Re: Read any good books lately ?.
mg
> I suggest reading two books -- in order -- for an unusually
> pleasurable experience. The books are "Dreams of Ada" by Robert
> Mayer and "Innocent Man" by John Grisham. They both involve the same
> people and same town -- but not the same story.
>
> I read "Innocent Man" several years ago and all I recall is that it
> was an excellent book. I read "Dreams of Ava" this week and shall
> now re-read "Innocent Man" -- beginning today. I'm usually a "law
> and order" type who sides with the prosecution in most criminal cases.
> But even I had some uneasy feelings about the prosecution in Ada.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Ward_and_Karl_Fontenot
>
> The people who sued Grisham.
>
> http://www.billpetersondistrictattorney.com/
>
> To really enjoy and understand what caused Grisham to write his first
> non-fiction book --- read them in order. "Mayer first and then
> Grisham.
I haven't read a book since the 1970s. I used to have a union job at a
steel plant several life's ago and did enough reading to last me
forever. Here are some old books I would recommend, though.
Man And His Gods, 1951, (Has an introduction by Albert Einstein, as I
recall)
Used: $3.99 (Amazon.com)
The Naked Ape, Desmond Morris, 1966, from $0.80 (Amazon.com)
The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements, Eric
Hoffer, $9.35 (Amazon.com)
Any of Ayn Rand's Books (Read them and find out how shallow and
brainless they really are)
How to Win Friends & Influence People, Dale Carnegie, $7.99
(Amazon.com). I have a buddy who once read this book and learned how
to wrap people around his little finger. Whenever he would try any of
the techniques on me, though, I would just laugh and tell him I read
the book too.
mg
> "True Believer" in my bookcase.
Another good one was "Games People Play" (1964). As I recall, that's
the only book dealing with psychology that has ever struck me as being
useful and informative instead of being filled with nonsense and
speculation.
It would be interesting to know if there are any modern-day
equivalents to any of those old books that are even better than the
originals. If there are then I would be tempted to read them. An
updated book on True Believers, for example, with the emphasis on
America's right-wing political movement would be interesting.
rtk...@gmail.com
wrote:
Many books on human evolution far better than The Naked Ape.
My profs in anthropology didn't think much of it -- try Richard
Dawkins on evolution. I own one, The Ancestor's Tale, which has
the virtue of being able to be read a chapter at a time -- in any
order. It is a fat paperback but easy to absorb just a bit at a time.
.
As for Dale Carnegie self help books, a new one seems to be published
every few months or so.
>
>
rtk...@gmail.com
wrote:
>On Jan 5, 4:53�am, Gary <n...@none.com> wrote:
Here is a review of the book I mentioned, The Ancestor's Tale. Amazon
has used copies at very low prices:
Just as we trace our personal family trees from parents to
grandparents and so on back in time, so in The Ancestor's Tale Richard
Dawkins traces the ancestry of life. As he is at pains to point out,
this is very much our human tale, our ancestry. Surprisingly, it is
one that many otherwise literate people are largely unaware of.
Hopefully Dawkins's name and well deserved reputation as a best
selling writer will introduce them to this wonderful saga.
The Ancestor's Tale takes us from our immediate human ancestors back
through what he calls �concestors,� those shared with the apes,
monkeys and other mammals and other vertebrates and beyond to the dim
and distant microbial beginnings of life some 4 billion years ago. It
is a remarkable story which is still very much in the process of being
uncovered. And, of course from a scientist of Dawkins stature and
reputation we get an insider's knowledge of the most up-to-date
science and many of those involved in the research. And, as we have
come to expect of Dawkins, it is told with a passionate commitment to
scientific veracity and a nose for a good story. Dawkins's knowledge
of the vast and wonderful sweep of life's diversity is admirable. Not
only does it encompass the most interesting living representatives of
so many groups of organisms but also the important and informative
fossil ones, many of which have only been found in recent years.
Dawkins sees his journey with its reverse chronology as �cast in the
form of an epic pilgrimage from the present to the past [and] all
roads lead to the origin of life.� It is, to my mind, a sensible and
perfectly acceptable approach although some might complain about going
against the grain of evolution. The great benefit for the general
reader is that it begins with the more familiar present and the
animals nearest and dearest to us�our immediate human ancestors. And
then it delves back into the more remote and less familiar past with
its droves of lesser known and extinct fossil forms. The whole
pilgrimage is divided into 40 tales, each based around a group of
organisms and discusses their role in the overall story. Genetic,
morphological and fossil evidence is all taken into account and
illustrated with a wealth of photos and drawings of living and fossils
forms, evolutionary and distributional charts and maps through time,
providing a visual compliment and complement to the text. The design
also allows Dawkins to make numerous running comments and
characteristic asides. There are also numerous references and a good
index.-- Douglas Palmer
mg
> On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 19:39:37 -0800 (PST), mg <mgkel...@yahoo.com>
Thanks for the info. Of all the books I've read, I've never read a
single, scholarly/scientific book on anthropology or evolution. So,
I'm overdue to read at least one. I just bought The Ancestor's Tale on
Half.com for $6.37 (including shipping) and look forward to reading
it.
rtk...@gmail.com
wrote:
>On Jan 5, 10:13�pm, rtkn...@gmail.com wrote:
I was a bit daunted when I received the book as even in paperback it
is very thick -- but you can skip around chapter by chapter and
Dawkins is a lively and entertaining writer.
>
>
mg
> On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 01:07:47 -0800 (PST), mg <mgkel...@yahoo.com>
"Man and His God's" was the same way and I confess I never did read it
cover to cover.
rtk...@gmail.com
wrote:
>On Jan 6, 6:21�am, rtkn...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no law that says you have to. I've been dipping in and out
of The Ancestors Tale from time to time.
But I often read books that way. One of my daughters is horrified
that I often read the ending of novels first.
Rumpelstiltskin
wrote:
>On Jan 6, 6:21�am, rtkn...@gmail.com wrote:
Dawkins is probably much easier to read, and this book you
can put down and pick back up as much as you want,
because the sections are only a few pages long. Dawkins
said he thought of it as the Canterbury Tales in reverse,
because instead of pilgrims meeting and joining the group
making the pilgrimage at Canterbury, his book walks us
back ward in time, to meet again along the trail the species
who had parted us at each juncture in the past.
I've often wondered why nobody has pointed out the case
of the horse and the donkey. They can mate and even have
offspring, but the offspring male or female is sterile. That
I would say is because the horse and donkey were once
one animal, but a mutation occurred in some past time and
the difference has gotten to that interesting point that they
can still mate, but because the offspring is sterile there is
no way the two species could recombine.
Dawkins also notes that since the definition of a species
is that it cannot successfully mate with anything else, it's
possible for two populations isolated from each other
could become two separate species even while neither of
them are changing. That would be if there were an
intermediate species with which both could successfully
mate even though the two main populations could not
successfully mate with each other, as happens in some
bird species. While the intermediate species lives, it is
possible for the two populations to recombine into a
single population, but if the intermediate species goes
extinct, then it is no longer possible for the two main
populations to recombine, which by definition makes
them now two separate species even though that was
only because another population went extinct.
strongly suggests the
Evelyn
<rtk...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uppak51oahvrht5j3...@4ax.com...
If it is a novel I realize one needs to read the whole thing, even if I
occasionally have peeked at the last page or two. But if a book gets
really boring or draggy, I will skip some parts too.
--
Evelyn
"Even as a mother protects with her life her only child, So with a boundless
heart let one cherish all living beings." --Sutta Nipata 1.8
High Miles
I have all his stuff, and share it often with some of the few remaining
creation crap saps I still deal with. It actually makes them think, and
I believe it's painful for them................but they don't admit it.
mg
> On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 20:42:04 -0800 (PST), mg <mgkel...@yahoo.com>
I think the case of the wolf and the human are particularly
interesting. In the case of the wolf, humans have managed to transform
it into a variety of useful and appealing dog species. Unfortunately,
in the case of humans, no one has managed to do the same thing.