|
||||||
|
Title: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by Philly on Nov 13th, 2002, 9:19pm IMPORTANT Addendum by admin Fellas, Remember that the "main" point here is "for us to get to know YOU better by way of talking about/recommending books", not so much to get to know books better through you (a line I myself am really going to have to make a concerted effort to toe on this thread). I really want that to be our focus. The idea of our truly getting to know each other on at least somewhat of a substantive level is what's at the "heart" of this place. Let's try not to get sidetracked by, albeit sometimes inherent, peripheral aspects of the discussion. Let's always "bring it back". Anyway, given the nature of this topic, ALL the different kinds of books there are, "what 'a book' is", I don't think we need to follow any type of top 10 format with this one. Philly's "Book Club" format is more fitting. So without further ado,... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Here is Philly's original post that he started this thread with way back: I've just finished reading a series of mystery/detective novels where the hero/protagonist is a sports agent. Lots of sports references to keep things interesting, but most of all it is a fun, easy read. The characters are interesting and there are lots of laughs. Author: Harlan Coben Books: 1. Deal Breaker 2. Drop Shot 3. Fade Away 4. Back Spin 5. One False Move 6. The Final Detail 7. Darkest Fear *Be sure to read them in order. There are lots of references to previous events in each subsequent novel. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Get to know your Gridironers - Topic: Book Cl Post by Philly on Oct 30th, 2003, 4:32pm Unfortunately I don't get the time to read that I once did, and also admit that as an English major in college, I didn't read as much as I should have. When I do get the read, now, it is generally something quick and easy for entertainment purposes only... Nevertheless, I wanted to get this thread going a bit with a few books that made me think and have stayed with me. I'll be sure to add more later... A Separate Peace - John Knowles I remember having to read this book as a freshman in high school. I was a disinterested student at the time and hated any assigned books before even reading them. This book, however, managed to draw me in. I've read the book more than a dozen times now, and am probably due to pick it up again soon. The characterization of Gene and Phineas is unparalleled. They are the closest of friends and their need for each other drives them to utter contempt for each other. Knowles is able to take the events of the time, bring them directly to the walled-in secrecy of a private boarding school, and develop a story filled with truth. High Fidelity - Nick Hornby I happened upon this book by chance, just going through my local bookstore and reading the backs of many before choosing one. I read the book and enjoyed it, then put it aside and forgot about it. Then I saw that the book had been made into a movie a few years later and couldn't remember too much about the book, so I re-read it before seeing the movie. The novel is a story of Rob and his recent breakup with a long-time girlfriend. While that sounds sappy enough, the book is filled with laughs, especially from Barry and Dick and their "Top 5" lists for any occasion. The novel is also filled with truths about relationships that seemed to hit a bit too close to home at times. Hornby's male-confessional writing style keeps the reader begging for more. The Secret History - Donna Tartt A high-brow novel that is at times creepy and hilarious. Richard, an insecure student is drawn to a group of scholars that all share a love of Classic Greek. The group is led by a reclusive professor who has earned the contempt of his peers because of his methods and beliefs. The students' devotion to their professor leads them to re-enact a bacchanal in the woods with tragic results. Richard learns the group's secret and cannot help but be drawn deeper and deeper into their circle. Many classic allusions that at times can become annoying and pedantic, but a top-rate psychological thriller nonetheless. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Get to know your Gridironers - Topic: Book Cl Post by DirkDiggler on Oct 30th, 2003, 6:06pm I am a real generally a real simpleton when it comes to books, or I skew to a type of book not many other people would read. While at the beach I read 2 of the Larry Bond War Books. You know the type, Japan decides they are are going to invade China. They do really well because their technology advances are so much better than any one else. Then the US 'hero' manages to save the day by some creative technique. When it comes to the other books, the last thinking book I read was DUEL: A History of Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr. Being a history major, I really find this book interesting. It examines the the lives of these two men. It truly portrays what scums our founding fathers were. And trust me, they played VERY dirty politics and led very scandalous lives. The role that these two men played in American History is fascinating. [offtopic]And while talking about History, I am going to digress for a second. I went to Philadelphia this past weekend. I took some great tours of the lesser known spots of history in Philadelphia. I am so amazed how life was back then. I also took a tour of the new Constitution Center. Go see it!!! It really is INCREDIBLE foundation the Constitution is. Honestly, I was almost in tears seeing what our country has become based on a single document altered 27 times.(technically, 17) Everything our country is and represents is in one simple document. The whole experience really made me appreciate what a great place we live in. [/offtopic] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Get to know your Gridironers - Topic: Book Cl Post by steelkings on Oct 31st, 2003, 10:52pm Forgive me fellow gridironers for I am with sin. The Science of hitting Ted Williams My Bible |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Get to know your Gridironers - Topic: Book Cl Post by Noey21 on Nov 1st, 2003, 12:59am I think all the best books are from my youth.. because i too have become wrapped up i this fast paced and video oriented world. Lord of the flies. Really made me think and I thought in some weird way that it would be cool to be way out on your own like that. the green Mile... Stephen King is an amazing author the only book I read three times as a youngster was American Physc by Bret Easton Ellis.......this was made into a movie a couple years back. the movie did not do the book justice. This book really made me think about how people can be so different than you really now. In other words think for yourself and just don't trust anyone. My Bible...and the Chronicles of Narnia by C.S Lewis. I think alot of people have read these and they are great for an array of ages. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Get to know your Gridironers - Topic: Book Cl Post by Philly on Nov 1st, 2003, 1:49pm on 10/31/03 at 22:52:40, steelkings wrote:
Nothing wrong with putting some baseball books down on your list. I think one of the things that makes these threads work (this thread and the movie thread) is that people explain something about the book/movie and how/why it is on the list - in the process the other members here get a chance to know more about you through your selections. [smiley=thumbsup.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Get to know your Gridironers - Topic: Book Cl Post by Philly on Nov 1st, 2003, 1:56pm on 11/01/03 at 00:59:56, Noey21 wrote:
This book is one that may make my list when I continue it. It shows how close our civilization is to the savage roots from whence it developed thousands of years ago. It really makes you think a bit more deeply about the perceived innocence of children and our society in general. I think many people's favorite books are books from their youth. That is when most of us were forced to read the classics. It's rare that someone picks up a classic when they get older. And there are so few classics being written today amongst the thousands of other titles. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Get to know your Gridironers - Topic: Book Cl Post by StegRock on Nov 16th, 2003, 8:48pm Well, I am going to go about this in a couple different ways. As a lover, and wanna-be scholar :-/ ::) [smiley=nono.gif] (for those of you in the know, you get what I am gettin' at there), of Philosophy, I am going to fall back on giving a Top 10 list of Philosophy books that I love and have heretofore positively influenced my life. After that, I am going to throw a few odds and ends out there in a more "book club" type way. First the Top 10 list: (I give exact publishing companies because those are the editions that I find to be the best.) #10 A Brief History Of Time, by Stephen W. Hawking, Bantam Books - Not a Philosophy text strictly speaking, but not really a Science text either; Philosophy of Science, a key area of the discipline, I would say. It really makes "physical realities" make sense in "more" layman's-ish terms. If you want to talk about "truth" or "the Truth", you just gotta deal with this stuff. #9 Crossing The Threshold Of Hope, by Pope John Paul II, Alfred A. Knopf - Again, not a Philosophy text strictly speaking, but Religion and Philosophy go hand-in-hand. As long as you can "deal with" the dogma, the powerful mind of one of the greatest, yet most unheralded, "Philosophical thinkers" of our time shines brightly in this book. Many philosophically-important concepts get covered from a contemporary perspective. #8 Groundwork Of The Metaphysic Of Morals, by Immanuel Kant, translated by H. J. Paton, Harper Torchbooks - This is the "categorical imperative" book... VERY difficult read, but one that probably has influenced my general philosophical outlook more than any other. It's a Philosophy classic... perhaps to a fault, but still key. #7 The Marx-Engels Reader, by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, edited by Robert C. Tucker, Norton - EVEN MORE difficult of a read and MUCH LONGER, but WELL worth a year's worth of reading, while commuting by train or bus or something, at least through page 500, The Manifesto of the Communist Party, and even that your just reading because how can you read Marx and not read The Communist Manifesto, which is one of his signature works, but in all frankness, surely not among his best. His later works, of which that would be included are much weaker than his earlier works: that's kind of where he went from social and economic philosopher, which he was awesome at, to political scientist and revolutionary, which he wasn't very good at. *#6 The Conquest Of Happiness, by Bertrand Russell, Bantam Books - One of the greatest, if not "the (long 'e')" greatest, layman's Philosophy books by a GREAT and fairly contemporary Philosopher. It touches upon many foundational points of Philosophy, BUT does it in as about as pragmatic a way as can be done "philosophically". #5 The Confessions Of Saint Augustine, by St. Augustine, translated by Edward B. Pusey, Collier Books - Okay, back to the tough stuff. It's like reading Philosophy's version of The Cantebury Tales, i.e. BRUTAL. However, after reading this book AND "getting it", the way you think about "time" will "forever" be altered (especially if you read this after having read something like #10 above). *#4 What The Buddha Taught, by Walpola Rahula, Grove Press - The (long "e") BEST book on the "basics" of Buddhism HANDS-DOWN! Comprehensive overview, fairly easily readable, absolutely logical presentation. After reading this and thinking it through, you cannot help but "see" the "beautiful logic" of Buddhism. *#3 The Enchiridion, by Epictetus, translated by Thomas W. Higginson, Macmillan Publishing - You had to know one of the ancient Greek guys were going to show up on this list eventually. Well, this guy is actually Roman. Could be considered the father of Roman Stoicism. One of the best features of this "manual" from a practical perspective is that it's VERY SHORT and the translation is very smooth, though I'm sure not ambient. You can read this sucker in a day, EASY. Practical Philosophy that you will not go away from the same person. #2 The Way Of Life, by Lao Tzu, translated by Wittner Bynner, Perigee Books - You had to know for Steegie-san the book above wasn't going to be it for the Eastern Philosophy stuff. This is a classic. Not an easy read to "get" the first time around if you read it quickly. It can be read in a day or two, but it CANNOT be "gotten" that quickly. This is a book that should rock your world regarding the fundamental philosophical concepts of "society", "being", "individuality", "nature", "accumulation (of wealth, e.g.)" and MUCH more when you "get it". #1 Winter Notes On Summer Impressions, by Fyodor Dostoevsky, translated by David Patterson, Northwestern University Press - VERY tough and "sophisticated" read. It shares something VERY in common with #2: it can easily be rifled through; it's not that long and seems quite readable, but is not AT ALL easy to "get". His sarcasm is like quicksand. I write A LOT of notes right on the pages when I read, and there are pages in my copy of this book that are just littered with pen-black or highlighter-yellow cross-outs because I misinterpretted what he meant. One of the greatest things about this book is that during both the Czarist and Soviet regimes in Russia, Philosophy was VERY RARELY, actually basically never, written "as such". Basically, all of Russian Philosophy is contained in and conveyed by way of Russian Literature. All of Dostoevsky's famous works are novels like The Brothers Karamasov and the Philosophy is conveyed in sequences like The Grand Inquisitor in that book. This reality is what makes Winter Notes... so special. It is written as a socio-economic commentary/critique of Europe, especially France, but it is dripping in Philosophy. It is about as close to a raw work of Philosophy coming out of Russia before, well, 1991 as you will find. And, it, once "gotten", will totally blow your mind with regards to many ideas fundamental to Philosophy and, of course, life, ranging from "brotherhood" to "accumulation (of wealth, e.g.)". Along the lines of more of a "Book Club" recommendation, for budding Philosophers out there, most of the books above I would NOT recommend starting out with. The book I would absolutely recommend starting out with (and now I don't mean this condescendingly)... You know the IDG Books "Dummies" series of "reference" books? ... Computers for Dummies, Science for Dummies, etc., etc... Well, they have a Philosophy for Dummies by Thomas Morris. It is a superb and easy read and it's not at all fluff. It covers a wide range of important philosophical concepts in a, believe it or not, fun and entertaining way and you will surely go away thinking, understanding more and really wanting to take the next steps *(which you could take with perhaps any of the ones with asterisks above... I would suggest the Bertrand Russell book, #6 on the list, to be your next step). Some other stuff worth sharing, I am not a big fan of classic American literature, actually don't like novels much, period, but I do have a soft spot for Russian Literature. Worthy of mention are Maxim Gorky's Mother, Valentin Rasputin's Farewell to Matyora and most of all Vasili Klyuchevsky's Peter The Great, which is not fiction, but it's not really non-fiction, either. It's "embellished" history, not that the life of Peter The Great needs much embellishing. This book is an awesome "tale" of one of the greatest leaders and "characters" the world has known... and, for that matter, one of the world's good guys. Along the lines of something Philly/Jeff touches on above regarding children's books, I would also like to mention that a second #1 book for me that I am not inclined to put on a "Top 10" list precisely because of the way it is popularly looked upon is Antione de Saint Exupery's The Little Prince. It is considered a classic children's book. It really isn't, though: I mean it's surely classic, but it definitely ain't just for children. The language is not that simple; the story is not easy to follow, and the concepts are actually quite heavy. I even know this from experience. I tried teaching it to a sixth grade class... Didn't work! Seriously, this is a book with honest-to-goodness early Marxist-type (as opposed to late Marxist) themes. As for as of late, I am reading The Art Of Happiness by The Dalai Lama. I am maybe about a fifth of the way through, and it has been an inspirational read. Again, though, for budding philosophers, I would steer you toward the book mentioned above by Thomas Morris. This would be a book worth tackling after that and a couple of the asterisked (say that three times fast... I can't even say it once) ones above. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Get to know your Gridironers - Topic: Book Cl Post by BarnabyWilde on Dec 10th, 2003, 12:18am Finally getting around to getting listing my top 5. I am going with series instead of actual single books. I don't do alot of non fiction reading since I work in law enforcement. I do alot of science fiction reading (it's my escape from reality) and here are my top 5 all time series: 5. Forgotton Realms Dragonlance Series by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman. This is a fantastic series with many interesting characters, with my favorite being Raistlin the mage. His inner struggles and the sacrifices he made to become a magician is one of the storylines of the series. Epic battle between good and evil dragons is the central storyline with many other smaller ones weaving throughout the three series of three books each. 4. The Lord of the Rings, by J.R.R. Tolkein Pretty much everyone has heard of this series by now with the fantastic movie trilogy that wraps up this month with the release of the third movie, The Return of the King. The movies have been awesome and follow the books pretty well. Follow Frodo the Hobbit and his inner struggle to rid the world of the one ring. Great story, great characters. If you have not seen the movies, do it now! 3. The Dark Elf series by R A Salvatore My favorite character in any book. Drizzit Do'Urden, the drow elf. The only drow with a heart and with morals, he leaves the underground world to find nothing but hatred and ridicule towards him. He finds solace in a land called Icewin Dale and fins a few friends, including a dwarven king name Bruenor Battlehammer. Together, Drizzit and his friends find many adventures. Great series. 2. The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever by Stephen R. Donaldson Thomas Covenant is a leper. Recently split from his wife, he lives a lonely secluded life. Until one day when he loses consciousness and drifts off into a fantasy land. A land where his white gold wedding ring carries enormous power. He becomes the reluctant hero, battling the evil Lord Foul. I have read both series over and over again. Great books... 1. The Shannara Series, by Terry Brooks This man is in my opinion the greatest fantasy writer ever. Starting with the Sword of Shannara to his most recent work, Jarka Ruus, Brooks fills the pages with extraordinary characters, from Allanon, to Garret Jax, to the King of the Silver River to the Ohmsfords. His series of writings span several centuries in the Four Lands. Starting with Shea Ohmsford, the small boy and unkowning savior of the lands, to Grianne Ohmsford, the former Ilse Witch turned Ard Rhys, leader of the Druids, the Ohmsford family is central to all of the novels. If you like fantasy novels and have never read any of Brooks' work, do so. You won't be sorry! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Get to know your Gridironers - Topic: Book Cl Post by Philly on Dec 10th, 2003, 9:39am I read some Fantasy Fiction when I was in high school, but haven't gone back to the genre since that time... A couple series that I remember enjoying were: The "Myth" series by Robert Lynn Asprin. The "Thieves' World" series, edited by Robert Lynn Asprin - a series of short stories (novellas, really) by masters in the field using the same setting and characters. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Jul 15th, 2004, 1:55pm Picked this goodie off "The REAL Feed"... It regards Robert Smith's very cleverly-titled book: "The Rest of the Iceberg: An Insider's View on the World of Sport and Celebrity". I've always admired Robert Smith a lot for his focus on education over sport. He retired off my GBRFL team, helping my "BLACKSmiths" win a GBRFL title in what turned out to be his last season. He definitely is a man "who there is more to" and one who takes the road less traveled (surely vis-a-vis others in similar shoes to his). Here is the piece from "The REAL Feed": http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1839937&CMP=OTC-DT9705204233. At least the article is worth a read. I am going to try to fit the book in someday. My reading [smiley=RIF.gif] load is about to get quite heavy here, though, soon. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Oct 30th, 2004, 4:15pm I add this here now (finally) in relation to a post I am going to make on the Politics thread. ... Before heading back to grad school, I promised myself that I would finish off a couple readings. I got through Frederick Copelston's third volume of his A History of Philosophy. As regards you guys here, eh... Volume III, though, with its coverage of Medieval philosophy has been VERY helpful to me here at Catholic U., though, needless to say. I am familiar with names, chronology of things and modes of thinking I would have not been had I not made it through it. ... Of, perhaps, more relevance to you all, I read Douglas Groothuis's (ironically, out of Denver Seminary right down the road from the University of Denver) On Jesus from the Wadsworth Philosophers Series, which I would highly recommend to any budding philosophers out there, who are seeking the wisdom and temperance of philosophy. Nice, not overwhelming, introductory material. Anyway, this presentation of Jesus qua philosopher vis-a-vis qua Savior gave an un"usual" take and offered some decent, digestable food for thought. It starts out pretty, well, "God-awful", so to speak, ;) in its dryness, but picks up by chapter four. Anyway, that was the last of my "independent" readings for a while worth sharing... :) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by gridiron_legends on Nov 13th, 2004, 5:39pm Copleston is extremely handy. Great stuff. By the way, I have nearly every volume (the old volumes: smaller, printed in the 60's) if you need to borrow one sometime. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Dec 20th, 2004, 3:59pm Well, at this point might as well start getting these offseason topics rolling along... [smiley=rollin.gif] ... A book our nation as a whole could REALLY stand to experience... C. S. Lewis's The Abolition of Man! I read it for one of my classes. It is a classic; it is a "cultured" and yet not difficult read; it is short and very well-worth the (few hours you'd spend) read(ing it). For those disposed a bit to the "right", which, by the way, I think for the "average" American is the "actual" middle (even though the FAR left makes it seem otherwise), it may seem a bit too far right in a couple respects, but, OVERALL, the "eyes" of America REALLY need to get the in"sight" contained in it in "view" and incorporate it in their paradigmatic "view"points about the world. Out with the daily "throw-away" writing of newspapers and magazines (which, very literally, are done, oftentimes moot and, in any event, in the garbage can at the end of the day) and in with classics which have stood the test of time and really make you think, and from which you can really learn something (useful). I would highly recommend the publication we were assigned. It is the 1974 one published by HarperCollins. For one, the "homemade"-looking cover gives it a very authentic and solid feel. The ISBN # is 0-06-065294-2. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by gridiron_legends on Jan 11th, 2005, 10:01pm Yeah, that is a great book, Steg. Another great read of C. S. Lewis's is his "The Case for Christianity," Part I, which is a defense of natural morality from the standpoint of reason alone. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Jul 31st, 2005, 11:51pm Spent the day at the beach [smiley=sunny.gif] today, Bradley Beach for those who know the Jersey shore well, and finished one of the best best-sellers in a while,... a PHILOSOPHY book, On Bullshit by Harry G. Frankfurt, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Princeton University. It's about a two-hour to two-and-a-half-hour read. I say that long because you do have to stop and re-read certain sections and think some of the ideas through. [smiley=thinking.gif] You could do it in 45 or so minutes, I suppose, but if so, you probably did not get out of it ALL that there is to learn and come to understand. The book is about a HUGELY important contemporary social issue, but, mind you, it IS philosophy. [smiley=wiseman.gif] It is NOT just some "poppy", merely time-sensitive work. In the book, in VERY short, he points out that the dangers of bullshit or bullshitting are, first and foremost, that it has NO relation to or respect for (the) truth (of things) or reality (the way things in fact really are), words/statements that provide no truth-value, which, then, causes people to lose sight of the truth, that there even is truth; this ("bullshit" skepticism), in the end, is very habit-forming/it easily becomes a way of life (and has in America, which provides a system and social context that sets the stage for the proliferation of bullshit and bullshitters). One of my FAVORITE quotes is on page 62. It echoes something I've basically been shouting from the rooftops [smiley=soapboxer.gif] here for almost three years now. He writes that bullshit "arise(s) from the widespread (American) conviction that it is the responsibility of a citizen in a democracy to have opinions about everything..." ... This is a TOTALLY AWESOME, fairly quick and yet VERY thought-provoking MUST-read!!! It's a chance to read a REAL philosopher philosophize vis-a-vis another pop-cultural figure opine. Another book I recently finished,... Y'shua - The Jewish Way To Say Jesus by Moishe Rosen. Another insightful, quick read. It's not the most "academic" read by any stretch of the imagination. If you were really taken by what he presents and think that there is something to what he's got to say worth investigating or at least considering as a reasonable point of view (which I do), you really would have to follow it up with (objective) research of your own. Anyway, it presents, from the (unique, somewhat forgotten and yet oh so authentic) viewpoint of Messianism, which comes from/is a transliteration of the Hebrew (for all intents and purposes, another way of saying Christianity, which is derived from the Greek translation of the Hebrew), i.e. Messianic Judaism. I am very intrigued by this religion. They were ultimately the original "Christians", the first believers in Christ the Savior, even though their history is not wrought like the Catholic Church's. As for me, I don't know where I ultimately stand on ultimate religious truths. BUT, this book, better and more cogently and concisely than any other I've read, presents the position of acceptance. Chapter 7 is particularly good. It gives a summary of Sir Robert Anderson's interpretation, or should I say extrapolation, of Daniel 9:24-26, in which the arrival of Jesus in Jerusalem is prophesized. It is a very tedious, arcane and complex passage requiring meticulous interpretation, the kind which Anderson was devoted to and Christian/Messianist scholars and clerics rejoiced over. Rosen goes about giving a wonderfully pithy summary of this all (which I have had explained to me by a born-again Christian... quite laboriously and "uncogently"). ... Anyway, it too is another worthwhile read, if for no other reasons than it can be gotten for FREE and it's doable in a short period of time. Depending on how fast you read as few as three hours may be all you will need and even for us slow readers I would say no more than eight. Next up, before school commences, I'm taking on a book I've been wanting to read/treat myself to since it came out 11 years ago, The Death of Common Sense by Philip K. Howard. I just started it. It's already a goodie! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Jan 6th, 2006, 6:54pm Well, today, just in time, the last Friday before spring semester commences and any personal reading has to be laid aside, I finished Mitch Albom's The Five People You Meet In Heaven. Has anybody else read this? WOW!!! And, (as per the above as yous know) I'm not much of a story reader... Give me the hardcore philosophy! [smiley=pumped.gif] Anyway, I started it on Sunday and had a hard time putting it down when I just had to so as to do the other things life requires. [smiley=gonecrazy.gif] BY ALL MEANS, pick this up for yourselves and get the box of Kleenex ready (at least for the end run). [smiley=touching.gif] It's a VERY worthwhile QUICK read. I'm still also working through The Death of Common Sense (as per my last post). I gotta say, between that, this and On Bullshit, the last three books I've read/been reading, you've got three not all too time-consuming reads that are jam-packed with (if you are open to it, LIFE-ALTERING) WISDOM, each of a different (but not mutually exclusive) sort!!! If I were to pull a Phil Jackson on yous, I would be doling out these three books to you all. ... When I open those FantasyFootballer.com offices someday (on the Big Island of Hawaii (a phrase which interestingly can be read correctly in two different ways [smiley=hmmmm.gif]) or the Rocky Mountains of Colorado or wherever),... I just may... [smiley=sunny.gif] ... ;) ... [smiley=zenmaster.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by MordecaiCourage on Jan 6th, 2006, 11:07pm on 01/06/06 at 18:54:21, StegRock wrote:
I've got it but have not started it yet...heard it was good |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Jan 6th, 2006, 11:15pm on 01/06/06 at 23:07:20, MordecaiCourage wrote:
That's putting it mildly... "Good" is NOT NEARLY strong enough of a word. Read it, MC,... a.s.a.p. If you are open to it's message (I think you would be), it can be life-changing or, at least, perspective-adjusting. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by MordecaiCourage on Jan 20th, 2006, 11:50pm I am not the reader I once was...I guess Fire Science, Hazardous Materials, National Electric Codes, DoD Tech. Orders, and NFPA Standards have killed the joy of reading for me over the last 20 years!! On the rare (getting rarer) occasion I get to read something outside of technical manuals, I find most of that time being spent in Scripture. Back in the day I enjoyed Kurt Vonnegut books (especially Slaughterhouse Five), Og Mandino's "The Greatest" series, and any of the old classics like the "Red Badge of Courage", "Call of the Wild", "Gulliver's Travels", "Treasure Island" etc. etc. I enjoy Robert Frost and Ralph Waldo Emerson. I also enjoyed "I Am Third" by Gale Sayers. If you notice there is no new print listed. It's not that I haven't read anything new...I just do not find the joy in it anymore. Sad [smiley=dejected.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by steelkings on Jan 23rd, 2006, 4:22pm I just finished The 5 people you meet in heaven. Its good. Im ready for discussion. Im starting "Dinner with a perfect stranger" |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by MordecaiCourage on Jan 24th, 2006, 12:22am on 01/23/06 at 16:22:38, steelkings wrote:
As per my post from the 6th of Jan. I have the book in my possession......but I still have not even broke the cover. When I do I will be there. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by steelkings on Apr 17th, 2006, 6:57am Dinner with a perfect stranger = [smiley=yawn.gif] tuesdays with Morrie = Great read. After talking with many people, I have found that Im the only one in the USA that hasent seen the movie. And....the movie follows the book well. Darn the luck. Reading : Blink, The power of thinking without thinking. I should be really good at not thinking! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by rickgpin on Apr 17th, 2006, 11:21pm my wife just picked up the five people you meet in heaven, guess i will have to read it soon. authors i read alot: chuck palahniuk - fight club, etc. robert parker - spencer for hire based on his books robert mccammon - the earlier books are better stephen hunter - espionage and guns stephen king - the best larry niven/jerry pournelle - scifi i read almost any and everything when i get the chance but it seems to be mainly escapism fiction. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by steelkings on Apr 21st, 2006, 7:00am Currently Im reading the "GAME OF SHADOWS "You gotta love that Berry Bonds. He makes T.O look like a choir boy. I have a family member who has a true run in with good ole Barry "Juicey" Bonds. Of course you probably have figured out that my roots are located in western P.A. I have a currently 83 year old grandmother inlaw who was sitting in a box seat along the wall just inside of third base back during Bonds last year as a Pirate in three rivers stadium. That would make her about 73 at the time. There was a shallow fly ball that "Juicy" made a diving catch with 2 outs and bags loaded. As he was trotting back to the dug out by my grandmothers box she exclaimed. "Atta boy!". "Juicy" stopped and replied." Who in the fuck are you calling boy, How would you like it if I called you an old bitch". He then turned and trotted away. Needless to say, Barry will never be confused with the likes of Clemente, Stargell ect.. as great former Pirate players. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Apr 23rd, 2006, 12:12am on 04/17/06 at 06:57:46, steelkings wrote:
That's what I've heard... Having read The Five People You Meet In Heaven, as I mentioned above, I believe it! Quote:
Make that two... (Hell, as per my post on the "G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Movies" thread, I still haven't gotten around to popping Saw, which I purchased like five months ago, in the VCR yet. :-/) Quote:
Very good... Read away, my friend... I'll be interested to hear what you have to say about this book. I've never heard of it, but it's title seems... intriguing... or provocative... Again, I'm reading that title from the perspective of a "philosopher",... one who has a strong appreciation for Eastern thought, mind you. [smiley=zenmaster.gif] ... In that vain, I MUST again HIGLY recommend you all to pick up for $5 and read Harry Frankfurt's On Bullshit. This guy is a BONA FIDE philosopher, an old-timer and wiseman from Princeton University. [smiley=wiseman.gif] This is not some "pop culture" BS. This is "real", but not overwhelming, scholarly reading. It's a tiny 5"x8" layout and in just 67 pages it gets to the core ugliness of the direction our great nation is going in. Its message needs to be acknowledged and heeded. [smiley=yes.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Jul 20th, 2007, 5:02am On to some serious talk,... not, ironically, "bullshit"... ;) on 07/18/07 at 21:27:18, Philly wrote:
Speaking of the devil, [smiley=evil.gif] there's one of the posts right above I made regarding On Bullshit. First off, again, I am flattered by your effort. [smiley=bow.gif] I'm curious, thought, Jeff... What about the book wasn't attractive to you? Were there any specifics? I'd be totally game to hear you out and work through some stuff with you. You're a bright guy, so it surprises me when you say that most of it went right over your head. I will say this much... It's a short book, but not necessarily a "quick read", at least not relatively speaking. But, still, I wouldn't peg you as a dude who couldn't handle grappling with it... successfully (given the time). Moreover, why I am curious is because, frankly speaking,... and I fear being considered a blasphemer when saying this, but remember you're hearing this from a scholar of Pope John Paul II here,... I think Americans need this book right now more than the Bible. It would (re-)orient us to (substantively) enact the (immanental) message of the Bible. Right now, we're neither predisposed to nor well-equipped intellectually for its (immanental) message, no less that of other "great books" that are less familiar to us culturally. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by MordecaiCourage on Jul 20th, 2007, 9:35am on 07/20/07 at 05:02:48, StegRock wrote:
Quote:
Ya' [smiley=scared.gif] me for a second there Stegger. Nice save!! [smiley=clap.gif] P.S. Still...... I wouldn't say that ever, even with the explanation!! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by Philly on Jul 20th, 2007, 10:47am on 07/20/07 at 05:02:48, StegRock wrote:
It has been quite some time since I read the book, and I'm sure I didn't spend the requisite time to review and really consider many of the subtleties of the text (I actually listened to it during my commute to work), but from what I recall, I had a hard time reconciling the difference between BSing and lying. While HGF went to great lengths to point out the nuances and levels of lies vis-a-vis BS. I had trouble believing that a person employing BS is as unaware of their position as HGF posited. I see BS as a crutch for the (perceived) truth, yet still an untruth (i.e., a lie). I don't see there being different levels of lying. Certainly, the effect of the lie will vary, but the lie itself is still a statement of untruth. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by Philly on Jul 20th, 2007, 10:53am Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows... [smiley=wizard.gif] Are there any Harry Potter readers out there? I've read the six previous books to my son (although, admittedly, he was too young to be interested or care, so I was really reading them for myself and my wife). I also saw HP and the Order of the Phoenix last weekend. So I'm all set for the next book. I'm not going to be camping out so I can get it at midnight or anything, but I will be heading out tomorrow morning (I reserved it at my local Borders) and will dive into it starting tomorrow night. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Jul 20th, 2007, 12:58pm on 07/20/07 at 09:35:38, MordecaiCourage wrote:
I knew, based on my very own words there, that that was going to be tough to hear for some. [smiley=spjesus.gif] You got to know, though, man,... :-/ I endure the same range of emotions and have to bite my tongue (in the "vice-versa", so to speak, of this kind of situation) all the time. That's why I've gone cyber. My tongue is in shreds,... quite literally. (Okay, well not really, but you get the point.) I'll follow this up with as pithily of a stated point later on. on 07/20/07 at 10:47:42, Philly wrote:
This is the key to "getting the book". But, I suppose I see how this could be a problem for you. Let me think! [smiley=thinking.gif] on 07/20/07 at 10:53:01, Philly wrote:
Well,... for one,... we're definitely not on the same page here, and unfortunately I'm not going to be able to return the gesture of checking out one of your recommendations this time. My mom, bless her dear heart, bought me one of the Harry Potter books, I think the first one, back in the day for my birthday. EVERYBODY at her job had dissuaded her, telling her, "Joan, that's not Steve's kind of thing," and shook their heads [smiley=no.gif] when she went ahead and bought it for me against their advice. They were right (but, I would guess, based on the Steve they knew, the high school and college version, only at the surface level). My mom was wrong (so don't beat yourselves up too much for not "getting me"). Thing is, I don't read to escape. Frankly speaking, most (in America) do. (And, incidentally, I think this is why the message of the Bible has become so over-simplified in America, in a way that paradoxically and ironically obscures the simple truths contained within it.) In fact, quite the contrary, I read to confront and understand (or, maybe, I escape to understand [smiley=thinking.gif] ... [smiley=idontknow.gif]). And, although there is more to both of our "attitudes", this is at the core of your lack of "appreciation" (mostly in its "second" sense) of On Bullshit AND of my lack of "appreciation" ("ditto") of Harry Potter. And, of course, there is our VERY different life circumstances, of which I am not unaware. You've taken the (usual) path of a wife and kids and a regular job, and I surely haven't. [To wit, this is the grounds of that "most (in America) do" comment above. It's also the grounds, I realize, of why I'm not so easily understood by the "average Joe" in my home country. What to make of all that (in terms of curiosity and deference), that's the key.] This, of course, affects our respective attitudes about reading, i.e. the desired function of reading in our respective lives. I mean, my attitude, put more simply,... others may not be reading Harry Potter because they are not into the whole "wizard boy", "D & D-type" schtick. That too is the case for me [at least, at this point in my life (though, I must admit, the "at this point in my life" part goes back quite a ways)], but not the main reason. That's just at the surface level. That's just a matter of taste. I'm sure, in its genre, Harry Potter is VERY WELL DONE (unfortunately, for me, it's "well done" more so in the other sense, figuratively speaking). For me, ultimately, it's not on my... [smiley=radar.gif] for the same reason Madden NFL 2008, the new iPod, etc., etc., etc., aren't. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by Philly on Jul 20th, 2007, 3:18pm Yes, I do see the differences there. My "regular job," as you put it, requires me to spend most of my day reading for understanding (and some of that understanding or lack thereof leads to confronting). Part of my job is to analyze literary texts for their literary elements and ideas that are stated and inferred. When my workday is done, I'm generally spending a couple hours doing the family stuff (eating dinner, bathing kids, reading Dr. Seuss or Curious George to my son) and then another couple hours of work-related stuff (with a few minutes of internet browsing mixed in) before heading off to bed. So when I do find time to read outside of work, I tend to read for pleasure and entertainment (or escape as you termed it). The most important thing for me in a novel is well-drawn characters. It's not the fantasy schtick (D&D elements) that make Harry Potter such a big hit (remember when we were in school in the 80s, the kids who read fantasy novels were usually considered to be nerds?), it's the characters themselves that make it work for me. Honestly, the books themselves have a very formulaic plot, but JK Rowling has done a knock-up job on creating complex characters and relationships between those characters. As a former English major (and HS English teacher, and English Language Assessment Specialist, and wannabe novelist), most of my reading tends to fall into one specific genre: the bildingsroman. I am a sucker for a really good coming-of-age novel (Catcher in the Rye, A Separate Peace, and Lord of the Flies made an early impression on me in school) and am in the midst of writing one myself (and have been for about 10 years now). These novels certainly lend themselves to confronting and understanding, but in an inherently different sense than the books that are on your shelves. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by MordecaiCourage on Jul 20th, 2007, 5:05pm Try reading Air Force Technical Orders, Instruction Manuals, DoD manuals, and NFPA codes for the last 23 years!! That will kill any enjoyment you could possibly get from reading!! I can't even pick a book up and enjoy it anymore...my eyes are too tired and I can't get my heart into it. :( |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Jul 20th, 2007, 6:31pm Nice write-up, Jeff. [smiley=bow.gif] Okay,... I'm gonna take a stab at the "lying" versus "BS" thing... In a stroke of good fortune, this is going to overlap with that "reality"/"meta-reality" distinction I was talking about up "between the 20's" on the CBFL commentary thread. First off, generally speaking, Frankfurt's point is to show that there is a meaningful, useful and enlightening distinction to be made between lying and BS-ing. In Philosophy terms, he wants to show that they are a different "species". According to my understanding of Frankfurt, in stark contrast to lying, when you BS, you don't even know what the truth is. When you lie, you do. BS-ing, commonly considered to be a "lesser evil" than outright lying, is (unfortunately) VERY compatible with our Americano, entrepreneurial, consumer-driven capitalist society. Frankfurt really plays this up in terms of the "(commission) saleman" mentality. BS does NOT have a necessary relation to truth the way lying does. Lying is a conscious departure from the truth, whereas, to BS is to just "talk out of your ass" as we say these days. You don't know what the hell the truth is and probably don't care. In fact, the truth may be (perceived to be) injurious to your modus operandi, and that tendentious backdrop may be the pathetic reason behind the BS. In this sense, in BS-ing, you've set yourself up against truth. The truth of truth is the foundation of truth (if you haven't figured, we're already knee-deep in this "reality"-"meta-reality" distinction). It's what makes the truth true, and BS-ing, more than lying, stands in opposition to this. When lying, on the other hand, you are just opposing this or that particular truth (on the ground level), not the truth of truth (on the higher level). The fact that a BS-er ignores the truth in the formulation of his/her BS lays, in an immanental/matter-of-fact way, the groundwork for an ignorant attitude toward truth, which, in turn, is a big step toward the denial of and even disdain for the truth, i.e. relativism, a nightmare "by any standards". [smiley=rollinwithlaughter.gif] Furthermore, that ushers in a very shallow mindset and culture, which is surely exhibited in the "short attention span" of America. In addition, BS in its denial of truth lends itself to a very comfortable, especially in the kind of political environment we find ourselves in in America, deniability factor. BS embeds an "out" for the BS-er. Also, BS-ing is almost always used in a self-serving way. Unlike lying, there are very few opportunities to BS in a way that is good for the other party, such as white-lies to smooth things over, like telling your wife she's the most beautiful woman in the world (something I don't have to lie about ;)), or, as the Buddha correctly taught, as an "expedient means", or for various other "good" purposes (e.g., police [smiley=policeman.gif] in a sting operation don't typically BS; they lie). In this immanental sense, BS sets the stage for a selfish citizenry, which, as just so happens to be the case, is UNFORTUNATELY VERY "cultivatable" in an Americano, entrepreneurial, consumer-driven capitalist society. When BS-ing, you're just trying to make yourself look good. BS is a great strategy when making connections, pitching a product, etc., and, as has become a modern capitalist cliche, the all-important skill of "selling yourself". So, besides an ignorance of the truth, there is also little-to-no or, at least, less (frequent) incentive to have consideration for the person you are BS-ing. There is a sense of the ignorance of, not just truth, but the "other", period. This desensitizes us toward the needs and even mere sentience of others and the fundamentality of relationality [as per that paper of mine that I presented at the Philosophy conference: http://www.internetstitute.com/Ni-paper.doc, revised as of June 3, by the way]. Now, we are at a point where the two-level "reality"-"meta-reality" distinction can be of particular help. When you BS, intrinsically, you are misleading the person you are BS-ing on two levels. This is NOT the case when lying, at least not intrinsically or necessarily, and actually probably not at all since to lie you need to know what the truth is, i.e., you don't deny the truth of truth. Otherwise, it's not a lie. When BS-ing, on the "ground level" of reality, you likely deceive the person directly or, at best, only happen to give him or her accurate information. On the "ground level", you are either an ignoramus, denier or disdainer of the truth and almost always, to the tune of 99.999~%, serving yourself and only yourself, caring less for the person with whom you are dealing, NOT at all appreciating the truly all-important immanental impact of your relationships on your self-authorship (again, as per my essay). But, worse yet, on "higher ground", so to speak, on the "meta-level" of reality, you are indirectly pawning yourself off to your interlocutor as an authority, as someone who knows what he/she is talking about, which, when BS-ing, is ABSOLUTELY, necessarily NOT the case. It's like the BS-er has taken the BS-ed into some sort of alternate reality, some parallel universe, some La-la land. That's the "higher-level" deception. What you are portraying yourself to be is NECESSARILY EXACTLY what you are NOT!!! But, that's still perhaps not the worst deception! [smiley=yikes.gif] That is because the HEIGHTENED level of self-deception required of the BS-er is now, alas, finally exposed and lucid. Self-deception is the worst deception, and it's the inevitable next piece in the puzzle here. This eschewal of the truth combined with a generally selfish disposition that works against an understanding and appreciation of relationality leads to self-absorption, a mono"self"ism of sorts, which basically requires you to have to lie to yourself. To have a society of people lying to themselves, no less each other,... is,... well,... a BIG mess. PLEASE, anybody, everybody, if you have questions and comments (but remember initial negativity is often a sign of a lack of understanding and appreciation, so it's always best to ask questions first and try to understand), have at it... [smiley=yinandyang.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by Callie on Jul 20th, 2007, 8:25pm I'd love to hear more about your book, Philly. Just curious, have you read "The Writer's Journey" by Christopher Vogler or the Joseph Campbell & Carl Jung things? Character things. As for Steg, I'd love to hear if you have studied Jung, and I'd love to hear your take on that as a philosopher. What I'm interested in is more about the human psyche basis for philosophical development. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by Philly on Jul 20th, 2007, 10:11pm on 07/20/07 at 17:05:50, MordecaiCourage wrote:
Heh... I actually read some of that stuff. My wife is a civilian contractor for the USAF and she has me read/interpret some of those things once in a while. I can see how that could kill any enjoyment for the written word. [smiley=onit.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by Philly on Jul 20th, 2007, 10:24pm on 07/20/07 at 20:25:14, Callie wrote:
I haven't read any of those, but I'll look into them. My novel right now is nothing more than about 15,000 words worth of little vignettes. I'm still trying to flesh out the characters a bit (one of the most annoying things is that I can't even settle on names for the protagonist and the antagonist--I seem to change them every time I go back to read what I've written). Another problem that I have is that the overall plot of the story keeps turning into A Separate Peace with a different setting and marginally different characters. The story follows the events of a pair of summer friends that are first-year lifeguards in the mid 1980s (something I am intimately aware of, but have to try not to turn into an autobiography). I do have a title for the novel. That was the first thing I settled upon and it hasn't changed during the whole process. Unfortunately I need a LOT more than just a title. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by Philly on Jul 20th, 2007, 10:56pm on 07/20/07 at 18:31:06, StegRock wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
OK... this is the distinction I was looking for. I couldn't get past the idea that the BSer wasn't really just the same as the liar. But I see the difference now. Thanks! [smiley=bow.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Jul 21st, 2007, 4:27am on 07/20/07 at 22:56:19, Philly wrote:
Yea,... that's pretty abstract. [smiley=blush.gif] It's the kind of language you see philosophically in reaction to (the nightmare of) relativism. Hardcore relativists don't just dispute truths, this or that truth, but rather the very notion of truth itself. For them, there is no truth. It's all relative. Even if pressed to admit to the existence of truth, the relativist will still point out that truth has no value (in both senses). It's just what is and like Hume they'll say that an "ought" cannot be derived from an "is". So, truth itself has no truth value (in terms of logic, it cannot be assigned a value of T/F), so to speak, and, thus, is of no value in reality. To subscribe to such a paradigm would be not to subscribe to the "truth of truth". So, in some sense, maybe it would be a little more accurate for me to have said "the truth of truths", but it is more sexy (and not incorrect, mind you) to say "the truth of truth". [smiley=awwgee.gif] Quote:
Without consulting a dictionary, though I'm sure I'll be in the same ballpark as the dictionary definition, what I have in mind when I use it is a cross-section of the following set of [all (grammatical) kinds of] words/notions: pervasive, pervading throughout, de facto (as in "it is what it is" and "A=A"), wholistic, in toto, embodied, inherent, internality, internalization, through-and-through, proactive... Now, some ostensive exemplification... - Pantheism and Process Theology, a la A. N. Whitehead, are immanental religious sensibilities. (Western) Christianity proper, as is understood, practiced and manifest in Catholicism and your traditional Protestant branches, is not, at least, in the case of Catholicism, not in its theology, though it is in its philosophy, from Augustine to Thomas to C. S. Lewis (actually an Anglican, whose work Catholic philosophers have adopted) to, my boy, Wojtyla. Christianity is based on the authority of a radically transcendent God and, thus, can be said to be authoritarian and transcendental, a transcendental authoritarianism if you will. Theologically at least, this is the opposite of an immanental sensibility. - To act in accordance with a maxim, let's say "Thou shalt not kill," not based on authority, but because you understand the wisdom of such a law, why it makes sense and is right, even righteous, in terms of the human condition within which it is employed and actualized, is to let the law immanently work through you as opposed to its just being a restrictor plate on your actions. In following the law in this immanental manner rather than on authority, you give the commandment life. The commandment lives, in fact, has life through you. On the other hand, if you just do what the law says because it happens to be the law and you don't want to get into trouble, the law is a mere external barrior as opposed to something that shines forth into the world through you. Acting immanently is proactive. Acting based on authority is reactive, perhaps, even inactive. (True authority lies in wisdom, not legality. Point being, it's not that there are no authorities. But, true authorities are followed like Jesus and Buddha, not obeyed, so to speak, like a policeman.) - Immanental appreciation is to appreciate things as they are in their totality. For example, I have a friend who considers himself a "best friend" with all the according "rights and privileges", so to speak, based on our going way back and having been extremely close at a time, in fact, for a long time. However, years have passed and, as adults, there have been periods of falling out, and for years there has been intellectual, spiritual, psychological, emotional, mental, philosophical, professional and even great physical distance. Yet, that friend still has expectations like a best friend would. In this case, his understands "best friendship" only in a nominal sense. He doesn't have an immanental understanding of best friends because, if he did, he would realize that we are no longer "best friends" with all the according rights and privileges, so to speak. To see a relationship immanentally is to see it wholistically and for what it is at the moment. Having an immanental approach to relationships is conducive to the rehabilitation of friendships or maturely moving on. A mere nominal understanding of relationships leads to neither progress in nor the maturity of friendships. Did that help? Quote:
NICE!!! [smiley=thumbsup.gif] But, you "get this" (better) based on the post overall and not just the part you quoted, right? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Jul 21st, 2007, 5:44am on 07/20/07 at 20:25:14, Callie wrote:
Well, first off, generally speaking, philosophers tend to look... [smiley=hmmmm.gif] at psychologists. Psychology gives us Cartesian flashbacks. [smiley=scared.gif] Anymore, Descartes, for all of his insight, genius, and innovation, or, at least, Cartesianism isn't very en vogue among philosophers from, on the one side of the spectrum, Catholic philosophers to Existentialists to Nietzscheans to Wittgensteinians to Heideggarians to Chinese philosophers to, on the very opposite end of the spectrum, Tibetan Buddhist philosophers. Now, that is not to say that there isn't some specific areas where some intriguing work between Psychology and fellas like Carl Jung and Philosophy can't be done. In fact, on the Eastern Philosophy side of the ball, I could see some really neat work being done between the Yogacarin/Cittamatrin (the Mind-Only School of) Buddhist Philosophy and Psychology... and Cartesianism, for that matter. It is in this kind of area where I could see "legitimate" philosophical development along the lines of investigations into the human psyche. Of course, I kind of need to better know what you mean by "the human psyche basis for philosophical development." However, I must confess I don't know much about old Carl. I haven't studied him since undergrad, some 15 or so years ago now. I do know that he didn't do a whole lot for me then, and, surprise, I went the route of Philosophy and not Psychology. However, my boy, Wojtyla, good old JPII, had read and was quite influenced by Jung. Unfortunately, as I do not share Wojtyla's interest in Jung, I do not know how "immanently" present (as opposed to present "per se") Jung's psychology was in Wojtyla's phenomenology. My sense is quite a bit so. But, at the end of the day, Wojtyla was a theologian and philosopher, not a psychologist, so... |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Jul 24th, 2007, 3:20am Well,... for those of you who are actually interested, but want to save the 100 bucks,... I stumbled upon this goodie on the internet awhile back: http://www.personalism.net/jp2/actingperson.htm. I don't know what the copyright deal is on this, but, in any event, I've looked through and compared it against my hardcover (legit) copy, and it's the real deal. Enjoy! :) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by rickgpin on Jul 24th, 2007, 9:49pm on 07/20/07 at 10:53:01, Philly wrote:
i sometimes read to escape, but i always feel like i read to learn. i read hp when my kids were reading them and it was alot of fun to discuss and learn their insights to the stories and characters. my wife picked up #7 at costco and i will probably read while on vacation in a few weeks. i think rowling is a talented writer. in the words of stephen king these books are "shrewd mystery tales". hope you enjoy the book Philly! [smiley=thumbsup.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by DirkDiggler on Jul 25th, 2007, 1:58pm on 07/24/07 at 21:49:49, rickgpin wrote:
My wife and I were both very excited about Harry Potter. (We have kids, but they are too young to read them too) By Monday night we had both finished the book! We both loved it. It tied up all the loose ends with no dangling parts. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by rickgpin on Jul 25th, 2007, 8:34pm on 07/25/07 at 13:58:28, DirkDiggler wrote:
[smiley=onit.gif] that's some fast reading! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by Philly on Jul 25th, 2007, 8:34pm Hey now... no spoilers for Harry Potter #7! I only managed to read about 50 pages before I had to leave on a business trip. (The book stayed at home with my wife and son.) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by rickgpin on Jul 25th, 2007, 9:12pm on 07/25/07 at 20:34:45, Philly wrote:
you have a couple of weeks before i spill my guts! ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Jul 25th, 2007, 11:27pm on 07/20/07 at 12:58:21, StegRock wrote:
I hate to cut in here, fellas, and, moreover, I hope this post doesn't get lost in the shuffle. Or, maybe, that would be better, actually... What I'm going to pithily present here is definitely either a thesis or foundational premise of a book someday, and IT HAS PUNCH!!! [smiley=boxer.gif] In VERY short... In the Far East (we're not talking India, and remember Buddhism is Indian), traditionally, culturally and historically, ethics and morality is NOT based on religion. There is no religious system which provides for you ethical maxims, like the Ten Commandments. Religion and belief are used more for dealing with the unknown, especially death, and, as my wife puts it, "wishing". Its most common manifestation is in the way of ancestor worship and wishing for good fortune. (Incidentally, this combinational dynamism is what makes Tibetan Buddhism so fascinating and useful because, while being very religiously Buddhist, it has a certain humanistic bent when it comes to ethical conduct, which is very evident in the works of Tenzin Gyatso, the current Dalai Lama.) Religion does NOT act as the basis for acting in the world together with others. Religion and, moreover, belief are not the ground for ethics and morality. [In fact, making religion/belief(s) the ground of action is my definition of "belief system".] In the West, traditionally, culturally and historically, this is quite the contrary. Religions and belief systems are precisely what provided us with our morality and ethics. The only way the western mind has been trained to have a moral and ethical sensibility is through religion. In fact, we call people who don't live according to their religious/religion's moral beliefs hypocrites. Now, there are differences from western religion to western religion, but the "Thou shalt not kills" overlapped enough that we could get by. However, and here's the rub, this fledgling country comes along (America) and, with good, but imperfect intentions, declares the separation of Church and State. It is no wonder how, in a short 225-year span, we have a country in rather extreme moral decay. At least, we all recognize the steady downward trend in morals from generation to generation. (How many times have you had that conversation about "how it once was", probably hearkening back to a time before you were even born???) This psychological process of being told what's right and wrong and what to do in a religious, "Ten Commandments" type of way has made us reliant on rules and laws to tell us what and what not to do, and that's why the Constitution has become God in America. I see it right here on "the Gridiron". Rules are not seen as guidelines. They are seen as commandments. Whenever a situation arises that requires thinking outside or beyond the rules and forces us to confront morality and ethics in its more raw form, head-on, I watch the moral compasses spin out of control (mine used to too). But, it's not a great mystery. How couldn't an ethical sensibility of a people have been lost and morals undergone decay when we have gone and separated OUT of our leadership model that which has been the source of moral and ethical understanding and guidance in our cultural heritage for millennia? Again, summed up, there's a people whose morals and ethics are bound up in religion. That same people creates a society that separates out religion from governance. It's no surprise that that people is going to lose its moral and ethical way. WE ARE THAT PEOPLE!!! Now, mind you, I'm not saying that (Western-style) religion is the best source of moral conduct or that we should work backward and try to rescind our separation of Church and State. What I'm saying is that we are at a VERY unique juncture in human history where the wrong move could mean eventual, inevitable oblivion to America, BUT the right move would mean America's reclaiming its great status in the world. Western-style religiousness could enrich the Far-eastern way of believing, and a Far-eastern understanding of ethics could enrich the western way of acting in the world. AND, you'll all hopefully be reading the best-seller by Dr. Steve Stegeman about this someday... ;) ... [smiley=wiseman.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Aug 27th, 2007, 2:10am Mind you,... as regards the above,... America's separation of Church and State is NOT the only culprit... or even the main... or original one. The above speaks ultimately to WESTERN humanism writ large as it was spawned and spurred on most notably by the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, western science, and Darwinism. America's separation of Church and State is, in fact, more residual than ground-breaking,... but it is our distinctive way into the discussion. Make no mistakes, though... The observation and according hypothesis I am making is much broader than its statement above. "Moving right along",... back to... [smiley=wizard.gif]'s and [smiley=footballsmiley.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by T-Rave on Aug 30th, 2007, 10:13pm I'd like to return to the discussion begun by Steggie and followed up by . . . no one? Such an interesting topic should be a nice platform for a real discussion. Your point, Steg, about Western vs. Eastern understandings of the relationship between ethics and religion, in the context of ethics and daily life, may be a little bit extreme as far as the Western understanding goes. Early on in Western thought, with Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, there was a clear understanding that ethics is not derived from religion nor dependent on it, but rather derived from the nature of man. Ethics is, therefore, a branch of philosophy. Ethical truths are accessible to human reason, and not merely truths codified by religion. Now perhaps you weren't implying that ethics depends on religion per se, but rather that to make man ethical religion is the best means (acc. to the Western understanding). This I think I would indeed grant (and St. Thomas Aquinas would also, I think, agree) -- religion serves to show man ethical truths more easily and readily than man's own reason, clouded by self-interest and passions, could do of its own accord (although man's own reason, clouded in this way, CAN indeed arrive at ethical truths -- see Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle). |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Sep 3rd, 2007, 4:44am on 08/30/07 at 22:13:29, T-Rave wrote:
I think, T, that's all I need to validate my position. But, I digress... This is all to fail to factor in the historical influence of the (Greek) polytheistic religions, the roots of which predated Socrates. In any event, the western (Classical Greek-based) philosophical tradition (at least, vis-a-vis the eastern tradition) is guided by the "One behind the many". (Overly) Simply put, this was the case when Heraclitus's philosophy of change lost out to the philosophy of the Parmendian One. As I see it, we just didn't see a whole lot of philosophical tread in a philosophy of change. It didn't leave a whole lot of room for comtemplative philosophy. So, this philosophy of the One behind the many naturally segues into a focus on theoria, logos, the "Word", theism, telos, formal logic, rhetoric, principles, contracts, rule of law and (extreme) constitutionalism, certainty, rationalism, equations and theorms, categorization and individuality, virtues and virtue ethics, western science and scientific (hypothetical) method, laws of nature, objectivity and objectivism, intentionality, accuracy, contemplative meditation, knowledge, the discovery of meaning, etc., etc. in the West. Mind you, this all goes hand-in-hand with the western monotheistic religious sensibility. In fact, like God, in the philosophies of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, et al., human nature, for all intents and purposes, is the one behind the many. One of the few (notable) philosophers to make a run at a revival of Heraclitean philosophy was Nietzsche, but by then it was such a mess that,... well,... you know... Now, the above is in STARK contrast with the far-eastern (Classical Chinese-based) philosophical tradition. Hell, the seminal work of Chinese Philosophy is the Yijing or The Book of Change. They surely had a sensibility of the One behind the many, Taiji [smiley=yinandyang.gif] and Dao, wholism, but, in a fashion absolutely opposite the western trend, they did not see a whole lot of philosophical tread there. They became more concerned with the "Many in front of the one", an immanental philosophy of change that emanates forth from the ineffable Taiji [smiley=yinandyang.gif], the "unnamable" Dao and a wholism beyond human comprehension. This naturally segues into an emphasis on praxis, pathos, the "image", the unspoken and that which is beyond words, ambiguity, guidelines, correspondences and metaphors, judgments, intuition, humanism (even rule of the mob), pragmatism, interconnectivity and relationality, entropy, appropriateness and circumstantial ethics of action, harmony with nature, subjectivity and subjectivism (NOT relativism), extensionality, efficacy, "clear- or no-mind" meditation, understanding(s), ritual, the creation of meaning, etc., etc. in the Far East. This all fits well with a Buddhistic religious sensibility. For Confucius and Laozi, et al., human circumstances act as the many in front of the one. Mind you, Aristotle [in his (attempt to) break away from his mentor Plato] in, especially, Books 1 through 3 of Nicomachean Ethics with his espousal of, so to speak, an immanental "it is what it is" "actions speak louder than words" ethics approaches an eastern ethical sensibility, but at the end of the day his "Doctrine of the Mean" is a rationalistic agent-oriented virtue ethics, not a pragmatic circumstantial ethics of action (though the distinction here is tight; it can be highlighted by wrapping your mind around the difference between Aristotle's notion of habit and Confucian ritual action, and the Aristotlean virtues and how they predicate moral conduct and the Confucian "virtues", which are really ingredients of moral conduct). That said, Acquinas's Personalism is grounded in that Aristotlean move, but it isn't, I contend, really perfected until it all hit the post-Heideggarian mind of Karol Wojtyla. Instead of busting it all apart like Nietzsche, Wojtyla puts it all together and takes the next step. The point being, we've seen how the Far East has augmented their societies with western science, i.e. "physics". In a similar vain, I think we'd do ourselves a great service by augmenting our society with eastern ethics, i.e. "metaphysics", in the Wojtylian sense... as in through the phenomenal, not beyond the phenomenal (you can locate my citation of that in the paper I presented at the conference in March: http://www.internetstitute.com/Ni-paper.doc). Taking this all one further step just for fun, I would even contend that in the West the above even evolves into the "atomic one (individual) in front of the One (God)" and in the East the "relational many (individuals) behind the Many (Ways)". But, I'm just gettin' whacky [smiley=gonecrazy.gif] now... ;) ... [smiley=wiseman.gif] I hope that was a coherent response... I'm pretty damn bleary-eyed tonight. I was up almost all night last night doing StegsList.com (http://www.stegslist.com) stuff. [smiley=tired.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Sep 3rd, 2007, 2:55pm on 09/03/07 at 04:44:41, StegRock wrote:
In VERY short, T-Rave, all, the point is... We in the West are used to deriving our moral discernment from without (the circumstances, seeking out overarching principles from the perspective of objectivity). We are used to being told what to do by God, the Law, human nature, etc., etc. Human nature is a tricky one because it is the within that is without. This is why, e.g., during wartime, we find ourselves in the moral conundrum(s) of "The Bible says, 'Thou shalt not kill,'" "Jesus said, 'Turn the other cheek,'" and "What would Jesus have done in response to 9/11?" In the East, they (my Korean wife, e.g.) are used to making moral judgments from within (the circumstances, moreover, from the perspective of xin or the heart-mind). They seek to divine moral answers from relations, the without that is within, so to speak. (Our actions after 9/11 posed no such conundrum as the aforementioned to my wife.) Mind you, those relations are taken to be both human and natural. (Incidentally, my additions during my last edit of my post above of "laws of nature" to the list of western tendencies versus "harmony with nature" to the list of eastern tendencies pointedly speaks to this.) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by T-Rave on Sep 3rd, 2007, 7:05pm Interesting post, Steg. Very informative. It seems to me that the original proposition that I sought to tweak was that religion is the underpinning of ethics (and, by extension, ethical action) in the West to the degree that without religion ethics crumbles (in the Western understanding). I think we found agreement in this "middle" position, namely, that while religion does provide a support for and insight into ethics and ethical action, at least in the West, nevertheless, ethics is not solely based upon revealed (and therefore at least somewhat inaccessible to reason) religion, but rather is founded in an understanding of human nature and human ends. Ethics, per se, is a philosophical study and endeavor, and not merely a religious one, despite the fact that religion plays a large role in the underpinning and framework of ethics. So far, so good. Actually, I think this really completes the original point under consideration. But you have taken this point as a springboard to discuss the difference between Western and Eastern philosophy, and this is very intriguing to me, so I would like to address it. Firstly, I would question whether Heraclitus' philosophy is a "philosophy of change" in contra-position to a "philosophy of the one behind the many." In fact, I would claim that Heraclitus' philosophy is precisely a philosophy of the one behind the many. Throughout the fragments of his writings that we have left, he constantly refers to the logos, the immortal fire, underlying all things, that makes all things one. To appearances, all things are in motion and are different; in reality, all things are one: "The wise man perceives that all things are one." Secondly, characterizing Western thought as the philosophy of the One behind the many, in contradistinction to Eastern thought as the philosophy of the many in front of the one, seems to me to be a Platonizing of the Western intellectual tradition. Certainly Plato's thought could be characterized as a philosophy of the One behind the many, for Plato sought precisely the One, the Form, behind its many particular instances in the world we live in. However, Aristotelianism runs off a different paradigm. The Aristotelian (and, later on, Thomistic) inquiry into human nature, into the nature of things, and ultimately into being itself is not a philosophy of the One behind the many, as if it were a search for the one form or nature that stands behind the many things that instantiate it. Rather, it is a search for the one form or nature that is WITHIN the many things that instantiate it. THIS is the difference between Platonism and Aristotelianism: the forms, the natures of things -- i.e., the intelligible structure of things -- which we seek in order to understand them DOES NOT LIE BEHIND THEM, as if we have to get through the many particulars to arrive at this ONE, but rather LIES WITHIN THEM, such that delving into the many, the particular things in the world we live in brings us inexorably to the forms/natures that are within these many as their constitutve principles. Whence Plato's dismissal of the many and Aristotle's appreciation for the many. I would say, to open another can of worms, that unless you search for the one (the form or nature) that lies within the many particular things that instantiate it, you aren't doing philosophy. In fact, you HAVE to deal with and talk about and delineate the one within the many, and common speech bears this out. For example, to even come up with the word "humankind" implies an (at least latent or unconscious) understanding of what it means to be human -- this "what it means to be human" is precisely the One/form/nature within the many human beings that are human, and if you don't deal with this one form, you can't talk about "humankind" but only about "Socrates" and "Jim-Bob" and "President Bush" etc. Language, therefore, presupposes an understanding of the one form/nature within the many instances that exemplify it. To deal only with the many instances is to never rise above the level of the particular, to never arrive at knowledge (e.g., to never arrive at knowledge of "human nature"/"humankind" or "justice" or "virtue"). I would imagine that Eastern philosophy has to deal with the One within the many, even if merely because language itself requires it. So I guess I'm asking for a clarification of what "philosophy of the many in front of the one" means, since it seems to me that it can't rule out "philosophy of the one within the many." Thirdly, as far as ethics is concerned, I don't think Aristotle's ethical theory is a "rationalistic agent-oriented virtue ethics" by way of its "Doctrine of the Mean." The very point Aristotle was trying to make is that you cannot universalize/rationalize/define what is virtuous in this or that situation (in the PARTICULAR) -- you can define what justice or courage or temperance is but you cannot delineate what would constitute virtuous action in each and every situation. For such "practical" decisions, the virtue of prudence is required: prudence "looks" at the situation, the circumstances, the object, the act, etc. and decides what is the virtuous course of action. The standard of virtue for Aristotle is not some rational definition (not even the "mean" acts as a definition of virtue): rather, the VIRTUOUS MAN himself is the standard of virtue. The mean is merely a phenomenological conclusion about the relationship of virtue to action -- virtue lies in the middle of two vices (to be a virtuous act, an act of courage must be neither cowardly nor rash). The mean does not serve as any sort of ethical guide, at least not very well, because certain virtues lean more to the side of one vice than the other. THE guide for virtue is the virtuous man -- more precisely, the virtue of prudence by which the virtuous man apprehends what is the virtuous act in this or that situation. So, at the end of the day, Aristotle's ethical theory seems to me to be much more "down-to-earth" and non-rationalistic than some seem to claim. Thoughts? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Jan 27th, 2008, 5:29am Okay,... back to the topic of this thread... on 01/08/08 at 00:52:44, StegRock wrote:
I just finished this book I mentioned in passing over on the [smiley=wiseman.gif] "Philosophy Corner (http://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi?board=58;action=display;num=1199260483)" [smiley=zenmaster.gif] thread (which, incidentally, is where all the Philosophy talk that went on on this thread should be taken), Walking the Tightrope of Reason by Robert Fogelin. GREAT read! [smiley=thumbsup.gif] I would recommend it like I did Frankfurt's On Bullshit as a piece of very readable, yet academic Philosophy. I'm sure most of our gridironers/ettes could take it on. Put in a way consistent with one of the overarching themes of the book, it is a work of, in the words of David Hume (who is one of the focal points), both "abstruse" and "EASY" philosophy. With football winding down, if you have the time to pick up something that will challenge you (like On Bullshit), but, if that challenge is met, will have you closing its cover just a little bit better (of a thinker) than you were upon cracking its cover, I'd highly recommend this piece. [smiley=yes.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by Philly on Feb 14th, 2008, 1:16pm I just finished reading a book that received quite a bit of acclaim and one that I've wanted to read for some time (waited for the paperback edition). The Kite Runner - Khaled Hosseini This is a powerful book (I think it says that in one of the reviews on the cover, but it's true). There are some amazing characters with complex relationships and it's occurring with the backdrop of social and political events in Afghanistan, a country I admit I knew very little about before reading the novel. It's a work of fiction, but it felt very personal, as if I was reading an autobiography. I haven't seen the movie, although I've heard good things about it. But I'd definitely recommend the book if you're up to it. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by rickgpin on Feb 15th, 2008, 8:05pm on 02/14/08 at 13:16:17, Philly wrote:
i completely agree with you philly! i read this book awhile back and really enjoyed it. i think there was some insight to Afghanistan and it's culture. in addition to the complex relationships, it was an exciting story. i bought his next book for my wife for christmas and hope to read it next week while on vacation. ;D see you at the library! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by MordecaiCourage on Feb 15th, 2008, 9:22pm Guys...I have to admit...I am not a reader! :-[ Just can't enjoy it...with all the dry stuff I have to read for work...I am just sick of print!! :'( |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by MordecaiCourage on Feb 15th, 2008, 9:23pm on 07/20/07 at 17:05:50, MordecaiCourage wrote:
I see I visited this thought already :-/ |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Feb 16th, 2008, 2:06am [offtopic]I'm glad you picked that off there yourself, MC. Your pointing out your (unfortunate) disdain for reading in light of your particular life circumstances does nothing for this thread. So,... just skip this thread. I mean what's the point. You don't want the rest of us to read; you don't want the rest of us sharing our readings... be-cause... Don't get me wrong... Your posts are not egregiously bad or in poor taste. But, they do have that passive-aggressive-ish air to them. ... Understand that I preface what I am about to write here in light of your (I don't think particularly considerate) posts on this thread, i.e. not just out of the blue... Think of the "Photo Album" thread, MC, and how you have typically put it to use. Don't get me wrong. It's ALL GOOD. But, put yourself in, e.g., my shoes... Think of the ANALOGOUS post(s) I could put on that thread to your posts here. It would be hurtful and nasty at a whole nother level. I wouldn't go there, of course... I'm not even going to type an example given how mean-spirited the whole endeavor is. However, the point is that the "spirit" would basically be the same. This is all not to mention that, whatever the circumstances may be, not reading or not having the desire to read is not something to tout about. [I digress... (within the digression)... I hope, notwithstanding your lack of enthusiasm for reading, you are raising those wonderful boys of yours to be readers. I know this was something my parents dropped the ball on, and just now at age 37 (as of tomorrow... hint, hint [smiley=wiseguy.gif]) after 8 years of post-secondary education, 3 years at the Master's level, have I just now overcome that deficit. [smiley=no.gif] This is the book club thread. Join in. But, don't come in to the "Book Club" thread just to poo-poo or be a stick in the mud regarding "READING". That's not cool, man. That's all...[/offtopic] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by Callie on Feb 16th, 2008, 6:32pm Try this, MC: http://www.amazon.com/Force-U-S-Military-James-Mccarthy/dp/0883631040 "Now, more than 50 years after its founding, the United States Air Force celebrates its spirit and essence in this deluxe-format book. Essays on Air Force history and today's aviators focus not only on the planes, helicopters, rockets, and technology but also on the special people that make it all work. Hundreds of full-color and vintage photography, portraits, recruiting posters, and historically inspired paintings complement the informative text. Written by a team of qualified historians, specialized authors, and associated experts, The Air Force links pilots past and present to America's first brave flyers, the Wright brothers." And this: http://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Wing-Guided-Airforce-Combat/dp/0425149579 A Guided Tour of an Air Force Combat Wing UPDATED WITH NEW MATERIALS AND PHOTOS- including cutting-edge information on the F-22 and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Tom Clancy's explorations of America's armed forces reveal exclusive, never-before-seen information on the people and technology that protect our nation. Now, the acclaimed author of Red Rabbit takes to the skies with the U.S. Air Force's elite: the Fighter Wing. And try this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjPEBunlstQ&feature=related Books are knowledge. Fiction or non-fiction. We need both kinds. Start with these, and you might just want to move into some novels, too! (Doesn't take money if you check for them in the local library. And you can usually ask the library to get books from ANOTHER library for you...for free!) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by MordecaiCourage on Feb 16th, 2008, 6:33pm Now Stegger.....did you really have to post your digression? Did I not amend my statement of how reading has sucked for me with a follow-up note admitting that I visited that feeling here before. Do you not think that "my catch" of what I previously have written about my disdain for reading was going to seal the topic for me? If your answer is "yes, he caught it", and "yes, he policed himself" ... then why even post your digression? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by MordecaiCourage on Feb 16th, 2008, 6:34pm Thank you Callie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Feb 16th, 2008, 8:34pm on 02/16/08 at 18:33:03, MordecaiCourage wrote:
I gave you a little credit for that, MC. I just felt that your admission was too easy... of a way out. I felt that you were too easy on yourself, at least publicly. I thought my extended commentary on the matter was "good food for thought" (again, as always is the case when I post, not just for you). And, to take this just one further step, again, if you did not "feel it", to get where I am coming from "deep-down" in terms of feelings, consider old Stegger's "family on hold" vis-a-vis the "Photo Album" thread (mind you, something I enthusiastically supported you on when you graciously made the suggestion to me). To spin this nicely,... you share your boys with us... You love them. GREAT! DoN'T stop! I... share my books... And, I do happen to believe that a love for reading (good tried-and-true, time-tested philosophy, at least) is of foundational import (for human psychological, spiritual, emotional, intellectual, mental, etc. growth), especially for Americans... and especially at this particular juncture in (our) history. [smiley=RIF.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by MordecaiCourage on Feb 16th, 2008, 11:04pm right said [smiley=thumbsup.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by rickgpin on Feb 26th, 2008, 9:35pm on 02/15/08 at 20:05:04, rickgpin wrote:
I read A Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled Hosseini this past 10 days on vacation. The story is set against the volatile events in Afghanistan over the last thirty years. Like "Kite Runner", the story was well written and provided interesting insights to life in Afghanistan as seen by the characters. I liked "Kite Runner" a bit more, but this was a good read. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Feb 27th, 2008, 3:04am Jeff, Rick,... what's the "slant" on this Afghani novel? In as best of a summary as possible that will do the book (semi-)justice, what's it saying? What's the message? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Book Club Post by StegRock on Apr 24th, 2008, 4:11am StegRock's "Selected Readings in East-West Philosophy"... posted a couple minutes ago here... http://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi?board=58;action=display;num=1199260483. :) |
||||||
|
Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.1! YaBB © 2000-2002, Xnull. All Rights Reserved. |