Books
I tend to be really picky and have a short attention span, so I don't read terribly often, but here are a few books that I read in the last few years and enjoyed: Evil Genius by Catherine Jinks Dexter series by Jeff Lindsey Artemis Fowl series by Eoin Colfer DragonLance series by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman The Bartimaeus Trilogy by Johnathan Stroud The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams
Michael Crichton is an amazing author. You could go with his well-known works (Jurassic Park, The Andromeda Strain…), but the rest of his stuff is just as good. The level of research he puts into his fictional stories is just amazing.
If you're looking for laughs, I suggest: The Alphabet of Manliness by Maddox I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell by Tucker Max I Am America (And So Can You!) by Stephen Colbert
Also, ynori mentioned The Hitchhiker's Guide, but I would extend that recommendation to include the other four books in the trilogy. Something tells me there's a fifth, but I haven't read it so I can't, in good conscious, make a recommendation.
Being 15, I'm kinda in that transition phase from medium sized books teens read to adult books so at the moment I'm really into Stephen King books (reading the Dark Tower series right now), The Inheritance Cycle (also known as the Eragon Books), and the Incarnations of Immortality.
Edit: I meant adult "sized" books. Don't interpret that the wrong way ;)
I ended up digging through my bookshelf looking for something to new to read yesterday and came up with a couple more to add to my list.
Stuff that I had to read for school but found strangely enjoyable: The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky 1984 by George Orwell Brave New World by Aldous Huxley Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut
Cliched series that I'm surprised no one has mentioned: Lord of the Rings by J. R. R. Tolkien Harry Potter by J. K. Rowling
I'll just update this as I come across more later, rather than posting a billion and a half times. You're welcome.
yours31f wrote: Another book I really enjoyed was The Origin Of Species By Charles Darwin. I was supposed to read that, but I got bored.
If we're gonna talk classics, read Euthyphro by Plato. Socrates is great. Or read Oedipus by Sophocles. Or the Tragedy of Julius Caesar by Shakespeare. All interesting stories.
yours31f wrote: Another book I really enjoyed was The Origin Of Species By Charles Darwin.
that book was mind numbing. "This is a butterfly. this butterfly has a long nose. This flower can only pollinated by long-nosed butterflies. Isn't nature grand? Now this, this isn't a butterfly. This is a long-nosed bee…." So much of the book is documentation, it's boring. And everyone already knows what he said because the religious nuts won't drop it.
Anyways… Enders Game, I Am Legend, Battle Royale, Samurai Hugakurie (there's 4, but I've only read 1), Dharma Punx, Siddhartha, Tao Te Ching, Heart of Darkness. I would definitely recommend any one of these books. House of Leaves is next on my list.
@ stealth When I was 15, books I liked were the Ender's Game series, Battle Royale, and the Samurai Hugakurie. The Samurai Hugakurie was more useful to me than Philosophy 101, or anything some old Greeks had to say about how I think.
and as far as steven king. I've only read a couple, but I think Danse Macobre was my favorite because it talked about HP lovecraft, the necronomicon, and a lot of other old horror authors/stories.
maug wrote: @ stealth When I was 15, books I liked were the Ender's Game series, Battle Royale, and the Samurai Hugakurie. The Samurai Hugakurie was more useful to me than Philosophy 101, or anything some old Greeks had to say about how I think.
and as far as steven king. I've only read a couple, but I think Danse Macobre was my favorite because it talked about HP lovecraft, the necronomicon, and a lot of other old horror authors/stories.
Yeah, I read ender's game already (well, the first one) and wasn't a huge fan of it. It wasn't bad, but not that great either. The Samurai Hugakurie sounds interesting, maybe I'll check it out.
Edit: Were you talking about this one?
MoshBat wrote: Then you have an alternative?
A meritocratic system could work better if it wasn't run by bloodlines and old money. We're standing yet far away from achieving a meritocracy because this form of governing requires educational standards and a level of understanding that we won't reach soon through our piss-poor attempts at education.
…requires educational standards and a level of understanding that we won't reach soon through our piss-poor attempts at education.
I agree with the education standards. As for the capitalism stuff, I don't get into politics. I think it would be nice to RULE THE WORLD!!!! But even in that since you would need great knowledge to accomplish such a goal… Isn't that right Pinky..
Pinky and the Brain Brain Brian Brain……
I miss that show.
spyware wrote: [quote]MoshBat wrote: Then you have an alternative?
A meritocratic system could work better if it wasn't run by bloodlines and old money. We're standing yet far away from achieving a meritocracy because this form of governing requires educational standards and a level of understanding that we won't reach soon through our piss-poor attempts at education.[/quote]
back to the offtopic:) capitalism is economic system, which describes the way economy works in given political establishment. Meritocracy is a type of this political establishment or a government, i.e. describing how the establishment itself works. What you proposed was alternative to democracy or aristocracy, not to capitalism, which would be e.g. marxism…
not to mention that capitalism has to some degree meristocratic element in it
Someone mentioned Euthyphro, I've read that. It's good, I thought the Republic was more interesting (albeit much longer).
Off the top of my head (and going off what other people said that I have also read): Atlas Shrugged by Rand Physics for Future Presidents (just finished this) Predictably Irrational (previously mentioned) New Libertarian Manifesto Satanic Bible God is Not Great How Religion Poisons Everything Freakonomics and Superfreakonomics (the second one I just skimmed but it seemed good)
Those are a few of the random books I like. The Satanic Bible I found was pretty interesting albeit there's a lot of stuff that's questionable. It's a good read nonetheless for entertainment's sake, if nothing else.
mattseanbachman wrote: Someone mentioned Euthyphro, I've read that. It's good, I thought the Republic was more interesting (albeit much longer).
Off the top of my head (and going off what other people said that I have also read): Atlas Shrugged by Rand Physics for Future Presidents (just finished this) Predictably Irrational (previously mentioned) New Libertarian Manifesto Satanic Bible God is Not Great How Religion Poisons Everything Freakonomics and Superfreakonomics (the second one I just skimmed but it seemed good)
Those are a few of the random books I like. The Satanic Bible I found was pretty interesting albeit there's a lot of stuff that's questionable. It's a good read nonetheless for entertainment's sake, if nothing else.
Why the hell would there be a book on physics for future presidents? I thought they're supposed to know basic physics, and leave the rest to the assorted scientists he / she has.
fuser wrote:
Why the hell would there be a book on physics for future presidents? I thought they're supposed to know basic physics, and leave the rest to the assorted scientists he / she has.
The title's a misnomer in my opinion, it's basically a book that seeks to dispel a lot of the misconceptions of our time involving physics. You certainly don't have to be an aspiring President to appreciate it. :)
I'm reading Mein Kampf now. Some of Hitler's theories do make sense. btw, Miichael Crichton's Area7 was good although some facts are blown just out of proportion for instance the P90 part that it is an assault rifle that has a 100 round magazine whereas in reality it is a sub-machine gun with a 30 round magazine.
Stay on topic guys; if you want to talk about Hitler and genocide, start a new thread.
@goluhaque - Your sig is friggin huge.
spyware wrote: [quote]goluhaque wrote: I'm reading Mein Kampf now. Some of Hitler's theories do make sense.
Which ones?[/quote] like the one against democracy – if a person "with whom nature has endowed with special gifts" is found and he/she rules, it is a lot better than having a democratic government. But once again, u have to find such a person.
@ynori7, yeah, wanted to make it different.
goluhaque wrote: like the one against democracy – if a person "with whom nature has endowed with special gifts"
Nature doesn't endow shit. Yeah, you got your genetics. That's it, that's all that is pre-determined. Great leaders and great villains aren't born. They are made, constructed from parenting, social surroundings and the things they experience in their life.
spyware wrote: [quote]goluhaque wrote: like the one against democracy – if a person "with whom nature has endowed with special gifts"
Nature doesn't endow shit. Yeah, you got your genetics. That's it, that's all that is pre-determined. Great leaders and great villains aren't born. They are made, constructed from parenting, social surroundings and the things they experience in their life.[/quote] not necessarily. That is just a hypothesis. For example Albert Einstein, check this-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein%27s_brain
I disagree with goluhaque and I agree with spyware on this one. Even though genetics might play a part of it, like Einstein's brain, you have to keep in mind about his upbringing, including those that introduced him to physics and math early on in life.
Now I usually notice that the worst dictators are normally intelligent individuals who come from dysfunctional families, since both Hitler and Stalin's dad used to beat them up when they were kids, and soon they found a cause for them to dedicate their life to (fascism and communism, respectively), and used their talents to dedicate to the cause, which didn't go to well for the rest of the population, naturally.
Try and compare it with the great leaders of our times, and you'd notice that their upbringing is different compared to tyrants, and they're able to relate to people better than to blind faith in their cause.
fuser wrote: I disagree with goluhaque and I agree with spyware on this one. Even though genetics might play a part of it, like Einstein's brain, you have to keep in mind about his upbringing, including those that introduced him to physics and math early on in life.
Now I usually notice that the worst dictators are normally intelligent individuals who come from dysfunctional families, since both Hitler and Stalin's dad used to beat them up when they were kids, and soon they found a cause for them to dedicate their life to (fascism and communism, respectively), and used their talents to dedicate to the cause, which didn't go to well for the rest of the population, naturally.
Try and compare it with the great leaders of our times, and you'd notice that their upbringing is different compared to tyrants, and they're able to relate to people better than to blind faith in their cause.
see, my point is that an intelligent person or one to whom "nature has endowed with special gifts" can rule or govern a country a lot better than a democracy. Anyway, ynori7 point's right, this ain't the topic.
goluhaque wrote: see, my point is that an intelligent person or one to whom "nature has endowed with special gifts" can rule or govern a country a lot better than a democracy.
So, your point is that a dictatorship would work better than a democracy? That is a naive, insulting and -very- dangerous thought.
spyware wrote: [quote]goluhaque wrote: see, my point is that an intelligent person or one to whom "nature has endowed with special gifts" can rule or govern a country a lot better than a democracy.
So, your point is that a dictatorship would work better than a democracy? That is a naive, insult and -very- dangerous thought.[/quote] no it's not naive or insulting. I say dictatorship would of course work better than democracy provided that u find a good enough person.
goluhaque wrote: [quote]fuser wrote: I disagree with goluhaque and I agree with spyware on this one. Even though genetics might play a part of it, like Einstein's brain, you have to keep in mind about his upbringing, including those that introduced him to physics and math early on in life.
Now I usually notice that the worst dictators are normally intelligent individuals who come from dysfunctional families, since both Hitler and Stalin's dad used to beat them up when they were kids, and soon they found a cause for them to dedicate their life to (fascism and communism, respectively), and used their talents to dedicate to the cause, which didn't go to well for the rest of the population, naturally.
Try and compare it with the great leaders of our times, and you'd notice that their upbringing is different compared to tyrants, and they're able to relate to people better than to blind faith in their cause.
see, my point is that an intelligent person or one to whom "nature has endowed with special gifts" can rule or govern a country a lot better than a democracy. Anyway, ynori7 point's right, this ain't the topic.
[/quote]
what? I was talking about how people are made since you and spy were proving your points, not on whether democracy or dictatorship works or not.
-but in my opinion, however, it's 50/50, there are democracies that work, but there are also flawed democracies (living in one of them makes you cynical) where the ones in charge came from notable families, favouritism, cronyism, rampant corruption and restrictions placed on basic freedoms.
The same goes for dictatorships. There are dictatorships that may deny the freedom of voting, but permit the freedom of speech, assembly, press and provides basic services, while there are dictatorships that are just plain cruel like North Korea.
So, if you ask me, it depends on the way the country was ruled. If you ask me to choose dictatorship, but an open one with respect for individual rights or a broken democracy, I'd choose the first one, but I always keep in mind of potential change in the latter.