Gadzooks I'm behind! I finally finished my first one.
1. God is Not Great, Christopher Hitchens, 307 pg.
It was a pretty good one. I'd give it 4 stars. Compared to Dawkins and Harris this was a fresh take on atheism. You can find my full review here. Keep it up everyone! I've been impressed with the progress so far. Now I'm gonna try to catch up.
The 50 Book Challenge 2009
1. Eragon by Christopher Paolini 496 pgs
2. Juiced: Wild Times, Rampant 'Roids, Smash Hits, and How Baseball Got BIG by Jose Canseco 284 pgs
Juiced wasn't written that well, and Jose Canseco came off as arrogant and cocky, but I enjoyed the book. It answered a few questioins I had about sterioids in baseball, but I think most of it was opinion based not facts. My next book will be American Gods by Neil Gaiman
2. Juiced: Wild Times, Rampant 'Roids, Smash Hits, and How Baseball Got BIG by Jose Canseco 284 pgs
Juiced wasn't written that well, and Jose Canseco came off as arrogant and cocky, but I enjoyed the book. It answered a few questioins I had about sterioids in baseball, but I think most of it was opinion based not facts. My next book will be American Gods by Neil Gaiman
Corey N.
What's worth the prize is always worth the fight~ Nickelback
What's worth the prize is always worth the fight~ Nickelback
Re: The 50 Book Challenge 2009
1. The Joke's Over; Memories of Hunter S Thompson Ralph Steadman 387pg
2. Bottomfeeder; How the fish on our plates are killing the planet Taras Grescoe 357 pg
3. Heart of Darkness Joseph Conrad 110 pg
Good book. Interestingly made me appreciate the movie (Apocalypse Now) a lot more - what an amazing book to movie adaptation. Although it's very short, it was also very dense, and I found it hard to concentrate on to begin with. It's not really until the fog arrives in the journey up the river that it really grabbed me, but it was gripping towards the end.
2. Bottomfeeder; How the fish on our plates are killing the planet Taras Grescoe 357 pg
3. Heart of Darkness Joseph Conrad 110 pg
Good book. Interestingly made me appreciate the movie (Apocalypse Now) a lot more - what an amazing book to movie adaptation. Although it's very short, it was also very dense, and I found it hard to concentrate on to begin with. It's not really until the fog arrives in the journey up the river that it really grabbed me, but it was gripping towards the end.
-
colefieldhouse22
- BSOS Beast
- Posts: 358
- Joined: 01 Jan 2006 17:55
- Location: Silver Spring, MD
Heart of Darkness is a great book. It is really interesting because it is considered one of the greatest English language novels of all time, yet the author is Polish and did not learn English until he was in his twenties. Since someone else read Things Fall Apart, thought I would post this essay that Chinua Achebe wrote about Heart of Darkness:
http://www.cis.vt.edu/modernworld/d/Achebe.html
http://www.cis.vt.edu/modernworld/d/Achebe.html
Adrienne Craver
I could be wrong but from what i remember, Conrad was a polish guy, working for Dutch Imperialists, writing an english novel about British imperialists? or something of that nature. Ridiculous. Good book though
JSACK wrote:alright well me and obara'bars, shredded our dicks off, since we are both in high school, obviously there is some sort of talent show
-
bigdirtyfoot
- Sloppy
- Posts: 3142
- Joined: 22 Apr 2002 12:30
- Location: NC
1. God is Not Great, Christopher Hitchens, 307 pg.
2. Great American Hypocrites, Glenn Greenwald, 290 pg.
I felt like this one wasn't as strong as it could've been. It was a quick read though! You can read my full review by clicking here.
2. Great American Hypocrites, Glenn Greenwald, 290 pg.
I felt like this one wasn't as strong as it could've been. It was a quick read though! You can read my full review by clicking here.
1. "Oh, Romeo" by Merete Pryds Helle (126 pages)
Modern version of Romeo and Juliet. Juliet is the daughter of a rightwinged local politician and Romeo is a refugee from Iran.
I read it for danish class
2. "I sammenbrudets tjeneste" which means "In the service of the breakdown" (237 pages)
The book is a dialogue between the leader of the art project Das Beckwerk and the art theorist and political commentator Mikkel Bolt.
The themes of the dialogue is mainly about philosophy, art and how to live revolutionary today.
Das Beckwerk is pretty annoying but their projects are funny.
Mikkel Bolt is super sharp.
Good and inspirering read. Probably only in danish though.
More on das beckwerk: http://www.dasbeckwerk.com/
Modern version of Romeo and Juliet. Juliet is the daughter of a rightwinged local politician and Romeo is a refugee from Iran.
I read it for danish class
2. "I sammenbrudets tjeneste" which means "In the service of the breakdown" (237 pages)
The book is a dialogue between the leader of the art project Das Beckwerk and the art theorist and political commentator Mikkel Bolt.
The themes of the dialogue is mainly about philosophy, art and how to live revolutionary today.
Das Beckwerk is pretty annoying but their projects are funny.
Mikkel Bolt is super sharp.
Good and inspirering read. Probably only in danish though.
More on das beckwerk: http://www.dasbeckwerk.com/
Ahh, between the holidays, moving, and a new ps3, there hasn't been much reading. I suppose that I'll start at 1 alongside everyone else on the thread and keep my own personal goal for 50 by September 2009.
1. The Ancestor's Tale - Richard Dawkins (520 pages)
In this book Dawkins takes you on a pilgrimage back through time, introducing you to approximations of your various ancestors, or, 'contestors'. At each contestor you are presented with a pretty little graph introducing various species who rendezvous with you at that common ancestor, as well as the approximate point in time that your ancestor was alive. The pilgrimage begins with humans and 'The Farmer's Tale', and ends with eubacteria and 'The Rhizobium's Tale'. Naturally some ideas of the origins of heredity are presented as well.
The book is filled with 'tales' of your fellow organisms, in which Dawkins uses each organism as an example of an aspect of evolutionary biology. It is rather dense as far as Dawkins goes, and is certainly not what one would call short. The technical bits aren't incomprehensibly so, though I do not recommend this book unless you have an interest in evolutionary biology, and are willing to strap on your thinking cap.
If you ever plan on buying this book, be sure that you don't get the north american version, get the hardcover Weidenfeld & Nicolson version. The paper in the north american version is of a relatively poor quality, whereas the W&N has high quality paper, and beautiful colour photos, maps and graphs. Definitely worth getting shipped overseas if need be.
1. The Ancestor's Tale - Richard Dawkins (520 pages)
In this book Dawkins takes you on a pilgrimage back through time, introducing you to approximations of your various ancestors, or, 'contestors'. At each contestor you are presented with a pretty little graph introducing various species who rendezvous with you at that common ancestor, as well as the approximate point in time that your ancestor was alive. The pilgrimage begins with humans and 'The Farmer's Tale', and ends with eubacteria and 'The Rhizobium's Tale'. Naturally some ideas of the origins of heredity are presented as well.
The book is filled with 'tales' of your fellow organisms, in which Dawkins uses each organism as an example of an aspect of evolutionary biology. It is rather dense as far as Dawkins goes, and is certainly not what one would call short. The technical bits aren't incomprehensibly so, though I do not recommend this book unless you have an interest in evolutionary biology, and are willing to strap on your thinking cap.
If you ever plan on buying this book, be sure that you don't get the north american version, get the hardcover Weidenfeld & Nicolson version. The paper in the north american version is of a relatively poor quality, whereas the W&N has high quality paper, and beautiful colour photos, maps and graphs. Definitely worth getting shipped overseas if need be.
Andrew Langstaff
Re: The 50 Book Challenge 2009
Thanks for the link Adrienne. I'd actually already read that essay, and I agree that it's good, although I think it was silly of me to read it before reading the book, as in some ways it spoiled parts of the experience perhaps. I guess that's speculation though.
1. The Joke's Over; Memories of Hunter S Thompson Ralph Steadman 387pg
2. Bottomfeeder; How the fish on our plates are killing the planet Taras Grescoe 357 pg
3. Heart of Darkness Joseph Conrad 110 pg
4. A Friendly Letter to Skeptics and Atheists David G. Myers 136pg
I read this book because a few people had been talking about it and because I strongly believe that you should seek out opinions that disagree with your own, not agree with them and that doing so is far more beneficial. Of course opinions that you do agree with may always contain more information than you had and more "weapons" to use, but until your opinions are seriously challenged and repeatedly challenged, the likelihood that you're wrong is probably fairly high.
This book did contain some information that was challenging and interesting. In particular I completely agree with the idea that people who are apathetic or not engaged with religion are the least moral, least healthy and most selfish people in the world, and it's good to see that the evidence strongly backs that up. People who spend the time and effort to try and find out about the world outside of their own lives and the greater meaning of the world, be it engaged atheists or agnostics, or Muslims and Christians are clearly people who are going to at least have good intentions, which is a lot more than can be said for the apathetics (including - or even especially - the ones who identify with religions and "believe" but don't put those beliefs into actions and behaviours). Indeed I would tend to view the world not as those who are religious or not religious, but those who care and those who don't care. Unfortunately amongst those who do care there is the virus of religion that leads to people committing mass murder thinking that they're doing the right thing (and indeed there are many other similar viruses that are not religious in nature but just as dangerous).
However the small gems of wisdom are separated by long patches of rubbish, logical fallacy, misunderstanding and possibly deliberate misquoting. It's unclear whether Myers actually took the time to read the "New Atheist" books he criticises, but he certainly fails to even attempt to address the core concerns of those books - which are 1. That there is no evidence to suggest any kind of "god" actually exists and 2. It is through the tolerance without criticism of faith that immoral acts in the name of religion occur.
Myers brings up a number of arguments that are refuted in the books he criticising without making any attempt to address the rebuttles. He might as well just copied out the part of each book where it says; "some religious people argue this" while cutting out the next paragraph that says "this is wrong because." It's particularly frustrating when he starts attempting to comment on physics and demonstrates his complete lack of knowledge of the field (he still thinks that scientists believe in the 1950s version of the Big Bang theory and that no progress on the theory has been made since then, and that there is no evidence for the "multiverse theory" - as well as the completely debunked idea that there are a number of variables in our universe that all had to be exactly what they are for life to exist). He even quotes Einstein despite the first chapter of The God Delusion addressing the question of Einstein's faith (and of course it's an argumentum ad verecundiam and a illogical belief that Einstein was infallible).
At one point he essentially claims (or at least I interpreted him as claiming, because I concede that this isn't completely direct and perhaps I misunderstood) that the fact that it's now essentially a demonstrated fact that prayer doesn't work is evidence supporting the existence of God.
So yeah, I wasn't that impressed. He does write well and tries to engage with sceptics and atheists but certainly failed to convince me that religion is anything other than irrational and unnecessary.
1. The Joke's Over; Memories of Hunter S Thompson Ralph Steadman 387pg
2. Bottomfeeder; How the fish on our plates are killing the planet Taras Grescoe 357 pg
3. Heart of Darkness Joseph Conrad 110 pg
4. A Friendly Letter to Skeptics and Atheists David G. Myers 136pg
I read this book because a few people had been talking about it and because I strongly believe that you should seek out opinions that disagree with your own, not agree with them and that doing so is far more beneficial. Of course opinions that you do agree with may always contain more information than you had and more "weapons" to use, but until your opinions are seriously challenged and repeatedly challenged, the likelihood that you're wrong is probably fairly high.
This book did contain some information that was challenging and interesting. In particular I completely agree with the idea that people who are apathetic or not engaged with religion are the least moral, least healthy and most selfish people in the world, and it's good to see that the evidence strongly backs that up. People who spend the time and effort to try and find out about the world outside of their own lives and the greater meaning of the world, be it engaged atheists or agnostics, or Muslims and Christians are clearly people who are going to at least have good intentions, which is a lot more than can be said for the apathetics (including - or even especially - the ones who identify with religions and "believe" but don't put those beliefs into actions and behaviours). Indeed I would tend to view the world not as those who are religious or not religious, but those who care and those who don't care. Unfortunately amongst those who do care there is the virus of religion that leads to people committing mass murder thinking that they're doing the right thing (and indeed there are many other similar viruses that are not religious in nature but just as dangerous).
However the small gems of wisdom are separated by long patches of rubbish, logical fallacy, misunderstanding and possibly deliberate misquoting. It's unclear whether Myers actually took the time to read the "New Atheist" books he criticises, but he certainly fails to even attempt to address the core concerns of those books - which are 1. That there is no evidence to suggest any kind of "god" actually exists and 2. It is through the tolerance without criticism of faith that immoral acts in the name of religion occur.
Myers brings up a number of arguments that are refuted in the books he criticising without making any attempt to address the rebuttles. He might as well just copied out the part of each book where it says; "some religious people argue this" while cutting out the next paragraph that says "this is wrong because." It's particularly frustrating when he starts attempting to comment on physics and demonstrates his complete lack of knowledge of the field (he still thinks that scientists believe in the 1950s version of the Big Bang theory and that no progress on the theory has been made since then, and that there is no evidence for the "multiverse theory" - as well as the completely debunked idea that there are a number of variables in our universe that all had to be exactly what they are for life to exist). He even quotes Einstein despite the first chapter of The God Delusion addressing the question of Einstein's faith (and of course it's an argumentum ad verecundiam and a illogical belief that Einstein was infallible).
At one point he essentially claims (or at least I interpreted him as claiming, because I concede that this isn't completely direct and perhaps I misunderstood) that the fact that it's now essentially a demonstrated fact that prayer doesn't work is evidence supporting the existence of God.
So yeah, I wasn't that impressed. He does write well and tries to engage with sceptics and atheists but certainly failed to convince me that religion is anything other than irrational and unnecessary.
1. Ilse Witch- Terry Brooks 452pgs
2. Antigone- Sophocles 70 pg translation (for school)
3. Antrax- Terry Brooks 378 pgs
4. Morgawr- Terry Brooks 402pgs
Okay so books 1,3,4 are the books of The Voyage of the Jerle Shannara trilogy by Terry Brooks, fantastic read if you are into fantasy. Personally they had this "flavor", i guess is the word, reminiscent of classic reads like Treasure Island just because of the sailing aspect. Very enjoyable read.
2. Antigone- Sophocles 70 pg translation (for school)
3. Antrax- Terry Brooks 378 pgs
4. Morgawr- Terry Brooks 402pgs
Okay so books 1,3,4 are the books of The Voyage of the Jerle Shannara trilogy by Terry Brooks, fantastic read if you are into fantasy. Personally they had this "flavor", i guess is the word, reminiscent of classic reads like Treasure Island just because of the sailing aspect. Very enjoyable read.
Tom Stouffer
CL: fairy, pixie, consistency, swirls, whirls, and bops(consistency)
CL: fairy, pixie, consistency, swirls, whirls, and bops(consistency)
-
Zac Miley
- Post Master General
- Posts: 5953
- Joined: 04 Jun 2006 12:11
- Location: Kansas City, MO
- Contact:
I might have to check out Terry Brooks.
1. Streams of Silver (RA Salvatore)
2. Raw Deal (Ken Smith)
Very interesting stories (it was a compilation of short nonfiction stories about Americans with terrible luck), but I thought the writing was really bland. It was kind of hard to read.
1. Streams of Silver (RA Salvatore)
2. Raw Deal (Ken Smith)
Very interesting stories (it was a compilation of short nonfiction stories about Americans with terrible luck), but I thought the writing was really bland. It was kind of hard to read.
Jay (8:06:01 PM): Bu-bu-buu-buug--Looks up, and the feeling goes away like a sneeze-bu-buuuh-BULLLSHITTT
Jay (8:06:14 PM): *wipes bellybutton*
Jay (8:06:14 PM): *wipes bellybutton*
1. The Ancestor's Tale - Richard Dawkins (520 pages)
2. The Ethical Imagination - Margaret Somerville (245 pages)
In The Ethical Imagination the author tackles some tough, controversial ethical questions, most of them lying in modern and near-future science & technology. However, I found myself a little irritated by much of the language that she used, and disagreeing with many of her assertions.
At one point she mentions one of her colleagues stating that she is far too 'mystical'. I couldn't agree more, though it is hard to figure out just how to define 'mystical'.
As annoying as the language sometimes was, it was an interesting, and thought provoking book.
2. The Ethical Imagination - Margaret Somerville (245 pages)
In The Ethical Imagination the author tackles some tough, controversial ethical questions, most of them lying in modern and near-future science & technology. However, I found myself a little irritated by much of the language that she used, and disagreeing with many of her assertions.
At one point she mentions one of her colleagues stating that she is far too 'mystical'. I couldn't agree more, though it is hard to figure out just how to define 'mystical'.
As annoying as the language sometimes was, it was an interesting, and thought provoking book.
Andrew Langstaff
1. Ilse Witch- Terry Brooks 452pgs
2. Antigone- Sophocles 70 pg translation (for school)
3. Antrax- Terry Brooks 378 pgs
4. Morgawr- Terry Brooks 402pgs
5. Tarzan of the Apes - Edgar Rice Burroughs 288pgs
Just finished Tarzan, loved it, really appeals to the adventurous romantic in you, a great read and im excited to read its many many sequels
2. Antigone- Sophocles 70 pg translation (for school)
3. Antrax- Terry Brooks 378 pgs
4. Morgawr- Terry Brooks 402pgs
5. Tarzan of the Apes - Edgar Rice Burroughs 288pgs
Just finished Tarzan, loved it, really appeals to the adventurous romantic in you, a great read and im excited to read its many many sequels
Tom Stouffer
CL: fairy, pixie, consistency, swirls, whirls, and bops(consistency)
CL: fairy, pixie, consistency, swirls, whirls, and bops(consistency)
-
bigdirtyfoot
- Sloppy
- Posts: 3142
- Joined: 22 Apr 2002 12:30
- Location: NC
1. God is Not Great, Christopher Hitchens, 307 pg.
2. Great American Hypocrites, Glenn Greenwald, 290 pg.
3. The Monster of Florence, Douglas Preston with Mario Spezi, 322 pg.
4. Toward 2012: Perspectives on the Next Age, editors Daniel Pinchbeck and Ken Jordan, 351 pg.
The Monster of Florence was an awesome book! I had read about it on a book review blog a while back and saw it in a store the other day. Picked it up and read about 50 pages in the store and decided to buy it. It was a very quick read, and I really enjoyed it. You can read my review for it here. 4 Stars
Toward 2012 is honestly one of the best books I have read in a long time. It's a collection of articles from Reality Sandwich, which you should check out if you haven't already. A little New-Agey, but very good. You can read my full review here. 5 Stars
2. Great American Hypocrites, Glenn Greenwald, 290 pg.
3. The Monster of Florence, Douglas Preston with Mario Spezi, 322 pg.
4. Toward 2012: Perspectives on the Next Age, editors Daniel Pinchbeck and Ken Jordan, 351 pg.
The Monster of Florence was an awesome book! I had read about it on a book review blog a while back and saw it in a store the other day. Picked it up and read about 50 pages in the store and decided to buy it. It was a very quick read, and I really enjoyed it. You can read my review for it here. 4 Stars
Toward 2012 is honestly one of the best books I have read in a long time. It's a collection of articles from Reality Sandwich, which you should check out if you haven't already. A little New-Agey, but very good. You can read my full review here. 5 Stars
-
bigdirtyfoot
- Sloppy
- Posts: 3142
- Joined: 22 Apr 2002 12:30
- Location: NC
1. God is Not Great, Christopher Hitchens, 307 pg.
2. Great American Hypocrites, Glenn Greenwald, 290 pg.
3. The Monster of Florence, Douglas Preston with Mario Spezi, 322 pg.
4. Toward 2012: Perspectives on the Next Age, editors Daniel Pinchbeck and Ken Jordan, 351 pg.
5. Understanding Marijuana: A New Look at the Scientific Evidence, Mitch Earleywine, 328 pg.
I've been reading this one for a while now (at least a few months) and finally finished it tonight. It's a really good selection of data/studies, and Earleywine does a great job of remaining objective and keeping his personal bias out of the book. I first heard about this book because of the NORML podcast, and thought it sounded cool. The only thing about it is that some of the information gets repetitive after a while, and it is a little "dry." As in, it's basically 300+ pages of scientific information, so you have to go into it knowing that. But I loved it. You can read my full review here.
2. Great American Hypocrites, Glenn Greenwald, 290 pg.
3. The Monster of Florence, Douglas Preston with Mario Spezi, 322 pg.
4. Toward 2012: Perspectives on the Next Age, editors Daniel Pinchbeck and Ken Jordan, 351 pg.
5. Understanding Marijuana: A New Look at the Scientific Evidence, Mitch Earleywine, 328 pg.
I've been reading this one for a while now (at least a few months) and finally finished it tonight. It's a really good selection of data/studies, and Earleywine does a great job of remaining objective and keeping his personal bias out of the book. I first heard about this book because of the NORML podcast, and thought it sounded cool. The only thing about it is that some of the information gets repetitive after a while, and it is a little "dry." As in, it's basically 300+ pages of scientific information, so you have to go into it knowing that. But I loved it. You can read my full review here.