Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Books you wish you had read earlier?

news.ycombinator.com

171–180 of 280 posts

Re: Ask HN: Books you wish you had read earlier?

#171
post #140

The bible, cover to cover: if reading western literature or philosophy produced in whatever year A.D., the bible is required reading for comprehending many the references and various rhetorical modes. I'm irreligious from a muslim background myself but I'm reading it now. Same goes for the qoran, my family is not a practicing muslim family and thus I never read it, but it's a part of the canon, must be read. I'm not…

Can you recommend a good English translation of the Qoran if it exists? I've asked Muslim friends but they seem adamant that it must be read in Arabic or, at least, only know of the Arabic text.

I can't unfortunately, but many translations exist, some from academical background. I don't think it must be read in Arabic, especially if the reading is a secular one.

edit: Saheeh international seems to be a nice translation with heavy annotations, there are pdfs online. I myself will consider this one for my readings.

Re: Ask HN: Books you wish you had read earlier?

#172
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, because a thorough understanding of the Bible shows that its teaching is quite different to what is often portrayed in media and in the assumptions of people like myself who had not previously read it. You can take many individual parts of the Bible out of context and make it sound like madness but reading the whole in its entirety has a narrative that many miss. For those raised on the internet and faste…

If you're already christian, I'd recommend not reading the bible cover to cover. I did, and it made me an atheist.

I would recommend Christians read the Bible for exactly that reason.

Christians should be forced to confront the absurdity of their holy book and the psychotic lunacy of the Abrahamic God before deciding not only to base their life and worldview on it, but to raise their children to believe in it and to vote for candidates who enshrine it into law.

At the very least, we might have far fewer Christians who insist upon Biblical literalism.

Re: Ask HN: Books you wish you had read earlier?

#173
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen this book recommended many times. I read a few chapters and don't feel like it was useful. Some of the stuff is obvious common sense like smile don't criticize others, be a good listener etc. Then it tells you to be genuinely interested in someone. How can you force yourself to be interested in someone? Does the book go into anything actually useful later on?

You're lucky if this is common sense for you. Sadly, for me, coming from a family where bad mood and malice is daily fare, this book was an eye opener.

For someone who was socially awkward growing up, it wasn't all common sense for me either.

I once had a neighbour tell me "I have a name, you know" and it seemed a crazy thing to say, of course they have a name! It wasn't until reading the book that I understood they were offended that I never used their name in conversation.

Re: Ask HN: Books you wish you had read earlier?

#174
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're already christian, I'd recommend not reading the bible cover to cover. I did, and it made me an atheist.

Do you mind explaining why? I'm not looking for a heated argument. I'm just curious what aspects of it drove you away.

Not the OP but... I read Gospels once. Or twice, actually.

The first time as a clueless teenager and it made me worry that maybe this paranormal stuff is real because so many people seem to believe it. This was probably the closest to "being a Christian" I had ever got. If you so desire, feel free to say it's crap and not what this religion was supposed to be about etc. etc., I don't mind at all. That's how I was raised by my parents - they seem to be a hard case of "belief in belief".

The second time in my twenties - it gave me some idea of how people may have come to believe in this paranormal stuff and helped me get over it.

Re: Ask HN: Books you wish you had read earlier?

#175
post #165
post #140

The bible, cover to cover: if reading western literature or philosophy produced in whatever year A.D., the bible is required reading for comprehending many the references and various rhetorical modes. I'm irreligious from a muslim background myself but I'm reading it now. Same goes for the qoran, my family is not a practicing muslim family and thus I never read it, but it's a part of the canon, must be read. I'm not…

Is it really necessary to read it cover to cover? A lot of it seems quite drawn out, and there seems to be a lot of overlap, particularly between the four gospels of the New Testament (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John).

It depends on what you want to get out of it. My reading is a philological/historical one, I'm aiming to become a scholar of literature (I'm a humanities student with a passion for computing), and also I'm looking for literary prompts in it, so a deeper understanding is important for me. But if you just want to know what it's about, then you can peruse the book and rely on commentaries and recaps. But all in all it's about 2000 pages, which equals to 4-5 novels, and does not require a linear, uninterrupted reading, so I guess it's worth it. I'm still reading the old testament (1Sa), but AFAIK the gospels do overlap in the story but views and interpretations are different.

Re: Ask HN: Books you wish you had read earlier?

#176
"From Bacteria to Bach the evolution of minds" by Daniel Dennet.

Should be called How Minds Evolve as Heirarchies of Darwinian Turing Machines ( analagously to Deep Neural Nets (Dennet cites Geoff Hinton and Edinburgh's Andy Clarke).

"working computer models have been developed that can do a good job identifying handwritten—scribbled, really—digits, involving a cascade of layers in which the higher layers make Bayesian predictions about what the next layer down in the system will “see” next; when the predictions prove false, they then generate error signals in response that lead to Bayesian revisions, which are then fed back down toward the input again and again, until the system settles on an identification (Hinton 2007). Practice makes perfect, and over time these systems get better and better at the job, the same way we do—only better" p.178 [1]

"Hierarchical, Bayesian predictive coding is a method for generating affordances galore: we expect solid objects to have backs that will come into view as we walk around them; we expect doors to open, stairs to afford climbing, and cups to hold liquid. These and all manner of other anticipations fall out of a network that doesn’t sit passively waiting to be informed but constantly makes probabilistic guesses about what it is about to receive in the way of input from the level below it, based on what it has just received, and then treating feedback about the errors in its guesses as the chief source of new information, as a way to adjust its prior expectations for the next round of guessing."

Which echoes Richard Gregory's concept of vision (or perception) as a hypothesis continually tested against input.

This is Paradigm shifting; weltanschauung shattering stuff. Dennet very clearly lays out a methodology for how all aspects of minds can evolve using heirarchical compositions of wetware robots or :

"Si, abbiamo un anima. Ma é fatta di tanti piccoli robot! (Yes, we have a soul, but it’s made of lots of tiny robots!)" p.24 [1]

[1] https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/253900/from-bacteria-to-bach...

Re: Ask HN: Books you wish you had read earlier?

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that? Some of the language isn't all that easy to get through but, taken as a piece of literary work, I don't find it that unreadable.

It's hard for me, feels like totally unrelated parts are patched together. Tons of contradiction and archaic views even on a single page. But I never read more than a page at a time I always put it back as something I should not waste my time with deciphering what they meant.

It's difficult if I take it as something I'm meant to believe. I always get that tug in my stomach.

It's interesting as a reflection of culture, of which religion takes a prominent part in much of history.

I see it like viewing the works of a renaissance artist. Perhaps not as brilliant but similar in that a lot of works have religious themes but your beliefs, what they may be, look past the religion to consider it as part of the work itself.

Re: Ask HN: Books you wish you had read earlier?

#178
post #54

Non-Fiction: "How to Win Friends and Influence People" by Dale Carnegie, because it changed my understanding of people for the better. "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!" by Richard Feynman, because it gave me a model for how to enjoy life. "Models" by Mark Manson, because it helped shape my understanding of heterosexual relationships. "An Introduction to General Systems Thinking" by Gerald Weinberg, because it illu…

Very good list. "Models" is an exceptional book (even if poorly written) about how to live a life that will maximize your opportunities to find a partner.

I am a huge fan of mark manson and I highly recommand his book "the subtle art of not giving a fuck". Great advice on how to live a happy life : https://www.amazon.fr/Subtle-Art-Not-Giving-Counterintuitive...

Re: Ask HN: Books you wish you had read earlier?

#179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mind explaining why? I'm not looking for a heated argument. I'm just curious what aspects of it drove you away.

Same here. For one it's full of inconsistencies and even if it all were true, I would not want to believe in such a neurotic, angry god.

> I would not want to believe in such a neurotic, angry god.

I'm under impression that people may have created gods in their own image so to speak, which immediately makes me wonder if there will come a time that you will eat these words. Denial much?

Re: Ask HN: Books you wish you had read earlier?

#180
post #172
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're already christian, I'd recommend not reading the bible cover to cover. I did, and it made me an atheist.

I would recommend Christians read the Bible for exactly that reason. Christians should be forced to confront the absurdity of their holy book and the psychotic lunacy of the Abrahamic God before deciding not only to base their life and worldview on it, but to raise their children to believe in it and to vote for candidates who enshrine it into law. At the very least, we might have far fewer Christians who insist upon…

> At the very least, we might have far fewer Christians who insist upon Biblical literalism.

Many of those who insist on Biblical literalism have already read this stuff.

You lose one life. Try again.

Post reply on HN