94 posts and 18 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
A thread for wizards to discuss books.
Previous thread hit bump limit:>>40869
I’m up for it! That sounds like fun.
Thanks for the rec.
Currently reading Capital by Karl Marx, just finished the first volume of the three that make up the first book in my edition. I find it dense sometimes but also extremely interesting and sometimes even funny. It's also very rewarding to understand deeply the theory he developed, to join all the pieces and see how each concept contains the following. It sounds like mumbo-jamboo when I say it but it's actually very pleasant to see it.>>48946
I read Quixote in its original language since I'm from a latin american country, so I don't know if this applies for the translation, but I found Don Quixote to be an extremely funny and hilarious book. I genuinely laugh out loud out of it. Yes, it's very long and in the first volume you can find dozens of miny stories that are like short novels with no relation to the main story. This can be dense but I found each of these stories extremely interesting, complex and funny at the same time. It's one of the books I enjoyed the most. You won't regret it anon. Also, the ending is incredibly emotive and I cried with it.
Sounds like fun but the end result is going to be disappointing. The audio quality being a particularly big concern.
Theres a fun section in "Primitive Accumulation" about all the draconian ways the English state punished 1500s NEETs to discipline them to be wageslaves
Ok, I am starting to get tired of straight up philosophy books.
Went through all the major stoics and the last couple of books I was just bored once I basically already knew the base philosophy.
I think I would enjoy something a bit more narrative in structure, even if it still is out to make a certain philosophical point.
Something like Atlas Shrugged, Animal Farm, or Brave New World.
Fahrenheit 451, Dune (kinda), A clockwork orange, and maybe starship troopers.
I have already read 451, which I did like quite a bit.
I watched the movies of the other 3.
Are the books different enough to justify giving them a shot?
I really wasn't a fan of Dune (the movie) at all. And starship troopers only had the action movie appeal to me. The actual philosophical and political ideas behind the movie were pretty weak.
The dune movie was universally panned, so I would say give the book a shot. Starship troopers still has a bit of an action focus but goes way more into detail about their society. Also clockwork orange in my opinion is good enough to give it a second go.
Alright, thanks for the recommendations then.
>>49133>First off, I want to read the entire Bible in Japanese
Why? You'd just be reading a translation of a translation. What could be gained?
Probably practice with somewhat familiar material.
Just got done with Starship Troopers. The book is a hell of a lot better then the movies, which are brain dead in comparisons.
I enjoyed it a lot, even if I strongly disagree with the philosophy of the author the story is still very entertaining and the way the argument and ideas he lays out are interesting.
Lastly the Mobile Infantry are awesome and kind of make me wish that Hollywood would try to do a book accurate remake to show off those mech-suits in their full glory.
said. I'm learning Japanese and I just wanted a reference.
>>49134>What could be gained?
the manga panels
>>49133>I want to read the entire Bible in Japanese, but I haven't even read the full book in English
I gave up after the Book of Daniel, only the minor prophets remain but I just can't enjoy it. The prophets are all about God basically threatening Israel/Judah over and over again, this love-hate relationship really starts to drag after a while.>>49114>Went through all the major stoics and the last couple of books I was just bored once I basically already knew the base philosophy
This is me when it comes to reading any kind of philosophy. Once you grasp the basic idea behind it the whole thing will be really predictable and boring.
You joke but they actually have manga adaptations of tons of western classics now. Jane eyre, the count of monte cristo, tom sawyer, the scarlet letter, etc. It's bizarre.
don't forget mein kampf
Not really a manga, but Marvel came out with a Dracula graphic novel with all the blood, guts, gore, and horror of the original novel. It was amazing!
The new Testament gets really interesting though. Specifically the book of Acts. The adventures written down are amazing!
my favorite Russian book has recently been translated into English, though judging by the preface the translation is mediocre
you can buy it here https://books.friesenpress.com/store/title/119734000093596666/V.-K.-Tarasov-Technology-Of-Life
the book itself is a list of wisdoms, the first chapter is very short and representative, it proves that one cannot find out the meaning of an activity if they don't go beyond it, it gives an example:
a man took a glass of water and took a sip. maybe he was thirsty, maybe he wanted to taste the water, maybe he wanted to fall asleep and never wake up. we can't know the meaning of the activity within the activity, we must go beyond it, same applies to the meaning of life.
if you like this kind of thoughts and wisdoms you should check out this book (and upload it somewhere so more people could enjoy it)
Comfy as fuck.
Portugal seems to be a good country for Wizards.
Sex and Character argues that all people are composed of a mixture of male and female substance, and attempts to support this view scientifically. The male aspect is active, productive, conscious and moral/logical, while the female aspect is passive, unproductive, unconscious and amoral/alogical. Weininger argues that emancipation is only possible for the "masculine succubus", e.g. some lesbians, and that the female life is consumed with the sexual function: both with the act, as a prostitute, and the product, as a mother. succubus is a "matchmaker". By contrast, the duty of the male, or the masculine aspect of personality, is to strive to become a genius, and to forgo sexuality for an abstract love of the absolute, God, which he finds within himself.
>>49169>Portugal seems to be a good country for Wizards
No, not really.
Does not compute
>>49170>the female aspect is passive, unproductive, unconscious and amoral/alogical
So most of us wizards are females actually? That would explain lots of things…>>49162
I read the New Testament before I started reading the Old. And I agree that it is superior compared to the OT.
>>49177>So most of us wizards are females actually? That would explain lots of things…
I'll answer your question once I have finished the book.
Finished reading Sengoku Jidai. Nobunaga, Hideyoshi, and Ieyasu: Three Unifiers of Japan.
I've been interested in Sengoku era Japan ever since I played the Samurai Warriors games as a kid, but I never bothered to pick up a book about it so all my knowledge was based on the games and reading a couple of Wikipedia articles about the battles or daimyo/samurai that interested me. Reading this was great though since it filled in a lot of the blanks and corrected some inaccuracies I had gotten from the games.
The main focus, of course is on the 3 men in the title and the various campaigns and battles during the Sengoku era, but it also included a lot of chapters on other things like foreign presence in Japan (the Portugese merchants and missionaries and, later, the Dutch), social structure at the time, the influence of religion (especially on the many Buddhists and the Ikko Ikki who opposed Nobunaga), and some historical details that lend more character to the major figures of the time.
Would definitely recommend to anyone interested in Japanese history or the Sengoku era specifically. I didn't find it to be at all dry or boring, either, like some history books I've read are.
Men aren't getting into stem for moral or spiritual reasons.
They're doing it because they have the pre-requisite aptitude in pattern recognition, quantitative and spacial reasoning. (from nature or nurture or both).
And because they have the aesthetic tastes for the processes and products.
succubi don't care much about bulldozers, racecars, steel mills, guns, bugs, bridges, container terminals, oil refineries, submarines and spaceships.
The potential to be around these things or involved in their production can't serve as motivation for study.
>>49196>succubi don't care much about bulldozers, racecars, steel mills, guns, bugs, bridges, container terminals, oil refineries, submarines and spaceships.
I mean to be fair neither do I lol.
Currently reading Men at Arms, the second in the City Watch series of the Discworld books. It's probably my 8th Discworld book in total. One of the better written ones, you can see how much Pratchett improved over the series. Beautiful use of language to create humour in the lines.
any books on this subject?
i am trying to find an ebook of this
I could never get into Discworld- I always ended up being indifferent to the heroes and more often than not empathizing with and rooting for the villains.
Finished Frankenstein yesterday. It was nothing like the movie.
Incan understand how it's not for everyone. Pratchett plays with the idea of what makes a hero or a villain, and that subversion of expectation can put people off.
If you haven't, maybe try Mort. Death is a great character.
He sounds like an edgy contrarian faggot. That'll put all of his public shenanigans in context. He's just being as controversial as possible for attention.
My boss is on holidays for the next two weeks. I've worked with him for five years. Do you think it's rude if I resign over email while he's on holiday?
>>49278>i never hear people bring this up when talking about diogenes
because all his funny antics are way more interesting
Read 2 of Shakespeare's plays last week, Hamlet and King Lear (well King Lear was a reread). I didn't like Hamlet as much as King Lear or Richard III but it was still good. The part where there's a clown carelessly chucking around skulls he uncovers while digging a grave and Hamlet starts lamenting on how even great people have the same end - recycled into material for banal purposes, like a stopper or food for the worms - was really good.
King Lear is probably my favorite Shakespeare play of those I've read so far, though.
Now going through Plato's Complete Works. I've read about half his dialogues over the years but never more than a few at a time, so I'm going through and reading/rereading all of them.
Euthypro, Apology, Crito, and Phaedo were all a reread. All good and not too complicated (if anyone wants to start with Plato I'd recommend these 4 first). Some of the arguments in Phaedo - specifically the one about all souls of the living coming from souls of the dead, and to lesser extent the one about knowledge being recollection - seemed more tenuous than when I read it years ago, but I guess he wrote a lot of the arguments like that to get people to think critically and come up with their own theories.
Cratylus I read for the first time yesterday. The subject is correctness of names and naming conventions. A lot of it drags on because it's just Socrates trying to find the etymology of various words (all in Greek of course). But in the beginning and towards the end there are some interesting points brought up.
Theaetetus I reread today. I remembered it being really good and wasn't disappointed. Along with Parmenides it's probably my favorite. Lot of insights into knowledge, even if it doesn't reach a conclusive answer, and challenges a lot of the views of some older philosophers.
There's also a tangent somewhere near the middle, about the difference between a philosopher and the average 'skilled' man, i.e. a defender in the courts. Rereading this I was kind of shocked at how similar parts sound to some things I've read in Zhuangzi's works and the Bhagavad Gita.
>This accounts, my friend, for the behavior of such a man when he comes into contact with his fellows, either privately with individuals or in public life, as I was saying at the beginning. Whenever he is obliged, in a law court or elsewhere, to discuss the things that lie at his feet and before his eyes, he causes entertainment not only to Thracian servant-succubi but to all the common herd, by tumbling into wells and every sort of difficulty through his lack of experience. His clumsiness is awful and gets him a reputation for fatuousness. On occasions when personal scandal is the topic of conversation, he never has anything at all of his own to contribute; he knows nothing to the detriment of anyone, never having paid any attention to this subject—a lack of resource which makes him look very comic. And again, when compliments are in order, and self-laudation, his evident amusement—which is by no means a pose but perfectly genuine—is regarded as idiotic. When he hears the praises of a despot or a king being sung, it sounds to his ears as if some stock-breeder were being congratulated—some keeper of pigs or sheep, or cows that are giving him plenty of milk; only he thinks that the rulers have a more difficult and treacherous animal to rear and milk, and that such a man, having no spare time, is bound to become quite as coarse and uncultivated as the stock-farmer; for the castle of the one is as much a prison as the mountain fold of the other. When he hears talk of land—that so-and-so has a property of ten thousand acres or more, and what a vast property that is, it sounds to him like a tiny plot, used as he is to envisage the whole earth. When his companions become lyric on the subject of great families, and exclaim at the noble blood of one who can point to seven wealthy ancestors, he thinks that such praise comes of a dim and limited vision, an inability, through lack of education, to take a steady view of the whole, and to calculate that every single man has countless hosts of ancestors, near and remote,among whom are to be found,in every instance, rich men and beggars, kings and slaves, Greeks and foreigners, by the thousand. When men pride themselves upon a pedigree of twenty-five ancestors, and trace their descent back to Heracles the son of Amphitryon, they seem to him to be taking a curious interest in trifles. As for the twenty-fifth ancestor of Amphitryon, what he may have been is merely a matter of luck, and similarly with the fiftieth before him again. How ridiculous, he thinks, not to be able to work that out, and get rid of the gaping vanity of a silly mind.
>But it is not possible, Theodorus, that evil should be destroyed—for there must always be something opposed to the good; nor is it possible that it should have its seat in heaven. But it must inevitably haunt human life, and prowl about this earth. That is why a man should make all haste to escape from earth to heaven; and escape means becoming as like God as possible; and a man becomes like God when he becomes just and pious, with understanding. But it is not at all an easy matter, my good friend, to persuade men that it is not for the reasons commonly alleged that one should try to escape from wickedness and pursue virtue. It is not in order to avoid a bad reputation and obtain a good one that virtue should be practiced and not vice; that, it seems to me, is only what men call ‘old wives’talk’.
>Let us try to put the truth in this way. In God there is no sort of wrong whatsoever; he is supremely just, and the thing most like him is the man who has become as just as it lies in human nature to be. And it is here that we see whether a man is truly able, or truly a weakling and a nonentity; for it is the realization of this that is genuine wisdom and goodness, while the failure to realize it is manifest folly and wickedness. Everything else that passes for ability and wisdom has a sort of commonness—in those who wield political power a poor cheap show, in the manual workers a matter of mechanical routine. If, therefore, one meets a man who practices injustice and is blasphemous in his talk or in his life, the best thing for him by far is that one should never grant that there is any sort of ability about his unscrupulousness; such men are ready enough to glory in the reproach, and think that it means not that they are mere rubbish, cumbering the ground to no purpose, but that they have the kind of qualities that are necessary for survival in the community. We must therefore tell them the truth—that their very ignorance of their true state fixes them the more firmly therein. For they do not know what is the penalty of injustice, which is the last thing of which a man should be ignorant. It is not what they suppose—scourging and death—things which they may entirely evade in spite of their wrongdoing. It is a penalty from which there is no escape.
Anyways also going through Aristotle's Complete Works and supplementing both that and Plato with the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy articles and some of Sadler's lectures on youtube.
Are any of you into the physical aspects of books?
tbh most of the books I read are on the PC or audio. But since 2016 I've also acquired a fairly large library of hardcopy books. I guess reading about ancient and medieval manuscripts, and how painstakingly they were prepared by volcel monk scribes like ourselves, and how rare and sacred they were. The tragedy of lost books. The scriptorium in the Name of the Rose. I've become fascinated with books as physical objects. And also collected some old ones from the 1800s and 1700s.
There doesn't seem to be much of a market for used books, so its been a relatively cheap hobby for me, my version of stamp collecting.
I was thinking of reading Plato's dialogues backwards starting with the Theateus.
It could make sense for a number of reasons. For one it was the 1st dialogue that Latin Europe had access to until the Rennassance. It covers the metaphysical topics I'm most interested in.
And I'm listening to the dialogues on audio, so it might take me a while to get used to the format, so I thought a more Aristotle-type treatise, in which the dialectic is pushed into the background, might be a good way to ease me into plato.
Im on Plotinus now and its tough going
I like physical books but I tend to opt for pirating copies online and loading them on an e-reader. I still prefer the 'weight' of actual books and the feel of turning the pages but I don't have the space or financial leeway to really seriously collect. Well mainly just space actually, since most used books are really cheap.
I do have a few slightly old ones but nothing from earlier than the 20th century.
First one is 'Japan's Military Masters', which was published in 1943. The author was an ambassador in Japan and was there in the several years before the war so he wrote about the military spirit of Japan - the undying loyalty of every common citizen for the emperor and the traditions they put in place to cement this loyalty, as well the military structure and some of the notable military figures in the Japanese army. It was an interesting read as something written during the time of war. I don't know if everything in it is accurate but given what happened in the next few years I think the guy was pretty on point in his conclusions.
Other one is a collection of several of Nietzsche's major writings (Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Beyond Good and Evil, The Genealogy of Morals, Ecce Homo, and The Birth of Tragedy). I can't find a publication date but someone wrote a note inside the cover saying "1950's edition" (also a lot of other notes written inside so I think it was a student's).
There are a couple of others I have but I think they're also all from the 1950's or later - some biographies on Mao, Hitler, and Mussolini, two volumes of something called "Japan's Imperial Conspiracy", and a book on microbiology.
I don't think there are any good used bookstores by me unfortunately. All the above were things I bought from stores I found while traveling to other states.
Do you buy online or do you have good stores near you?>>49314
You'd be fine starting with Theateus I think, especially if you're already working through Plotinus. The recommendations to start with Euthypro and the others were mainly for people who weren't used to reading philosophy (although they do certainly contain some important ideas, but they don't go too deep into the theory of forms or epistemology, outside of a few short sections). Only thing you might want to read up on is Heraclitus's philosophy and maybe some of Protagoras's, as Plato really works off of and criticizes these 2 throughout the dialogue. But even those aren't absolutely necessary as he sums them up well enough within the dialogue itself.
Reading backwards would definitely be interesting. I'm not too familiar with the chronology of Plato's works but I think a lot of the later ones were criticizing his earlier theories (like Parmenides) so that might trip you up a little.
Plotinus is also one of the philosophers I'm most interested in right now. I'm planning on starting to read him after I finish all of Plato and a few of Aristotle's major works.