A palpable sense of mystery is maintained from start to finish, but it arguably does better than any other book in the Bible at giving a deep look into the person of Jesus as he was seen and believed in by the early church. Additionally, there is a subtle sense of humor as the gospel author clearly enjoyed language and word plays and describes multiple misunderstandings that occur because of the ambiguity of language.
Probably more than any other book, this book has shaped me on a personal level.
(If you're going to read it, I highly recommend a modern translation such as the ESV, NKJV, or HCSB.)
It's also notable for Jesus's consistent affirmation of his own divinity. Not that the synoptics don't, but John is much more explicit about it. For me, that does much to validate CS Lewis's liar, lunatic, or Lord argument.
Two follow ups that would appeal to the HN crowd: Things a Computer Scientist Rarely Talks About [1] and 3:16 Bible Texts Illuminated [2], both by Donald Knuth.
Logos! "In the beginning was the word" can be understood information theoretically. It's almost as though John is telling us that information or knowledge is ontologically primary, rather than matter. And it is "the word", not "the DWORD" ;)
"The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins. It describes biology from the perspective of the gene as the unit of natural selection, rather than the organism or the species, and demonstrates the power of that perspective to explain much about the natural world. But then, the author generalizes the concept of a gene to that of the replicator, which is any kind of pattern that influences its environment to produce copies of the pattern. (As an example, the author invents the concept of a meme, being a unit of culture that uses brains to spread itself across a culture.) This (the replicator) is the mind-blowing concept that I'm still thinking about 35 years after I first read this marvelous little book. Organisms and people and species and cultures are ephemeral side-effects of mindlessly self-replicating patterns. You'll never look at the world the same way after reading this one!
But please continue by reading more rigorous work on evolution, or you run the risk of being badly misinformed. I suggest, at a minimum, a decent textbook. Here I'd recommend Douglas Futuyma's Evolution.
Follow this up with some key works in the field, such as Gould's early critique of naive adaptationism,
The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme.
Also consider different perspectives such as the those described in following books, which take, respectively, drift- and mutation-first approaches to evolution:
The Origins of Genome Architecture, M Lynch; and
Mutation-Driven Evolution, M Nei.
Above all, know that evolution is far more complex, subtle (and interesting) than The Selfish Gene would have you believe.
"Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" by Robert Pirsig. While it's also a tale of travel and self-exploration (the rediscovery of identity after a nervous breakdown and shock therapy), mostly the book is about thinking. I was a different person after identifying with the narrator who also lived in the mind, and asked questions about basic concepts like 'quality', or qualia of events, objects, roles, and the subjective/objective values they embody or we impart on them. A watershed book for me.
Interesting suggestion! I really cannot stand this book, but I appreciate all of the things you've gleaned from it and I'm glad it's had a positive impact on people.
I actually really like Pirsig's ideas about quality and balancing analytical and emotional worldviews, but the writing style drives me nuts and feels like I'm grading a weak Philosophy 101 essay.
I thought the first third of the book was absolutely fantastic. But then it quickly decayed into philosophical drivel, IMO. Perhaps I'm not wise enough to understand the end of the book but I truly thought it was garbage and believe this is one of the most overrated books of all time. Anybody else feel this way?
Yeah, I read the book years ago but wasn't mature enough to appreciate the its value. But as I've gained in years and as my children have grown older I've thought a lot about quality and its significance. I'll be revisiting the book in the near future.
This book blew my mind when I first read it in highschool. I've had a few pivotal experiences in my life which have shaped who I am and how I think. Reading this book was one of them.
This book ruined my life. I highly recommend it. Every engineer, manager and designer should read this. Maybe every human. I think of this book every time I try to pull a push door, every time I reach the bottom floor of a stairwell and notice the design that might save my life one day, and every time I try to struggle to operate a television or a microwave.
2) Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion
by Robert Cialdini
This book helped me understand myself and everyone else. For example, I now understand why I double down on dumb ideas. I also catch a lot more marketing and sales tricks.
Edit: Sorry, just now realized that I broke the 1-book rule, but it's probably too late to correct this and it's really hard to choose between these two anyway.
"Gödel, Escher, Bach" by Douglas Hofstadter, which I read when I was 17. I was just getting into serious programming (I would learn C later that year). I had only an inkling about things like recursion, had little appreciation for music outside of Pink Floyd, and lacked any kind of spiritual philosophy that didn't end in simple atheism or nonsense that I stole from science fiction paperbacks.
GEB got me wondering about a lot of things, and showed me how hard science and engineering and art can coexist. It's not a perfect book -- frankly, I find it rather dull reading now -- but it was an eye-opener when I was just starting out.
I tried to read it in my middle thirties and felt like I wasn't prepared enough to understand it. Should I just go through it without trying to get everything?
First read this thirty years ago. It's a long read, but it's the gentlest explication of Godel that I've read, so well worth it. I only realised recently that the sub title "Eternal Golden Braid" is an acronym anagram of the main title "Godel, Escher, Bach". EGB, GEB...
I think GEB holds up almost 40 years later - it's very much steeped in GOFAI[1] optimism, but the substance of the book, the intersection between math and art, its silliness and approachability, its pure fun, is absolutely as important now as when published.
Meditations, originally written by Marcus Aurelius, but translated many times over. More as an introduction to stoicism; choosing the translation that works best for you is ideal. Hays and Hicks translations are most often recommended but if you can peek inside the book to see what language resonates the best with you.
Stoicism helped me build the ability to care about the things in my power to change, and not stress about things that aren't. Very useful in any job or personal situation that includes a lot of ambient stress.
This book has had a great impact on me. My favorite quote (Dover Thrift edition)
"To conclude, always observe how ephemeral and worthless human things are, and what was yesterday a speck of semen tomorrow will be a mummy or ashes. Pass then through this little space of time conformably to nature, and end your journey in content, just as an olive falls off when it is ripe, blessing nature who produced it and thanking the tree on which it grew."
It makes me appreciate everything so much more and I feel like a fool for worrying over little things.
"Your soul takes on the color of your thoughts." P59
"Awaken; return to yourself. Now, no longer asleep, knowing they were only dreams, clear-headed again, treat everything around as a dream." P76
"It's normal to feel pain in your hands and feet, if your using your feet as feet and your hands as hands. And for a human being to feel stress is normal - if he's living a normal human life. And if it's normal, how can it be bad?" P76
"You can hold your breath until you turn blue, but they'll still go on doing it." P102
"Leave other people's mistakes where they lie." P122
The Four Agreements by Don Ruiz. It's a short and simple book about four rules of life which you can use anywhere.
1. Be impeccable with your word. You can read this as "don't swear", but it's not about that. It is about the constant and continuing things we say to ourselves that make us feel bad. We don't even know we do this. And it's not about big things, it's about the thousands of small reprimands we give ourselves that hold us back living our life.
2. Don't take anything personally. When someone else says something to you, good or bad, it shows how they feel. What they say is about them, what they think is important, what is relevant for them. It's not about you. This doesn't mean that you can ignore it, but it shines another light on things other people say about you, or about others to you. This applies to "good things" as well. If someone gives you a compliment, it tells something about them. And of course it works as well for the things you say or do - they tell something about you.
3. Don't make assumptions. Don't think you know what other people think, or that you know why they do the things they do.
4. Do your best. You can't always live your life following rules. Do your best, and if you break a rule, bad luck, next time better! That means that you can forgive yourself. And it means that you should not give up after a big fuck up. Or a small fuck up, or many fuck ups. You can start over again at any moment.
The book is much better at explaining. It's about 60 pages, worth the effort.
I've only read it in a hurry but it had some rather odd bits
For example, re 1. :
> Every human is a magician, and we can either put a spell on someone with our word or we can release someone from a spell. We cast spells all the time with our opinions. An example: I see a friend and give him an opinion that just popped into my mind. I say, "Hmmm! I see that kind of color in your face in people who are going to get cancer." If he listens to the word, and if he agrees, he will have cancer in less than one year. That is the power of the word.
There are many, but one is The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. I read it as a child, and it was the first time I thought about logical thinking.
Here is the section:
“Logic!" said the Professor half to himself. "Why don't they teach logic at these schools? There are only three possibilities. Either your sister is telling lies, or she is mad, or she is telling the truth. You know she doesn't tell lies and it is obvious that she is not mad. For the moment then and unless any further evidence turns up, we must assume that she is telling the truth. ”
Lewis was instrumental in helping me understand that faith can be based on a foundation of logic and reason versus pure emotion and my guess is he helped many others struggling in that same area.
This looks kind of like logic if you squint, but is actually a logical fallacy.
This issues is of course there are of course more than 3 options. If she had been deceived intentionally than none of the given three examples apply. Further, it assumes you can verify that she was 'telling lies' or 'insane' as an abstract property of her which is another mistake.
That said, I can see why someone might find it a useful introduction to logic.
Lewis and Tolkien both spend a lot of time exploring the internal moral and ethical struggles of their protagonists, the development of courage, and the importance of doing the right thing even when no one is looking or in the face of opposition. This was hugely important to me as a kid, and recently I've been going back to The Lord of the Rings to read up on courage in the face of looming evil.
He puts into words concepts of life so close to us yet so foreign sounding that makes us rethink everything in our lives.
When you ask people "What is the opposite of fragile", they usually answer robust, which Taleb proves to be incorrect by introducing a new concept, the Antifragilty. It entangles so many things in economic, academic, science, finances and other systems with several tales from the past revisited with a new lens.
The Millionaire Next Door: The Surprising Secrets of America's Wealthy.
We know the "rich", people who spent $10M on a Yacht as a parking space for their 1M private jet which they use as a cellar for their $10k wines.
And we think millionaires are like that but on a smaller scale. ACTUALLY... most folks who have $1M liquid are hard working, cheap, frugal (still cutting coupons from ads). The reason why this book is so good is not only because it shatters the perception about how millionaires live, but if you take the description of their lifestyles as a lesson, it will make you manage your money better.
Most people in the US have tons of debt, don't have $500 to use for an unplanned spending. Probably this forum full of well-paid high-tech professionals less so, but still, the principles are all the same. In fact, there are parts of the book talking about how big earners also spend big (and fast), so it's a good reminder of how not spending money is as good as earning it, and also usually easier to do.
The book was written by a psychologist who survived the Holocaust camps. The paragraph that always sticks with me goes something like "for sure, the best amongst us never left the camps - they (the guards) would need to pick (kill) a dozen people, and the best wouldn't let it be their friends or family, even if it meant their own death."
Sapiens - there's a section in there about how everything (well, most) in our world is essentially a figment of our collective imaginations that enough of us believe is true and as such it is reality. If enough people (like everybody) decided tomorrow that every company's articles of incorporation actually don't count then companies as we know them could simply cease to exist since the documents that make them exist only have meaning in our collective imaginations.
Once I accepted this everything became a lot more fun, arguments about politics/religion etc are enjoyable as you realise that no one is fundamentally right.
Also, the explanation of fractional reserve banking and how debt came to be a thing was like the matrix being revealed.
1984. I read this when I was around 13. It profoundly changed how I view the government and technology. It gave me a strong respect for what a government can do, and how our reality is not just our naked perception, but it is what others want us to perceive.
Nobody has ever captured the nature of power on an individual level to the depth and breadth that Caro did on this book. (except perhaps his epic treatment of Lyndon Johnson)
Over something like 1,100 pages you get to track the career of an aspiring reformer as he transitions to skilled and trusted government official, to someone who manages to grow to the point that he is more powerful than the Governor and Mayor of New York during NY's economic peak -- despite never having been elected to anything. Then you get to witness his decline and ultimate fall.
This is probably the best biography ever written. It may take you six months to read, but its time well spent.
I adore this book. It also took me 6 months to read. I think about it often while wandering around the city, imagining the areas before and after Moses' steel-and-concrete hand, imagining the old neighborhoods, trying to envision what could be next, what could have been, what could be.
Lately I've been reading Foucault and I find that many pieces of The Power Broker are incredible examples of Foucault's post-modern/post-structuralist theory of power: power relations as a sort-of amorphous "lines of force" that move between people through society, occasionally emergent as structural domination/power, rather than as some sort of antagonistic relationship between rulers and ruled. This conception of power makes sense when you consider Moses operating at an intersection between (and attempting to leverage) many different "fields" of powers: government politicians, wealthy private estates, union high-ups, the news media, etc.
The book is simple mind blowing. It seems as if the entire history of homo sapiens which we learned in school was wrong. There was no slow progression, homo Sapiens and Neanderthals existed in the same time as did many ither species like homo erectus, but the perished before Sapiens.
It seems that our ability to form fictional entities (like money, state, society, country, religion etc) made us superior to other species. It seems that the basic ability to gossip helped us beat other species!
Completely agree. The book is full of ideas and questions the fundamental assumptions we live with.
I just started reading it and am through the first 100 pages. Was reading it last night when I hit upon : US Declaration of Independence document is an imagined reality - a myth. It talks about equality of all men ( was hoping to read word human there but anyway ). And then he goes onto blow away the fact how all men are not equal - biologically - evolutionary and so on.
I do not necessarily agree with a lot of things he says but the book is a riveting read and does questions some of fundamental assumptions we have made.
I can't wait to discover what the book has to offer next. It is very thought provoking.
I am a big fan of it but do not take the book uncritically. Everything in the book is somewhere between simplified and incorrect. It is still very useful challenging of conventional wisdom for all of history. It ties everything together too neatly but neatness has some benefits. It makes your own think more solid and makes you question everything.
You can buy Lord of the Rings as a single bound hardcover roughly 1200 pages. The paper is thin, its only about 2 inches thick. I'm thinking of the 50th anniversary edition. In terms of total amount of lifetime "wasted" playing DnD/Pathfinder and derivatives offline, plus infinite hours of computer fantasy RPGs plus perhaps the whole concept of RPGs in general, it probably has the largest impact in terms of hours spent thinking about the concept.
I can't provide a specific link but something only 70s/80s kids will understand is when I was about five and I finished reading every Tom Swift book ever written (as of that decade, anyway) I spent most of a week reading an entire single volume encyclopedia, trying to figure out how it all works together, or not. Before wikipedia, before "multimedia cdrom" encyclopedia, there were multi volume collections and large single volume collections. I'll push the limit and claim reading an encyclopedia entry about Kant or Impressionism or Bach or the american civil war isn't technical in the sense of "programming C" is technical. I admit there were technical articles in the book. It was weird reading a 60s liberal arts article about computers when I had an early TRS-80 home computer on my dad's desk.
I can't immediately find it right now, but if memory serves, the last time this came up, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" and "Stranger in a Strange Land" seemed to be the strongest answers.
I have since read, enjoyed, and been influenced by both.
Neither are properly regarded as "non-technology," but I think from your point 2 it's clear that you are just looking to exclude training manual type texts.
Hitchhiker's in particular imparts a lot of great advice for creativity in technical fields, and software in particular, but does it using a fictionalized world with comedic logical oddities.
Another book I'll add, which has some of these properties, is "Jitterbug Perfume" by Tom Robbins (although take note that this book is highly erotic and explicit).
Not a single book but the Discworld series of books by Sir Terry Pratchett.
In particular the Watch sub-series.
I grew up reading them from the late 80's on-wards and I actually can't separate my worldview from them anymore, his outlook on life became my outlook on life.
Hope, Cynicism, politics, mortality (Death is a literal character), practicality and absurdity all feature in the series strongly.
Some of my favourite quotes
> Logic is a wonderful thing but doesn't always beat actual thought. (The Last Continent).
> Genius is always allowed some leeway, once the hammer has been pried from its hands and the blood has been cleaned up. (Thief of Time).
> I believe in freedom, Mr. Lipwig. Not many people do, although they will, of course, protest otherwise. And no practical definition of freedom would be complete without the freedom to take the consequences. Indeed, it is the freedom upon which all the others are based. (Lord Vetinari - Going Postal).
> What sort of man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter.
> Technically, the city of Ankh-Morpork is a Tyranny, which is not always the same thing as a monarchy, and in fact even the post of Tyrant has been somewhat redefined by the incumbent, Lord Vetinari, as the only form of democracy that works. Everyone is entitled to vote, unless disqualified by reason of age or not being Lord Vetinari.
And yet it does work. This has annoyed a number of people who feel, somehow, that it should not, and who want a monarch instead, thus replacing a man who has achieved his position by cunning, a deep understanding of the realities of the human psyche, breathtaking diplomacy, a certain prowess with the stiletto dagger, and, all agree, a mind like a perfectly balanced circular saw, with a man who has got there by being born…
A third proposition, that the city be governed by a choice of respectable members of the community who would promise not to give themselves airs or betray the public trust at every turn, was instantly the subject of music-hall jokes all over the city.
It's a history of macro trends in violence - wars, homicide, rape, etc. The burden of violence in the modern world is much, much lower than it was historically, even fairly recently.
The book catches a lot of flak from people who reject the claim that the future will automatically be more peaceful than the past. I think this is poor criticism because that's not what the book says; it is explicitly a descriptive history and not predictive.
I love this book because it presents remarkable evidence from multiple fields that the world has gotten profoundly better (at least, regarding violence). The realization that the world can improve and has improved is...liberating? Surprisingly many people don't believe this, though I expect on HN belief in progress is not uncommon.
Having such evidence that the world has improved so much is powerful motivation to try to continue - you know it's possible. It's the antidote to incorrect zero-sum thinking, which is not just damaging but also wrong. And perhaps it's a moral call to action: our grandparents' and parents' generations left us a world which is much more peaceful than the one they were born into. Do we not owe future generations the same gift?
[+] [-] epaga|9 years ago|reply
A palpable sense of mystery is maintained from start to finish, but it arguably does better than any other book in the Bible at giving a deep look into the person of Jesus as he was seen and believed in by the early church. Additionally, there is a subtle sense of humor as the gospel author clearly enjoyed language and word plays and describes multiple misunderstandings that occur because of the ambiguity of language.
Probably more than any other book, this book has shaped me on a personal level.
(If you're going to read it, I highly recommend a modern translation such as the ESV, NKJV, or HCSB.)
[+] [-] cjf4|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kej|9 years ago|reply
[1] https://cs.stanford.edu/~uno/things.html
[2] https://cs.stanford.edu/~uno/316.html
[+] [-] osullivj|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pklausler|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jonathansizz|9 years ago|reply
Follow this up with some key works in the field, such as Gould's early critique of naive adaptationism, The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme.
Also consider different perspectives such as the those described in following books, which take, respectively, drift- and mutation-first approaches to evolution:
The Origins of Genome Architecture, M Lynch; and Mutation-Driven Evolution, M Nei.
Above all, know that evolution is far more complex, subtle (and interesting) than The Selfish Gene would have you believe.
[+] [-] osullivj|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] randcraw|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] XaspR8d|9 years ago|reply
I actually really like Pirsig's ideas about quality and balancing analytical and emotional worldviews, but the writing style drives me nuts and feels like I'm grading a weak Philosophy 101 essay.
[+] [-] genkimind|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 0x445442|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tylerc230|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Nomentatus|9 years ago|reply
Terrible philosophical reasoning, yet plenty of relevance, and an interesting person, no question.
[+] [-] kemiller2002|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thedevil|9 years ago|reply
1) Design of Everyday Things by Dan Norman
This book ruined my life. I highly recommend it. Every engineer, manager and designer should read this. Maybe every human. I think of this book every time I try to pull a push door, every time I reach the bottom floor of a stairwell and notice the design that might save my life one day, and every time I try to struggle to operate a television or a microwave.
2) Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini
This book helped me understand myself and everyone else. For example, I now understand why I double down on dumb ideas. I also catch a lot more marketing and sales tricks.
Edit: Sorry, just now realized that I broke the 1-book rule, but it's probably too late to correct this and it's really hard to choose between these two anyway.
[+] [-] leobueno|9 years ago|reply
I also like The Soul of a New Machine, The Prince, The Art of War and On Human Nature.
[+] [-] BeetleB|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kabdib|9 years ago|reply
GEB got me wondering about a lot of things, and showed me how hard science and engineering and art can coexist. It's not a perfect book -- frankly, I find it rather dull reading now -- but it was an eye-opener when I was just starting out.
[+] [-] Nekorosu|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] osullivj|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Fripplebubby|9 years ago|reply
1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_artificial_intelligen... i.e. AI that isn't machine learning
[+] [-] neduma|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] icey|9 years ago|reply
Stoicism helped me build the ability to care about the things in my power to change, and not stress about things that aren't. Very useful in any job or personal situation that includes a lot of ambient stress.
[+] [-] medius|9 years ago|reply
"To conclude, always observe how ephemeral and worthless human things are, and what was yesterday a speck of semen tomorrow will be a mummy or ashes. Pass then through this little space of time conformably to nature, and end your journey in content, just as an olive falls off when it is ripe, blessing nature who produced it and thanking the tree on which it grew."
It makes me appreciate everything so much more and I feel like a fool for worrying over little things.
[+] [-] bcbrown|9 years ago|reply
"Your soul takes on the color of your thoughts." P59
"Awaken; return to yourself. Now, no longer asleep, knowing they were only dreams, clear-headed again, treat everything around as a dream." P76
"It's normal to feel pain in your hands and feet, if your using your feet as feet and your hands as hands. And for a human being to feel stress is normal - if he's living a normal human life. And if it's normal, how can it be bad?" P76
"You can hold your breath until you turn blue, but they'll still go on doing it." P102
"Leave other people's mistakes where they lie." P122
[+] [-] snikeris|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hollander|9 years ago|reply
1. Be impeccable with your word. You can read this as "don't swear", but it's not about that. It is about the constant and continuing things we say to ourselves that make us feel bad. We don't even know we do this. And it's not about big things, it's about the thousands of small reprimands we give ourselves that hold us back living our life.
2. Don't take anything personally. When someone else says something to you, good or bad, it shows how they feel. What they say is about them, what they think is important, what is relevant for them. It's not about you. This doesn't mean that you can ignore it, but it shines another light on things other people say about you, or about others to you. This applies to "good things" as well. If someone gives you a compliment, it tells something about them. And of course it works as well for the things you say or do - they tell something about you.
3. Don't make assumptions. Don't think you know what other people think, or that you know why they do the things they do.
4. Do your best. You can't always live your life following rules. Do your best, and if you break a rule, bad luck, next time better! That means that you can forgive yourself. And it means that you should not give up after a big fuck up. Or a small fuck up, or many fuck ups. You can start over again at any moment.
The book is much better at explaining. It's about 60 pages, worth the effort.
[+] [-] cJ0th|9 years ago|reply
For example, re 1. :
> Every human is a magician, and we can either put a spell on someone with our word or we can release someone from a spell. We cast spells all the time with our opinions. An example: I see a friend and give him an opinion that just popped into my mind. I say, "Hmmm! I see that kind of color in your face in people who are going to get cancer." If he listens to the word, and if he agrees, he will have cancer in less than one year. That is the power of the word.
[+] [-] 1ba9115454|9 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influen...
I have to keep reminded myself to apply the rules, but very sound advice.
[+] [-] adgasf|9 years ago|reply
Here is the section:
“Logic!" said the Professor half to himself. "Why don't they teach logic at these schools? There are only three possibilities. Either your sister is telling lies, or she is mad, or she is telling the truth. You know she doesn't tell lies and it is obvious that she is not mad. For the moment then and unless any further evidence turns up, we must assume that she is telling the truth. ”
What I didn't realize at the time was that Lewis was pushing his theistic argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis%27s_trilemma
I don't think that detracts from it, however.
[+] [-] 0x445442|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Retric|9 years ago|reply
This issues is of course there are of course more than 3 options. If she had been deceived intentionally than none of the given three examples apply. Further, it assumes you can verify that she was 'telling lies' or 'insane' as an abstract property of her which is another mistake.
That said, I can see why someone might find it a useful introduction to logic.
[+] [-] jefurii|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tyurok|9 years ago|reply
He puts into words concepts of life so close to us yet so foreign sounding that makes us rethink everything in our lives.
When you ask people "What is the opposite of fragile", they usually answer robust, which Taleb proves to be incorrect by introducing a new concept, the Antifragilty. It entangles so many things in economic, academic, science, finances and other systems with several tales from the past revisited with a new lens.
[+] [-] inerte|9 years ago|reply
We know the "rich", people who spent $10M on a Yacht as a parking space for their 1M private jet which they use as a cellar for their $10k wines.
And we think millionaires are like that but on a smaller scale. ACTUALLY... most folks who have $1M liquid are hard working, cheap, frugal (still cutting coupons from ads). The reason why this book is so good is not only because it shatters the perception about how millionaires live, but if you take the description of their lifestyles as a lesson, it will make you manage your money better.
Most people in the US have tons of debt, don't have $500 to use for an unplanned spending. Probably this forum full of well-paid high-tech professionals less so, but still, the principles are all the same. In fact, there are parts of the book talking about how big earners also spend big (and fast), so it's a good reminder of how not spending money is as good as earning it, and also usually easier to do.
[+] [-] dakrootie|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mtreis86|9 years ago|reply
The book was written by a psychologist who survived the Holocaust camps. The paragraph that always sticks with me goes something like "for sure, the best amongst us never left the camps - they (the guards) would need to pick (kill) a dozen people, and the best wouldn't let it be their friends or family, even if it meant their own death."
[+] [-] simonbarker87|9 years ago|reply
Once I accepted this everything became a lot more fun, arguments about politics/religion etc are enjoyable as you realise that no one is fundamentally right.
Also, the explanation of fractional reserve banking and how debt came to be a thing was like the matrix being revealed.
Good book, highly recommend it.
[+] [-] kemiller2002|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Spooky23|9 years ago|reply
Nobody has ever captured the nature of power on an individual level to the depth and breadth that Caro did on this book. (except perhaps his epic treatment of Lyndon Johnson)
Over something like 1,100 pages you get to track the career of an aspiring reformer as he transitions to skilled and trusted government official, to someone who manages to grow to the point that he is more powerful than the Governor and Mayor of New York during NY's economic peak -- despite never having been elected to anything. Then you get to witness his decline and ultimate fall.
This is probably the best biography ever written. It may take you six months to read, but its time well spent.
[+] [-] Nav_Panel|9 years ago|reply
Lately I've been reading Foucault and I find that many pieces of The Power Broker are incredible examples of Foucault's post-modern/post-structuralist theory of power: power relations as a sort-of amorphous "lines of force" that move between people through society, occasionally emergent as structural domination/power, rather than as some sort of antagonistic relationship between rulers and ruled. This conception of power makes sense when you consider Moses operating at an intersection between (and attempting to leverage) many different "fields" of powers: government politicians, wealthy private estates, union high-ups, the news media, etc.
[+] [-] cponeill|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thewhitetulip|9 years ago|reply
The book is simple mind blowing. It seems as if the entire history of homo sapiens which we learned in school was wrong. There was no slow progression, homo Sapiens and Neanderthals existed in the same time as did many ither species like homo erectus, but the perished before Sapiens.
It seems that our ability to form fictional entities (like money, state, society, country, religion etc) made us superior to other species. It seems that the basic ability to gossip helped us beat other species!
Completely mind blowing.
[+] [-] aa5a|9 years ago|reply
I just started reading it and am through the first 100 pages. Was reading it last night when I hit upon : US Declaration of Independence document is an imagined reality - a myth. It talks about equality of all men ( was hoping to read word human there but anyway ). And then he goes onto blow away the fact how all men are not equal - biologically - evolutionary and so on.
I do not necessarily agree with a lot of things he says but the book is a riveting read and does questions some of fundamental assumptions we have made.
I can't wait to discover what the book has to offer next. It is very thought provoking.
[+] [-] canes123456|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] VLM|9 years ago|reply
I can't provide a specific link but something only 70s/80s kids will understand is when I was about five and I finished reading every Tom Swift book ever written (as of that decade, anyway) I spent most of a week reading an entire single volume encyclopedia, trying to figure out how it all works together, or not. Before wikipedia, before "multimedia cdrom" encyclopedia, there were multi volume collections and large single volume collections. I'll push the limit and claim reading an encyclopedia entry about Kant or Impressionism or Bach or the american civil war isn't technical in the sense of "programming C" is technical. I admit there were technical articles in the book. It was weird reading a 60s liberal arts article about computers when I had an early TRS-80 home computer on my dad's desk.
[+] [-] jMyles|9 years ago|reply
I have since read, enjoyed, and been influenced by both.
Neither are properly regarded as "non-technology," but I think from your point 2 it's clear that you are just looking to exclude training manual type texts.
Hitchhiker's in particular imparts a lot of great advice for creativity in technical fields, and software in particular, but does it using a fictionalized world with comedic logical oddities.
Another book I'll add, which has some of these properties, is "Jitterbug Perfume" by Tom Robbins (although take note that this book is highly erotic and explicit).
[+] [-] noir_lord|9 years ago|reply
In particular the Watch sub-series.
I grew up reading them from the late 80's on-wards and I actually can't separate my worldview from them anymore, his outlook on life became my outlook on life.
Hope, Cynicism, politics, mortality (Death is a literal character), practicality and absurdity all feature in the series strongly.
Some of my favourite quotes
> Logic is a wonderful thing but doesn't always beat actual thought. (The Last Continent).
> Genius is always allowed some leeway, once the hammer has been pried from its hands and the blood has been cleaned up. (Thief of Time).
> I believe in freedom, Mr. Lipwig. Not many people do, although they will, of course, protest otherwise. And no practical definition of freedom would be complete without the freedom to take the consequences. Indeed, it is the freedom upon which all the others are based. (Lord Vetinari - Going Postal).
> What sort of man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter.
> Technically, the city of Ankh-Morpork is a Tyranny, which is not always the same thing as a monarchy, and in fact even the post of Tyrant has been somewhat redefined by the incumbent, Lord Vetinari, as the only form of democracy that works. Everyone is entitled to vote, unless disqualified by reason of age or not being Lord Vetinari. And yet it does work. This has annoyed a number of people who feel, somehow, that it should not, and who want a monarch instead, thus replacing a man who has achieved his position by cunning, a deep understanding of the realities of the human psyche, breathtaking diplomacy, a certain prowess with the stiletto dagger, and, all agree, a mind like a perfectly balanced circular saw, with a man who has got there by being born… A third proposition, that the city be governed by a choice of respectable members of the community who would promise not to give themselves airs or betray the public trust at every turn, was instantly the subject of music-hall jokes all over the city.
[+] [-] GedByrne|9 years ago|reply
I so wish that Sir Terry could be here now, helping us to make sense of what is happening with some silly little stories.
[+] [-] Tarrosion|9 years ago|reply
It's a history of macro trends in violence - wars, homicide, rape, etc. The burden of violence in the modern world is much, much lower than it was historically, even fairly recently.
The book catches a lot of flak from people who reject the claim that the future will automatically be more peaceful than the past. I think this is poor criticism because that's not what the book says; it is explicitly a descriptive history and not predictive.
I love this book because it presents remarkable evidence from multiple fields that the world has gotten profoundly better (at least, regarding violence). The realization that the world can improve and has improved is...liberating? Surprisingly many people don't believe this, though I expect on HN belief in progress is not uncommon.
Having such evidence that the world has improved so much is powerful motivation to try to continue - you know it's possible. It's the antidote to incorrect zero-sum thinking, which is not just damaging but also wrong. And perhaps it's a moral call to action: our grandparents' and parents' generations left us a world which is much more peaceful than the one they were born into. Do we not owe future generations the same gift?