Cataloging the Detritus of my Life
The review of Dan Ariely’s Predictably Irrational is back up! Just follow the link on over to my friend, Clay Collins site take a poke around when your done reading it.
If you’re just coming here from The Growing Life, poke around here too! DMS is all over the place but it tends to focus on book and game reviews, with some of my own personal writings throughout.
Thanks for stopping by.
Now seems like an apt time to talk about my reading of Pope Benedict the XVI book, Jesus of Nazareth, considering he is in the middle of a historic visit to the USA. The best that can be said about it is that it’s short. It could be shorter, there really shouldn’t be so much to say about a carpenter who lived in the first century AD, and who either fancied himself a demi-god or happened to have the right group of friends who fancied him to be. If you’ve walked through your local bookstores religions section though you’ll notice a great deal of thick books expounded on Jesus’ remarkable role in the history of the world, they’re also usually full of greek and latin words. These are the types of books that look good on a bookshelf. I suspect though that if Jesus’ message was so simple and clear you wouldn’t need several 1000 pages to explain to someone. But anyway back to the Pope’s book
It’s all right I guess, I’ve been told by numerous sources (New York Times, Washington Post, etc…) that Benny is one smart guy, he was John Paul’s head theologian. The man can certainly string an argument together and he does, but it always falls apart when we get to of Jesus. Which is the problem with Christianity (or Islam, or Mormonism) Benedict really wants us to believe that Jesus is God, and he holds up the Bible, and the fuzzy feeling he and millions of others get when they think about him as justification for his beliefs. This doesn’t work for me, because Scientologists get the same fuzzy feeling from reading Dianetics and thinking about L. Ron Hubbard, and I know at least two guys who get it when thinking about Playboy magazine. Perhaps I’m missing something, but I can’t see why the age of the Bible and the number of its followers should separate it from the weirdos in the latter two groups. The Judeo-Christian God isn’t any more legitimate than the Flying Spaghetti Monster or He-Man, he just happens to be followed by a hell of a lot more people. Which brings us to the ultimate problem I have with Jesus of Nazareth, I don’t have any faith. I can follow the Pope’s arguments up until he makes the leap that leaves logic behind and goes head-long into faith…
I could also mention the Pope’s tired argument that if everyone just believed as he did all our problems would go away. If we all just scurried back to the 12th century where the Catholic church controlled their lives but also their thoughts. I’m sorry I don’t believe a sincere belief in Jesus as the Savior of the World and the Catholic Church as his instrument here on earth would stop people from finding reasons to hate and kill each other. In fact the history of western civilization only confirms my belief.
I was going to do a simple “Top 10” list but I don’t really feel like channeling David Letterman right now, it hurts my jaw when I do that. Also I don’t know if I’ve deeply read ten philosophers. I’ve read more than ten, but just single works which really doesn’t give you constructed context in which they’ve created their works. Even with the philosophers whose works I’ve read completely it can be hard to see exactly what they were getting at. And, with philosophy it is never a monologue you read or listen and you take what is being said and filter it through you’re own experiences and what comes out is sometimes similar to what they said, but often it has changed, occasionally the changes are subtle and it takes awhile to recognize that what you thought the philosopher said is not at all what he did say other times it is completely different and you’ve constructed your own philosophy from the bones of their’s.
I believe it is because of this conversation philosopher’s have with us, the dialogue each one of them creates with the culture surrounding them and the individuals in it, philosophy has remained such a powerful force throughout the ages. But back to the topic at hand my favorite philosophers (so far):
1. Socrates – I could have started with a pre-socratic but why? You wouldn’t recogonize their name or their work, but everyone knows who Socrates is, sorta. We don’t have anything actually written by Socrates we only know him through the writings of two of his students and a Athenian comicwright. If you’ve never read philosophy reading Socrates’ dialogues by Plato are the best place to start. The books are affordable and well translated and it is easy to follow the flow of the argument.
2. Albert Camus – You figured Plato was going to be next didn’t you? Nope, Plato is an iconic philosopher but he isn’t one of my favorites. Albert Camus was a French Algerian born in 1913 and is most known for his novel The Stranger. Camus is often labeled a existentialist though he didn’t consider himself one. I think the label is appropriate as Camus wholly believes in a universe indifferent to humanity and each human is responsible entirely for creating meaning and purpose in their life. The label is very broad and many existentialists disagree on much. I love Camus because of his great works of fiction and the hope that infuses his philosophy.
3. August Strindberg – What is a 19th century Scandinavian playwright doing on my list? Mostly because his “autobiographical” work Inferno is one of the most mind blowing books I ever read. This is a man haunted by paranoia and persecution who formulates the belief that this life is hell. Everyone here failed in life and is now being punished, of course part of the punishment is not knowing we are being punished. I don’t agree with that philosophy but reading Strindberg was engrossing.
4. Friedrich Nietzsche – Probably still my favorite philosopher. I’ve read all of his works multiple times. Even so, I find new things in them and doubt I understand what he was trying to say. Nietzsche is also an existentialist, one whose reputation was largely destroyed by his self loathing and an overzealous and moronic sister (she is the one responsible for tying his philosophy to Nazism). Nietzsche’s finest idea in my opinion his his thought experiment “the eternal recurrence”, imagine that you have to live your life over and over again, forever. Every decision you make will be the same, as will every action, thought, etc., etc. You will live the same life over and over again. Will you be happy with this life? The person who can say yes is truly living their life, those who can’t need to re-evaluate themselves. The other powerful idea Nietzsche brings us is the idea of the overman and the last man. The overman is someone who has taken control of their life, has abandoned the rule sets of culture and forged their own, a person who sees joy and suffering as the same, an affirmation of living. The last man? is the pathetic degraded human who has willed away his life to others.
I can’t recommend a detailed reading of Nietzsche’s works enough. Start with something easy though like the Ecco Homo end with Thus Spoke Zarathustra
There are plenty of other philosopher’s to talk about but I think those four are sufficient for now.Investigate them,read and study the. let me know what you think. If you have a favorite philosopher pass them on to me. I like reading new things!
The Secret History of the World is a terrible book. A terrible 512 page book. I knew it was terrible by page 5, I continued to read it until I was 30 pages from the end. I really wanted to finish the book, despite how bad it was, when I pick up a book I intend to finish it. But I can only take so much, the mind can only handle so much garbage before it revolts and vomits into your brain pan…
So why would I pick up such a terrible book? Well, because the people who work at Borders don’t actually read the books they classify, yup they have no idea what the books are about when they decide what section of the store it belongs in. I imagine that the people in charge of this just read over the promotional material and then make their best guess as to where it goes. I found it in the World History section, and if you just look at the cover that makes some sense, the words “world” and “history” are in the title of the book. But you just have to read the dust jacket and the 2 odd page introduction to know that this is not a book about the actual history of the world. No, no this book is about the author’s delusions… which means that the book belonged in General Metaphysics or Speculation, next to such gems as Zecharia Sitchin, Sylvia Browne, and J. Douglas Kenyon.
I thought the book was going to be about the history of various real secret societies and the mythologies of those socities and how it related to their contemporary environment. But nope, that isn’t what you get instead Mr. Booth’s book just rambles on about things he doesn’t seem to know much about, pushing and cramming and jamming all sorts of mythologies and history together to make it fit his agenda. All using an obscure lingo and vocabulary that doesn’t make much sense. Oh, and he gets all sorts of history wrong… *sigh* He doesn’t seem to understand literature or art, but that doesn’t stop him from making things up to fit into any piece of art… *sigh*
I don’t even like talking about how bad this book is, so this is the end of the post.
P.S. Don’t read this book!