if you've already taken some neuroscience classes) but also alot of valuable info as well. I'm about half way through this 500+ page book.
Secondly, Im starting to read the Major Works of Wittgenstein which include the
Tractatus, Philosophical Investigations, and
On Certainty. Cant say much about this because I just started it and the Tractatus is definitely a bit on the obscure side, but I cant wait to read 'em all.
Also re-reading
Beyond Good And Evil by none other than Nietzsche which, I must say, is a great book (especially since Im a fan of Nietzsche's writing style) and he definitely probes some issues that I think everyone would say is controversial. So it will definitely keep you interested and make you think.
We're also supposed to be reading
Utilitarianism by Mill in my philosophy club and I think Im slowly getting back into ethics again because I never really was a fan of it before but it's starting to grow on me. And that's about it for the extracurricular reading; I also have my textbooks for classes to read as well. Needless to say, I needz moar tyme!
@Kielicious,
Been trying to brush up on Philosophers and such but no luck. Currently reading such up and coming classics as
Cultural Models in Language and Thought and
From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Go me!
@odenskrigare,
Reading a narrative is different than reading an expository work or reference. I've got a lot of history and geography books on my shelf that I've partly read, or read here and there in snipets.
But novels are a self-contained work of art. I read them straight through.
@Theaetetus,
Theaetetus;103044 wrote:by Les-lie (why does the site censor this name)
because of pam69ur who spammed the site with self-references to Colin Les-lie Dean
@odenskrigare,
Currently working on
Fable of the Bees,
Song of Roland and finishing up a long stint working through
Dawn to Decadance, 500 Years of Western Culture. All reviews coming.
As far as picking and choosing; that's a double-edged sword. Yes, some is generally better than none, but I find very often that it's not until I've read the ENTIRE work that I gain the perspective and how-things-fit, in the author's overall message, that it all becomes assimilated in the context in which it was intended.
Thanks
@odenskrigare,
I just read a book called,
The Piano Shop on the Left Bank, which was actually quite a good read; I just randomly picked it up at the bookstore a couple weeks ago, and couldn't put it down.
It's basically a story of a man's returning passion for music while living in Paris, and discovering a hidden side of Paris in an old
atelier out of curiosity. (The book is subtitled, "Discovering a Forgotten Passion in a Paris Atelier"). It is an interesting read, and quite humorous at times, with some good stories that can't be easily forgotten. i.e., when the author orders his new grand piano, and a huge guy shows up at his doorstep, straps it onto his back, and lugs it up a staircase all on his own.
If you are especially interested in music, pianos, or Paris and its culture, I would highly recommend it.
@VideCorSpoon,
VideCorSpoon;102617 wrote:Zetherin,
I remember a while ago there was this guy on Jeopardy who was a powerhouse as far as answering the questions were concerned. Some news channel did an interview with him after he finished (or lost I dont remember which) and the interviewer asked him how he knew so much. He replied that he very rarely read a book all the way through. Instead, what he did was read a book only for the bits and pieces he wanted, which then led him to another book where he read the bits and pieces he wanted. In that way, he networked his knowledge and drastically increased the amount of diversity in his reading material.
Honestly, it may not be as good to finish a book as to read the book for the relevant information and network with other books with different information. Once you form the fundamental network, you can enrich it all you want by going back whenever you want to get more elaboration on whatever subject you want just so long as you know what to reference and where to look. Actually, putting it down like this, this seems rather fun to try.
But he did not read for pleasure. And that is what I do. Reading for information is great, but reading for pleasure is greater.