61–70 of 184 posts
Like Hemingway, Kerouac, and James Bond, I also like going to bars in exotic places, meeting women and other people, and not reading.
I have noticed an interesting trend in our discourse about reading lately - there seems to be more and more moralizing and virtue signaling. So much self-help and "motivation porn" focuses on reading books, as if it's a magical activity that will unlock the best version of oneself. It's part of the new aspirational message - imagine yourself rich, happy, driving a Lamborghini, living off dividends from your stonks, a…
I've been thinking about the halo around books on and off for years. I think whatever special value books used to represent in our society from before the internet is long gone. I remember the pre-internet times when the information world you had access to was small. You could consume silly low-information things on the tv or radio or you could read a book on the topic, which had a much higher information density and…
The micro-niche aspect of the internet is unrivaled for straightforward, practical information. I won't question that. That said, if you want the detailed thoughts of an expert on some topic, they will by definition be in a book or book-analog online format since no other medium allows for this sort of efficient and unforgiving long-form development of thoughts. Online courses and blog posts tend to refer to books anyway, or to summarize them. Videos can offer information as well but the format itself constrains the amount of information you can cram into the work, and the incentive to editorialize is greater.
But in a deeper sense it's not even about the books but the applicability and context of the information that is gleaned regardless of the format. Ten year's worth of HN can be impressive, but it mostly gives you perspective on HN users and which topics interest them to begin with. Just like the School of Athens gave a specific perspective, HN will give you a specific framework from which you may or may not have to escape eventually. To name another example, if you start reading non-popular history books it becomes clear that different experts can have radically different views of the same events. In turn you start to realize that the pop-history books you've read are so distorted as to be almost useless. Similarly, the internet can yield astounding quantities of information, but if they are optimized for views, reinforce an echo chamber, or are repeating ideas as a secondary source, it won't matter. It's seductive to feel this power at our fingertips but the end practical result tends to be the same, since developing thoughts takes effort. More importantly, time remains the true barrier.
I have noticed an interesting trend in our discourse about reading lately - there seems to be more and more moralizing and virtue signaling. So much self-help and "motivation porn" focuses on reading books, as if it's a magical activity that will unlock the best version of oneself. It's part of the new aspirational message - imagine yourself rich, happy, driving a Lamborghini, living off dividends from your stonks, a…
There will always be someone who wants the credit without the effort (I read x books a month, look at me) — the looks without the substance — and yes, it is annoying, but at least we have books :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Books let you live a version of the lives of other more intelligent people from almost any point in history. How can pottery and kayaking do that? I do agree with your statement about books, because I personally love reading. Henry David Thoreau wrote a chapter of Walden called "Reading", and put it way better than I ever could: > "To read well, that is, to read true books in a true spirit, is a noble exercise, and…
I agree with you on most of these points and would argue the defining traits you’re putting forth is curiosity and some grit. You’re curious about pottery and will learn about it but with enough grit and obsession that you’ll actually do it and once you’ve done it once you want to know more. Most people I know (including myself) have a tough time staying curious once you get that initial taste. You see the cool texti…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So your argument to dismiss this blogpost is guilt by association, am I understanding you correctly?
The blog post's author lists a Ferriss book as one of his "3 favorite books" in a video on his channel, so it's more like "guilt by endorsement".
For such a long blog, I still didn't understand how does one read more effeciently, or did I miss something? Or is it just a clickbait title, since the majority of the blog just defends reading and counts it's pros.
Agreed. Go straight to the source: How to read a book, by Mortimer Adler. Ironically you will find there that you must grapple with the good books, which arguably disqualifies just reading about it in a blog.
I have noticed an interesting trend in our discourse about reading lately - there seems to be more and more moralizing and virtue signaling. So much self-help and "motivation porn" focuses on reading books, as if it's a magical activity that will unlock the best version of oneself. It's part of the new aspirational message - imagine yourself rich, happy, driving a Lamborghini, living off dividends from your stonks, a…
The worst is some arbitrary goal of reading X books per year. That clearly optimises for short, easy to read books (eg New York Times Best Sellers) and avoids more technical and difficult books (eg Art of Computer Programming)
> That clearly optimises for short, easy to read books (eg New York Times Best Sellers) and avoids more technical and difficult books (eg Art of Computer Programming)
Some will "cheat", but most won't. Even if you cheat, is reading 15 short, bad books better or worse than reading 0?
I have noticed an interesting trend in our discourse about reading lately - there seems to be more and more moralizing and virtue signaling. So much self-help and "motivation porn" focuses on reading books, as if it's a magical activity that will unlock the best version of oneself. It's part of the new aspirational message - imagine yourself rich, happy, driving a Lamborghini, living off dividends from your stonks, a…
I love books, and wish for the world you describe. To me books are a sort of alchemy, indeed (I would not use the word hobby, but I see what you mean. And I love pottery). It is serious business, learning the alphabet, putting oneself or others to sleep, enjoying fiction or getting an insight into a technical problem. There will always be someone who wants the credit without the effort (I read x books a month, look a…
Agree! I admittedly put on my "critic hat" writing that post so maybe it came off a bit contrarian.
But you're absolutely right. If it's a choice between dealing with some shallowness, or not having books in the public consciousness at all? I'll gladly tolerate the self-help crowd slightly overselling the promise of reading.
For such a long blog, I still didn't understand how does one read more effeciently, or did I miss something? Or is it just a clickbait title, since the majority of the blog just defends reading and counts it's pros.
TL;DR : Start taking notes about what you read if you want to actually remember a bit of it. Here you go.
I have noticed an interesting trend in our discourse about reading lately - there seems to be more and more moralizing and virtue signaling. So much self-help and "motivation porn" focuses on reading books, as if it's a magical activity that will unlock the best version of oneself. It's part of the new aspirational message - imagine yourself rich, happy, driving a Lamborghini, living off dividends from your stonks, a…
Is reading good for you because other forms of entertainment have gotten worse? I suspect reading is so great because time spent reading is not time spent toiling away on social media or other shallow distractions. The same reason tea is good for you simply because it's not soda. Or do successful people tend to read because successful people don't tend to get dragged into shallow activities. The reading didn't make t…
Many professions require reading to be successful, but it's more the case that getting the necessary information would not be realistically possible without reading at some point. People in that position don't read for its own sake in their work life (whether they read for pleasure is another story), they go find the information they need in the format it exists in. This is then confused as "reading makes you successful" but it is as trivial a statement as "having the right information makes you successful"