Live data from Hacker News

St. John’s Reading List: A Great Books Curriculum

sjc.edu

21–30 of 155 posts

Re: St. John’s Reading List: A Great Books Curriculum

#21
post #17

A former partner of mine was a St. John's alum (and champion), so I heard a lot about and thought a lot about their undergraduate program. Of course this is a wonderful list of brilliant works. I don't know if reading nothing but primary sources is the most efficient way to become a critical thinker or knowledgeable (e.g. reading Euclid might be a treat for those who know geometry, but is it the ideal way to learn ge…

I really disagree with the implication. It’s not like Hitler or the slavers were well read in their Greek philosophy. Traditionally — and I hope going into the future — the classical works of western civ have been a source of enduring liberalism. They show the value and meaning of freedom — and nuanced, complex, non-black/white thought.

But of course I’m biased because I’m deeply immersed in the classics—and I draw from it regularly. I find it troubling that people feel comfortable portraying classical civ as Nazi fodder…

Re: St. John’s Reading List: A Great Books Curriculum

#23
Class of '87 here. Most valuable takeaway is that you can read almost _anything_ directly or in translation. You don't need to read a summary of Hegel, you can read Hegel. You don't need to read an article about a Supreme Court case like Marbury v. Madison, you can read the case itself.

When you go into technology, you're then willing to dive into the guts of the actual docs instead of waiting for a book or blog post about it. Another way it prepares you for tech-- understanding philosophy is the skill of drawing incredibly fine distinctions between things. Designing software is also the skill of drawing incredibly fine distinctions between things. Having years of experience in arguing these incredibly fine distinctions was a huge leg up fr me when I was getting started, and remains useful to this day.

I think that the careers of my graduating class are primarily in software, law, academia, and medicine.

Funny things about it - there are a lot of places where your undergrad experience just doesn't overlap with that of people who didn't go there. Everyone studies the same thing at SJC, so if I meet a Johnny who went there years after me or years before, I can tell them what I did for my senior thesis and they'll have a similar reaction - why the hell did you do that? It's also _extremely_ small, so if they went there during the same years I did, I almost certainly know them.

The original-works thing works gangbusters on philosophy, science, and literature, and breaks down a little in math. You spend a frustrating amount of time doing Ptolemaic astronomy, because it's an excellent classical treatment of trigonometry. You study Newton for calculus, but you don't actually learn anything that the modern world thinks of as calculus from Newton, so you study supplemental materials that teach you derivatives and integrals over algebraic expressions.

It's culturally pretty liberal on the inside, although it's bizarrely worshipped by some right-wingers who didn't go there because of the curriculum's focus on works from the European tradition.

Re: St. John’s Reading List: A Great Books Curriculum

#24
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that list is ... eclectic, to put it politely. If you want to learn maths, I wouldn't recommend Aristotle, Descartes and Darwin. Perhaps I don't understand what "The information presented is for illustration purposes only and may not reflect the current reading list" means, and why one would link that page anyway.

The Great Books approach involves reading the actual historical development of a subject and seeing not only what the state of the art is but how we got from here to there.

I believe the person you're replying to understands that. The claim is that this approach is really bad way to learn math.

As someone who has learned and taught a lot of math, I agree with that claim.

Re: St. John’s Reading List: A Great Books Curriculum

#25
post #16

Huh, this is neat. If you click on a book's subject(s), it will then take you to the specific topic and a reading list tailored to it. For example, this is their Mathematics reading list: https://www.sjc.edu/academic-programs/undergraduate/subjects... .

Except that list is ... eclectic, to put it politely. If you want to learn maths, I wouldn't recommend Aristotle, Descartes and Darwin. Perhaps I don't understand what "The information presented is for illustration purposes only and may not reflect the current reading list" means, and why one would link that page anyway.

It has been trendy in the last fifty or so years to strip historical and cultural content from math classes in favor of rote computation (as the former is easiest to test in a “standardized” setting), but I’d argue that dehumanizing mathematics makes it far harder to understand, or indeed even care about.

Word problems are the last edifice of natural philosophy in the high school mathematics curriculum and there’s constant pressure to remove those as well.

Re: St. John’s Reading List: A Great Books Curriculum

#26
post #16

Huh, this is neat. If you click on a book's subject(s), it will then take you to the specific topic and a reading list tailored to it. For example, this is their Mathematics reading list: https://www.sjc.edu/academic-programs/undergraduate/subjects... .

Except that list is ... eclectic, to put it politely. If you want to learn maths, I wouldn't recommend Aristotle, Descartes and Darwin. Perhaps I don't understand what "The information presented is for illustration purposes only and may not reflect the current reading list" means, and why one would link that page anyway.

We actually read some Descartes in math-- some of the papers from which we get the term "Cartesian coordinates." What he does in those papers fascinating, but has very little to do with the way that we learn and use Cartesian coordinates.

Re: St. John’s Reading List: A Great Books Curriculum

#27

I stayed at St. John's one summer and I remember they had a "final" where they had to solve geometric problems by actually drawing the proofs on a chalk board, shapes and all. I watched that girl go through the whole process while studying and I was fascinated.

That's what you do literally every day in math - take turns going to the board and working through proofs. Ptolemy is Waterloo for anyone who has trouble drawing big circles.

Re: St. John’s Reading List: A Great Books Curriculum

#28
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that list is ... eclectic, to put it politely. If you want to learn maths, I wouldn't recommend Aristotle, Descartes and Darwin. Perhaps I don't understand what "The information presented is for illustration purposes only and may not reflect the current reading list" means, and why one would link that page anyway.

The Great Books approach involves reading the actual historical development of a subject and seeing not only what the state of the art is but how we got from here to there.

But consider that they include Hardy's "Mendelian Proportions in a Mixed Population" but not Riemann's "On the Hypotheses Which Lie at the Foundations of Geometry."

Re: St. John’s Reading List: A Great Books Curriculum

#29

I have read many of these works listed. I don't like this database-looking list format; too many books there. Some of them are quite challenging. Freshman Reading: Homer - Illyad, Odyssey ... ok! if you read the Odyssey in your own native language (not greek), you probably will enjoy it, but how are you going to know about the grand themes unless someone tells you about it? seems sad in a way that these great works a…

> Freshman Reading: Homer - Illyad, Odyssey ... ok! if you read the Odyssey in your own native language (not greek), you probably will enjoy it, but how are you going to know about the grand themes unless someone tells you about it? Isn't there a class instruction, supplementary reading, and discussion component for these books? I assume so. But I think a lot of people — even freshmen! — could just read these books a…

Talking about them in a small class of people who read the same thing at the same time, led by 1 or 2 professors who are practiced in _not_ acting like more than advanced students, is _really_ different from just reading the book.

I'd read _Pride and Prejudice_ many times before the seminar on it, and I could not have predicted what other people saw in the book and wanted to talk about with a pile of postit notes, a ball of red yarn, and ten hours in front of a big wall.

Re: St. John’s Reading List: A Great Books Curriculum

#30
post #17

A former partner of mine was a St. John's alum (and champion), so I heard a lot about and thought a lot about their undergraduate program. Of course this is a wonderful list of brilliant works. I don't know if reading nothing but primary sources is the most efficient way to become a critical thinker or knowledgeable (e.g. reading Euclid might be a treat for those who know geometry, but is it the ideal way to learn ge…

I really disagree with the implication. It’s not like Hitler or the slavers were well read in their Greek philosophy. Traditionally — and I hope going into the future — the classical works of western civ have been a source of enduring liberalism. They show the value and meaning of freedom — and nuanced, complex, non-black/white thought. But of course I’m biased because I’m deeply immersed in the classics—and I draw f…

Which "slavers" are you referring to? Almost all of the American Founding Fathers owned slaves, and they were of course very familiar with the tradition of liberal thought.

I can't speak for Hitler's knowledge of the Greeks specifically, but he was democratically elected by the nation of Germany, which - like I mentioned - was considered to be one of the most "civilized" in Europe (and thus the world). It's easy enough to draw a line from Hegel or Nietzsche - both on this list - to Nazism, after all. It's even easier to draw a line from Heidegger to Nazism, and he's also on this list.

Post reply on HN