Why read Dostoevsky? A programmer's perspective • Hacker News Board

Re: Why read Dostoevsky? A programmer's perspective

#61

Post by jmartrican » Sat, Oct 01, 2022, 1:29 PM UTC

kieckerjan wrote: post #21

I met a young and apparently highly intelligent AI researcher the other week who confessed to me that he thought fiction (books but also movies etc) was a waste of his time: there was nothing to be gained there. Being a lover of fiction myself, I huffed and puffed and he challenged me to name him a book that would change his mind. Usually when people ask me where to start in literature, I advise them to start at the…

Crime And Punishment I would recommend, but only because I have not yet read Don Quixote.

Re: Why read Dostoevsky? A programmer's perspective

#62

Post by layer8 » Sat, Oct 01, 2022, 1:29 PM UTC

kieckerjan wrote: post #21

I met a young and apparently highly intelligent AI researcher the other week who confessed to me that he thought fiction (books but also movies etc) was a waste of his time: there was nothing to be gained there. Being a lover of fiction myself, I huffed and puffed and he challenged me to name him a book that would change his mind. Usually when people ask me where to start in literature, I advise them to start at the…

As someone who finds most fiction to take much too long to get to any interesting points, I’d like to recommend Greg Egan’s Axiomatic, a collection of thought-provoking SF short stories.

Re: Why read Dostoevsky? A programmer's perspective

#63

Post by jmartrican » Sat, Oct 01, 2022, 1:30 PM UTC

user3939382 wrote: post #31

I’ve had a hard time trying to read both Dostoevsky and Tolstoy because of the names. I guess because I don’t speak Russian, the names are long and complicated and in most cases, compounding the problem, there are too many characters. It makes it very difficult to read “in my head” and keep track of what’s going on.

I had similar problem. The audio version helped. I never remembered any of their names, but their voices stood out.

Re: Why read Dostoevsky? A programmer's perspective

#64

Post by jmartrican » Sat, Oct 01, 2022, 1:32 PM UTC

dvt wrote: post #2

I used to like Taleb, but his cult is getting out of hand. Really? You needed Taleb to explain why the classics are good reading? Why literature that has been treasured for the entirety of human history is valuable? Get a grip. Mix that faux-intellectualism--slash--nouveau-englightenment with gross oversimplifications and you have a Taleb cultist. > From Communist Russia's collapse due to Marxism... I'm no Russian sy…

I agree. Taleb's book have really opened up my eyes. But that's just one of lives many lessons. Take the lesson and move on. No need to make a cult of it.

Re: Why read Dostoevsky? A programmer's perspective

#65

Post by alfor » Sat, Oct 01, 2022, 1:32 PM UTC

kieckerjan wrote: post #21

I met a young and apparently highly intelligent AI researcher the other week who confessed to me that he thought fiction (books but also movies etc) was a waste of his time: there was nothing to be gained there. Being a lover of fiction myself, I huffed and puffed and he challenged me to name him a book that would change his mind. Usually when people ask me where to start in literature, I advise them to start at the…

You need to dig deeper, only ask questions.

What is his current view of the world of humans, etc.

Once you have a grasp of that, there is probably a fiction that can show him how his vision is incomplete.

We are after knowledge and to be useful and interesting the new knowledge need to be just a bit farther than we are at the moment. (zone of proximal development)

Not a book, but for AI I enjoyed watching Joshua Bach interview (consciousness is a simulation)

I agree that most movies are a waste of time at the moment. They mostly repeat the same propaganda.

Re: Why read Dostoevsky? A programmer's perspective

#66

Post by ordu » Sat, Oct 01, 2022, 1:39 PM UTC

dvt wrote: post #11

ordu wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You needed Taleb to explain why the classics are good reading? Why literature that has been treasured for the entirety of human history is valuable? Classics are good reading because every new generation of readers can find there something valuable. Every new generation of readers can find something new, or at least rediscover something old. Everyone find in classics their own things. If the author sees Dostoevsky…

> It means he is still relevant. Yeah, that's kind of my point. Of course he's still relevant, he's Dostoevsky . I'm in the middle of Moby Dick. Not because Taleb (or Jordan Peterson, or any other twitter "intellectual") told me about this cool 19th century author named Herman Melville, but because, you know, it's Moby freakin' Dick .

> Of course he's still relevant, he's Dostoevsky.

It is a theoretical prediction: Dostoevsky will be relevant forever.

When someone reads Dostoevsky and sees Taleb's ideas there, it is not an insult to Dostoevsky, it is an evidence supporting the theory.

Re: Why read Dostoevsky? A programmer's perspective

#67

Post by closedloop129 » Sat, Oct 01, 2022, 1:44 PM UTC

Bakary wrote: post #41

kieckerjan wrote: post #21

I met a young and apparently highly intelligent AI researcher the other week who confessed to me that he thought fiction (books but also movies etc) was a waste of his time: there was nothing to be gained there. Being a lover of fiction myself, I huffed and puffed and he challenged me to name him a book that would change his mind. Usually when people ask me where to start in literature, I advise them to start at the…

The irony is that if all the highly intelligent and capable researchers, capitalists, and knowledge workers read more fiction the world would probably be slightly less dystopian than it currently is

The world could also improve if the readers of fiction would increase their engagement in research, business and knowledge.

Re: Why read Dostoevsky? A programmer's perspective

#68

Post by bazoom42 » Sat, Oct 01, 2022, 1:44 PM UTC

kieckerjan wrote: post #21

I met a young and apparently highly intelligent AI researcher the other week who confessed to me that he thought fiction (books but also movies etc) was a waste of his time: there was nothing to be gained there. Being a lover of fiction myself, I huffed and puffed and he challenged me to name him a book that would change his mind. Usually when people ask me where to start in literature, I advise them to start at the…

Perhaps the Harry Potter books? Don’t throw Tolstoy at someone who havent read fiction before.

Re: Why read Dostoevsky? A programmer's perspective

#69

Post by ordu » Sat, Oct 01, 2022, 1:44 PM UTC

Bakary wrote: post #43

ordu wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You needed Taleb to explain why the classics are good reading? Why literature that has been treasured for the entirety of human history is valuable? Classics are good reading because every new generation of readers can find there something valuable. Every new generation of readers can find something new, or at least rediscover something old. Everyone find in classics their own things. If the author sees Dostoevsky…

You should be more worried about Taleb being remembered in 50 years than Dostoevsky

Why should I be worried about that? Taleb is remembered now, it is relevant now, and it makes people think about Taleb now. So why not to try to understand Taleb deeper by reading Dostoevsky? If Taleb will fail to be relevant in 50 years, then no one would try to do it then. And what? Why should it worry me?

Re: Why read Dostoevsky? A programmer's perspective

#70

Post by oldsklgdfth » Sat, Oct 01, 2022, 1:45 PM UTC

psychomugs wrote: post #59

Forgeties79 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like there’s a lot to be gleaned here, but all I can focus on is how this - especially the last line - could be easily misrepresented to spread an anti-education message.

You could say similar of any technology, as they all extend and amputate ourselves in some way. I read the Schopenhauer line as a sentiment against technosolutionism; technology like books are fine in moderation, but they are not replacements for the reality of lived experience. See Marshall McLuhan and Neil Postman for better arguments.

Came here to mention those two.

It’s a subtle message. Technology giveth and technology taketh. Use of any technology is a trade off.