[HN Gopher] How to live an intellectually rich life
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How to live an intellectually rich life
        
       Author : TheLadyParadox
       Score  : 447 points
       Date   : 2025-05-02 10:58 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (utsavmamoria.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (utsavmamoria.substack.com)
        
       | karol wrote:
       | I wouldn't advise this as a life goal. Better to live an
       | intentional live. I am sure people can come up with even better
       | formulations.
        
       | incomingpain wrote:
       | How to:
       | 
       | Read lots of non-fiction. Whatever interests you.
       | 
       | Try to find overlap over the different interests. Try to find new
       | thoughts there. You might be the first to find them.
       | 
       | Assume everything you know is wrong. It's generally true of >50%.
       | 
       | Hard is best, too hard is bad, too easy is bad.
        
         | amos-burton wrote:
         | bend, dont break
        
         | jhickok wrote:
         | I think engaging with works of fiction is just as important.
         | Like anything, if a work of fiction engages and challenges you,
         | and you are an intentional reader, it exercises very important
         | muscles.
        
           | incomingpain wrote:
           | fiction absolutely can be intellectual. 1984, 451 Fahrenheit,
           | anything dostoevsky or heinlein.
           | 
           | in fact, by adding that intellectualism is what makes these
           | stand out.
           | 
           | But i do specify non-fiction because I wouldnt say most
           | fiction is intellectual; or if you try to approach some
           | fiction you'll quickly dig deeper than what's actually there
           | and then it's just you superimposing.
           | 
           | The example i like is colour metaphors. Shakespeare will say
           | that a character put a green shirt on. You're supposed to say
           | 'thats just a new shirt, not the colour green' but no. It
           | actually really is just the colour green. You cant dig too
           | deep on most fiction.
        
       | ashoeafoot wrote:
       | Seek movement .Move towards discomfort. Settle only in your
       | values, never in loyalties or kinship. Be homeless in regards to
       | ideologies, be merciless to those that subvert what your values
       | brought about , be subversive to all things to see the
       | brittleness of things.
       | 
       | Disregard detected retardations in yourself, invest your lifes
       | work in little turtles crawling towards abilities up the scenario
       | tree. Do not attach, to fortresses, kings and nations built on
       | those branches.
        
         | Etheryte wrote:
         | This reads like someone accidentally posted their Linkedin
         | motivational slop on HN.
        
           | deeThrow94 wrote:
           | Ah it's just romantic; let's not be so harsh. LinkedIn would
           | be so lucky to get a post like this.
        
         | noduerme wrote:
         | Polonius. You forgot "never a borrower nor a lender be".
        
           | linguistbreaker wrote:
           | Polonius was famously wrong about everything.
        
         | apwell23 wrote:
         | nah..do whatever the fuck you want.
        
       | noduerme wrote:
       | Just because you can prove mathematically that most link chains
       | "end" at "philosophy" doesn't mean that's the end _you_ should
       | end up at. I spend at least 2 nights a week just reading links
       | through wikipedia as I 'm falling asleep, and I almost inevitably
       | end up at _languages and cultures_ or historical events that I
       | knew little about. Philosophy isn 't an end, and it's pretty
       | meaningless without some stone cold knowledge about the world. Or
       | you could say it comes as a result of knowledge, not before it.
        
         | ysofunny wrote:
         | personally I believe that
         | 
         | philosophy helps to "compress" more knowledge about the world
         | into "less" knowledge by shifting quantity of data into
         | difficulty from advanced conceptual abstractions
        
           | ghugccrghbvr wrote:
           | This is a fucking brilliant observation!
           | 
           | Thank you.
        
         | bluGill wrote:
         | Nothing ends at philosophy. They reach there, but they can
         | reach lots of different places. Without scrolling on philosophy
         | I can see more than 50 other links from that page that are thus
         | reachable from anywhere by at most one more step.
         | 
         | Pick a random thing and see if it is reachable from anywhere. A
         | lot of them are. I suspect most are, but I don't know how to
         | run this study (other than a brute force algorithm that will
         | use more compute than I would want to dedicate)
        
         | sesm wrote:
         | Philosophy is like math for humanities.
        
         | gen220 wrote:
         | I think you'd be interested in Tolstoy's view of "Philosophy",
         | which he expresses in "Confession / What I Believe".
         | 
         | Basically that the reason why philosophy is cold and
         | meaningless is because it tries to separate itself from the
         | source of meaning, which is intrinsically subjective and
         | physical and spiritual.
         | 
         | Philosophy's logical conclusions are relativism and nihilism
         | (or at least they were in Tolstoy's time? I'm not a
         | philosopher), because they try to understand the world with a
         | pretext that denies its vitality.
         | 
         | Common folk / common sense frown on these forms of philosophy,
         | because they miss the point in a sense; they don't actually
         | tell you how to live in a moral way. Tolstoy thought
         | intellectuals grossly underrated the perspective of folk wisdom
         | in that way. We've made some progress in that department, since
         | his time, but it's still largely true today.
        
       | booleandilemma wrote:
       | Read HN, of course.
        
       | begueradj wrote:
       | True knowledge is to know yourself.
        
       | bsenftner wrote:
       | Read Nobel Literature too young to understand but old enough to
       | remember the stories. Then when "life happens" the meaning of
       | those Nobel Books hits with a physical epiphany and sudden
       | unexpected wisdom is realized.
        
       | tomrod wrote:
       | I tried this for awhile, but was dissatisfied. I found myself a
       | constant consumer of intellectual material instead of being an
       | engaged participant. Once I realized that, I set course to become
       | more of a producer of useful things. That's led me to
       | woodworking, to running a consultancy, to producing AI/ML for
       | nonprofits, and to writing academic works. All in all, I enjoy
       | life substantially.
        
         | phrotoma wrote:
         | Years ago I realized that if I bluntly categorize the things I
         | do with my free time into buckets of "productive" and
         | "consumptive" it's the productive things that make me feel
         | pretty great.
        
         | aflukasz wrote:
         | I find consumer vs producer to be very interesting and useful
         | distinction. Sometimes very enlightening and somewhat scary
         | when applied to personal time spending.
        
           | xwiz wrote:
           | Pairing production and consumption can be very satisfying.
           | Some personal examples:
           | 
           | - Cooking a novel dish, then eating it
           | 
           | - Setting up a music server, then listening to music with it
           | 
           | - (With friends) Making a pen-and-paper game, then playing it
        
             | tomrod wrote:
             | Absolutely agree!
        
             | lanfeust6 wrote:
             | One might argue that everything we produce lends itself to
             | some kind of consumption. Moreover, not all actions lead to
             | tangible "products", but they can lead to useful results
             | and experiences. Sports and games are an example.
        
               | nonethewiser wrote:
               | Perhaps production tends towards consumption but not the
               | opposite. If I make music I'll probably listen to it. But
               | I can easily listen to music without making it.
               | 
               | And agree sports are an interesting example. It kind of
               | fits my mental model of consumption in many ways:
               | something you do that's primary effect transforms you.
               | Watching TV, playing a game, etc. The effect being
               | something chemical that is satisfying. I guess with
               | sports or exercise the internal change is more physical
               | (muscle, endurance, etc) vs chemical. Although I suppose
               | you are acting on the world as well - you are scoring a
               | point or advancing a position. It's just more ephemeral
               | (ends when game ends) and arbitrary.
               | 
               | Im sure even just in terms of chemical reactions there is
               | going to be a clean split between stuff like playing
               | video games or watching TV vs. sports, building
               | something, etc. Dopamine vs... ?
        
         | lanfeust6 wrote:
         | I agree. Knowledge-seeking can become a defense or excuse not
         | to take action. I think it can be enriching, particularly when
         | young, but there's a balance in everything.
        
         | genghisjahn wrote:
         | "Anyone who reads poetry to improve their mind will never
         | improve their mind by reading poetry." CS Lewis.
        
         | Eextra953 wrote:
         | I've been trying to create/produce more but I'm stuck in the
         | consumption mindset. I can't think of what to create. How did
         | you decide what useful things to produce?
        
           | bwfan123 wrote:
           | In my youth, I read many books, and I still have many unread
           | ones on the shelf. But, eventually, realized that, you only
           | understand what you can create (to paraphrase feynman), and
           | also that, what it means to be curious is to start from a
           | burning problem or itch which differs for each one of us
           | based on something deeper in our psyche.
           | 
           | Productive activities put us often into uncomfortable mental
           | places which spurs growth of some kind - the discomfort is
           | difficult to embrace however, which is why we resist it. In
           | contrast, the consumptive activity comes out of a comfortable
           | mental place and is embraced easily.
           | 
           | So, a question I ask myself is: what problems am i passionate
           | about, and what am i doing (productively) about them. If I
           | dont feel any passion, then perhaps, something is amiss (I am
           | not communicating with my soul so-to-speak), and if I am not
           | doing anything about them, then I need to get my ass moving
           | and embrace the discomfort.
        
           | bluGill wrote:
           | Do you need something? Make it - it doesn't matter what.
           | Quality doesn't even matter, if the shoes you make turn out
           | well you wear them, if not well go to the store and buy some.
           | If you decide you like making shoes then make some more. If
           | you decide it isn't fun then find something else (and come
           | back again if you later change your mind).
           | 
           | See someone else make something, try to do it yourself.
           | Sometimes you get something nice, sometimes you have fun and
           | then throw away the worthless object.
           | 
           | There are a few danger signs to watch out for. Don't get
           | caught up in learning how - you can spend the rest of your
           | life watching "how to make a guitar" videos and never build
           | anything. You can spend a lot of money on tools, or think you
           | cannot do something for lack of tools - for the first one
           | figure out how to use minimal tools (not zero!) so you don't
           | get invested in a hobby you turn out not to enjoy - the big
           | bucks should be only after you are sure the hobby and the
           | tool is for you. You can start with a project too complex -
           | start with small projects you can get done - take on the
           | complex ones only after you are sure this hobby is for you.
           | 
           | Question for you: does creating mean building something? Do
           | you count playing music as creating? What about art? What
           | about dancing? There is no right answer to these questions
           | except whatever you decide.
        
           | tomrod wrote:
           | I divide my time into 4 sets.
           | 
           | Based on an area of interest I:
           | 
           | 1. Find interesting people or projects that are interesting
           | (discovery)
           | 
           | 2. Identify the things I don't know how to do yet, or where I
           | don't have enough information (information consumption with
           | plan as output)
           | 
           | 3. Execute on the plan (creation and delivery)
           | 
           | 4. Evaluate on the outcomes -- modified ikigai is the
           | framework I use: (1) does the world need it? (2) what is the
           | world willing to pay for it? (3) did I enjoy it? (4) could I
           | be good at it
        
           | nonethewiser wrote:
           | >I can't think of what to create. How did you decide what
           | useful things to produce?
           | 
           | What you like to consume.
        
           | creer wrote:
           | Consumption is addictive - even or all the more so when we
           | feel we are consuming worthwhile stuff (see the various major
           | reading projects here). A useful first step is awareness of
           | the time spent on the various time sinks: we have limited
           | time and sinking all that available time in one thing kills
           | that. So then, diversification away from the worst bits. Even
           | if temporarily that means still consuming.
           | 
           | A second step is understanding the taste vs skill gap: unless
           | what you produce is related to your job or training, when you
           | start creating things your skill is poor (and your equipment
           | probably not adapted) and it's hard to be satisfied with the
           | quality of what you are creating. You can create something
           | related to your job skills, or you can recognize that skill
           | gap is a normal thing and persevere. Some classes though are
           | excellent at carrying someone a long way in a short time.
        
             | tasuki wrote:
             | > Consumption is addictive
             | 
             | So is production! Even more so, I guess.
        
               | creer wrote:
               | Would love to hear more! We rarely hear stories of people
               | "stuck" on the making/ creative side. Exciting yes - but
               | rarely addictive in the sense of taking so much time that
               | the rest suffers?
        
               | dayvigo wrote:
               | It's common enough that there's a well-known term for it:
               | workaholic.
        
               | tomrod wrote:
               | Typically, production requires some consumption. At a
               | base level, however, the outcomes can be guided,
               | satisfying my ego and leaving my mark on the universe.
        
           | benwaffle wrote:
           | Here are some suggestions: Writing, music creation,
           | woodworking, drawing, painting, photography, podcasting,
           | gardening, cooking, DIY home projects, chess, sports
        
         | nicbou wrote:
         | My very brief stint into woodworking and machining gave me a
         | lifetime of looking at random objects from _really_ close.
         | Seeing how things are manufactured makes you look at every man-
         | made object differently. It gives you a rare appreciation for
         | craftsmanship and clever engineering. There are whole museum
         | sections that have suddenly opened up to me.
         | 
         | I credit a few YouTube channels for creating the spark: The
         | Engineer Guy, This Old Tony, AvE, Pask Makes, Xyla Foxlin to
         | name a few.
        
       | deeThrow94 wrote:
       | I enjoyed this article.
       | 
       | I am confused though how this was a difficult problem to begin
       | with, particularly with the internet. It is not exactly hard to
       | find intellectually stimulating concepts if that's what gets you
       | off.
       | 
       | I also find "philosophy" to be a pretty miserable and unrewarding
       | topic to think about, and I tend to run quickly away from those
       | who want to talk about it. I find it very curious that the author
       | finds it to be a natural place for your focus to land. I think
       | this is a red herring: the secret to long-term contentment is not
       | thinking at all if it's not strictly necessary. Aristotle got
       | "contemplation is the greatest good" _dead_ wrong.
        
         | card_zero wrote:
         | The first precept of anti-philosophy philosophy is,
        
           | deeThrow94 wrote:
           | Philosophy as a _concept_ isn 't an issue; but we tend to
           | romanticize the tendency to neurotically examine even when we
           | know finding "truth" isn't possible, and I've noted a
           | tendency in people so devoted to unconsciously emotionally
           | attach to what are ultimately word games. This concerns me.
           | Perhaps we should instead romanticize living a contented
           | existence, some of which will surely still involve reading
           | and discussing philosophy (in moderation, of course).
        
       | precompute wrote:
       | I have great difficulty in believing that a real human and not a
       | LLM wrote this. It reads like self-help tripe and is far too
       | long.
        
       | WaitWaitWha wrote:
       | I am still searching for the definition of "Intellectually Rich
       | Life".
       | 
       | There are some compelling and imaginative calls in the article,
       | but can we drop with the metaphors? I rather have the author
       | develop deeper examples, instead of vague focus and practicality.
       | 
       | Maybe because I am not searching for inspiration, but detailed
       | roadmaps.
        
       | Changerons wrote:
       | That is my conception of the world that we all have different
       | interests and cognitive functions. Also, call it serenpidity,
       | synchronicity, fate or luck, but as this article showed, the best
       | ideas come from places you could never have expected.
       | 
       | Read about the discovery of LSD if you haven't, it's one of the
       | perfect example of this.
       | 
       | So you have to find your nature, the garden of iteas that
       | resonates with you. For that, just read. From any topic that
       | interests you and sometimes, dare to read something you would
       | never do. Comics, mangas, niche recipes, biographies, romance,
       | everything is fair game and you never know, sometimes you might
       | just click on something you never might otherwise.
       | 
       | In the age of Wikipedia, kindles and libraries, you really have
       | no excuse to not indulge in your curiosity.
       | 
       | For all we know, we could ever be "hard-coded" to love certain
       | topics more than
       | others(https://www.europeanscientist.com/en/research/the-way-we-
       | app...). Maybe in the future, a drop of saliva would be enough to
       | know if you should study architecture or dancing ?
        
       | globnomulous wrote:
       | This is interminable and appears to be a disaster of mixed self-
       | help metaphors and embarrassingly naive writing -- a TED-talk
       | blog post, though TED talks mercifully have a length limit.
        
         | FlyingSnake wrote:
         | I personally found this very tedious to read and hard to
         | follow. The author veered into weird unrelated tangents and
         | came across of too self indulgent at times. I would rather read
         | Seneca or Cicero instead of this.
        
         | lbrito wrote:
         | Came here to say the same. Excessive writing itself is a form
         | of self indulgence and comes across as sloppy.
         | 
         | Conciseness is really undervalued. Long and meandering is okay
         | for a personal journal or diary, but if you're sharing it with
         | the world, be concise.
        
       | harrigan wrote:
       | I'm not sure about the metaphors. The "Axe of Satisfaction"
       | suggests that some of the ills of late-stage capitalism can be
       | overcome through individual grit alone. Maybe we need to band
       | together and target the root system rather than hacking down
       | individual trees?
        
         | the__alchemist wrote:
         | Discussing this and its implications in a direct and serious
         | manner is, regrettably, unpalatable in polite company. Few are
         | willing to accept the risk of discussing it openly.
        
       | RajT88 wrote:
       | > In August 2018, in the last month of my three-month sabbatical,
       | I arrived at the Hamta village in Himachal Pradesh. I rented a
       | one-room cottage, and my caretakers were Dolma Aunty and Kalzang
       | Uncle, a couple well into their 70's.
       | 
       | I got to this part and realized: I've read this article before in
       | some form.
       | 
       | It's a really common trope to head out to some remote area of
       | Asia and admire how happy people are. There's often a spiritual
       | component to it. I will write the guy a bit of a pass, because he
       | himself is (I think) Indian.
       | 
       | But westerners have been doing stuff like this for ages and
       | prattling on about it - it's kind of a cornerstone of
       | Orientalism. This was actually a plot point in the recent White
       | Lotus season. People rarely go to Appalachia to have these
       | experiences, but you certainly can find people living simple
       | happy lives there. (At least, if they do, nobody publishes those
       | articles - it doesn't fit our preconceived notions of who gets to
       | be enlightened, which is to say it has to be some place far away
       | and people very different than your average Americans)
       | 
       | Not to say there's no value in this article (there is), and it
       | was a fun read at that.
        
         | IanCal wrote:
         | Rather reminds me of Pratchetts character Lu-Tze, who having
         | seen so many travel to the monasteries to achieve enlightenment
         | decides to travel to Ankh Morpork and learns many ancient
         | wisdoms ('Is it not written "Oo, you are so sharp you'll cut
         | yourself one of these days."?')
        
         | webdoodle wrote:
         | The America's have the 'noble savage' trope to find
         | enlightenment with. It became so blatantly co-opting anothers'
         | religion that many Native American tribes still refuse to teach
         | non-tribal members there spiritual practices.
        
         | FlyingSnake wrote:
         | It's a common trope among urban Indians. They're enamoured by
         | the simple and rustic living of the villages and think of them
         | as noble savages.
         | 
         | I grew up in rural India and I always recommend people to read
         | Dr. Ambedkar's rights on this subject.
        
           | Labov wrote:
           | Dr. Ambedkar is somebody more people in the United States
           | should know about. I was a briefly involved with the Triratna
           | Buddhist Community and read some of Sangharakshita's writing,
           | and he discusses Ambedkar. Real interesting stuff.
        
             | FlyingSnake wrote:
             | TBH Dr. Ambedkar's Buddhism is very different from what the
             | other traditions preach. It was an answer to the prevailing
             | jativada, but unfortunately it didn't manage to make the
             | dent he envisioned.
             | 
             | I've grown up around Navayana and have many friends from
             | Kagyu, Theravada and other traditions.
             | 
             | (All this to say I know Bauddha Dharma intimately)
        
               | Labov wrote:
               | All part of the great warp and weft. It's a fascinating
               | thing to learn about, how all these traditions intersect.
               | 
               | Seattle, the city I live in, recently became the first to
               | ban caste discrimination. I didn't think much of it at
               | the time, but nowadays maybe there's something to be
               | learned from jativada, the many forms it comes in, and
               | the response to it. Reading Leslie Feinberg right now,
               | interesting working class perspective.
        
               | FlyingSnake wrote:
               | There's a difference between casteism and jativada which
               | is not easy to explain in a short comment. Ambedkar's "
               | Annihilation of Caste" and A.M. Hocart's works provide
               | interesting insight on it.
        
           | alephnerd wrote:
           | Hamta isn't even really rural. It's a bunch of homestays just
           | outside of Manali, and is similar to Pahalgam.
           | 
           | My family is from rural HP/JK/Ladakh, and a homestay like
           | Hamta is not representative of rural HP/JK/LA/UK.
           | 
           | > They're enamoured by the simple and rustic living of the
           | villages and think of them as noble savages
           | 
           | I think it goes both ways. They either over-idealize it, or
           | overly berate it.
           | 
           | I feel it's also state dependent to a certain extent, with
           | some states better at rural administrative capacity (eg.
           | Kerala, HP, PB, JK) than others (eg. KA, TG, GJ).
           | 
           | Something I've noticed is states that don't have a primary
           | city tend to have slightly better rural administrative
           | capacity, as it at least incentivizes small town or T3/4
           | economies to develop instead of being invested in a single
           | mega city.
        
             | FlyingSnake wrote:
             | Thanks for adding extra context. I wasn't aware of Hamta.
             | My experience is in rural central and South India but I've
             | travelled extensively in Garhwal. How different would you
             | say rural JK/HP/LA/UK is?
             | 
             | Your last para rings true. Goa, Kerala, CG and Odisha have
             | better rural administration than MH, TL or KA because of
             | the absence of heavyweight cities.
        
               | alephnerd wrote:
               | > How different would you say rural JK/HP/LA/UK is?
               | 
               | Rural UK is much poorer than rural HP and JK.
               | 
               | The administrative structure of UK is very top heavy
               | (everything is decided in Dehradun), and
               | Dehradun+Haridwar have caused tourism and real estate
               | induced Dutch Disease to arise. JK and HP also have a
               | tourism economy, but also have a strong industrial base
               | (pharma in HP, heavy industry in JK) plus more investment
               | in higher value rural industries like food processing and
               | fruit cultivation.
               | 
               | HP and JK also have a bottom up political culture with
               | panchayats in a district coalescing into District
               | Planning Committee that includes state civil service
               | cadre and the MLA, so local governance is much more
               | responsive, and has the resources and capacity to invest
               | in infra like cold storage or make the case for an MNC to
               | invest in manufacturing.
               | 
               | Basically, if local government and administration is
               | actually given priority beyond haphazard panchayats, it
               | makes it easier to attract build industries and a semi-
               | industrial rural economy.
               | 
               | > Kerala, CG and Odisha have better rural administration
               | than MH, TL or KA because of the absence of heavyweight
               | cities.
               | 
               | Political culture is also more top-down in states like
               | MH/TG/KA, where the CM office tends to have inordinate
               | control over local planning and panchayat+local
               | government funding is minimal
               | 
               | Even if their administrations had some interest in rural
               | economic development (which in those states they don't),
               | they wouldn't even have the bandwidth because there are
               | too many districts. This is why local government needs to
               | be invested in by states, but locals are the ones who
               | know best about their needs and capabilities.
        
               | FlyingSnake wrote:
               | Great comment, thank you for sharing it. I've seen some
               | of it in Garhwal where villages didn't get proper
               | attention by the Govt. We keep forgetting that states in
               | India are akin to states in Europe.
               | 
               | A modern version of Gram Swaraj combined with Switzerland
               | type canton system might work well but there are no
               | incentives for the administration for that.
        
               | alephnerd wrote:
               | I'm not sure a canton type system is necessary if the
               | Gram Swaraj system sees further investment and is coupled
               | with delimitation for legislative assemblies, it would
               | solve most of the pressing problems.
               | 
               | A lopsided population to MLA ratio makes it easier for
               | MLAs to be disconnected from local government, and
               | incentivizes governance through internal party machinery
               | (beg the CM or the local party leadership to get your MLA
               | or DM to do something) instead of via the local
               | administration, which further deprofessionalizes local
               | government.
               | 
               | > We keep forgetting that states in India are akin to
               | states in Europe.
               | 
               | Pretty much. Even within states the diversity is insane
               | (eg. MP, KA, or UP would be better served split into 3-4
               | states).
        
               | Karrot_Kream wrote:
               | JK's interesting history from partition onward has
               | definitely biased its political culture to inspiring
               | bottom-up, panchayat-forward governance.
        
         | Labov wrote:
         | Well, maybe there's something to it. I think it's great when
         | East meets West. East should keep meeting West over and over
         | and over. Maybe one day East will know West and vice versa.
         | 
         | For what it's worth, I had something of a similar experience,
         | but it was in a plywood shack on a desert island off the coast
         | of California.
        
         | dogleash wrote:
         | > But westerners have been doing stuff like this for ages and
         | prattling on about it - it's kind of a cornerstone of
         | Orientalism. This was actually a plot point in the recent White
         | Lotus season. People rarely go to Appalachia to have these
         | experiences, but you certainly can find people living simple
         | happy lives there.
         | 
         | I think you're moralizing over a pretty bland bit of
         | psychology: people need to be shaken from their frame of
         | reference to see different parts of the world. Even if they
         | exist next door. For many Americans, Appalachia will be too
         | close to home to force off the blinders.
         | 
         | I've flown all over the US for work, and in every location
         | found the same exact city. It's hard to take away someone's
         | footing when they feel at home. OTOH, the preconditions that
         | gave me many life broadening experiences within 100 miles of a
         | single US city are not available to everyone.
         | 
         | Assigning someone internal character traits so that their
         | external practice of respectful travel can still be judged is
         | cruel.
        
           | jhickok wrote:
           | Agreed. I think beyond tourist voyeurism, there is something
           | really maturing(?) about being inserted into a completely
           | different culture where people seem to be content. I grew up
           | in rural Wisconsin and even the micro-change of moving away
           | for college in a place like St. Louis had very important
           | implications for my worldview.
        
           | carleverett wrote:
           | As someone from the US who's traveled all over the country
           | for fun, I can assure you there are loads of delightfully
           | unique places and rich communities that think and act quite
           | differently from each other.
           | 
           | But yes I could see how work travel only could make them feel
           | like carbon copies - both from the mindset you'd be in and
           | from the types of places you might only go for work.
        
             | RajT88 wrote:
             | Places you go for work are mostly corporate parks in the
             | suburbs. Of course they all feel the same. I had the same
             | experience and that was why - rarely did I get to visit the
             | big cities. I went to places which had Chili's and Target
             | and Outback Steakhouse.
             | 
             | On the odd times I visited DC or SF or Toronto - really
             | amazing and different experiences.
        
               | jacobgkau wrote:
               | Both the DC and SF metro areas have Chili's, Target, and
               | Outback. Can you articulate what made DC and SF "really
               | amazing and different experiences" from one another,
               | beyond vibes? Asking as an American who's pretty sure
               | it's all the same here (and has traveled internationally
               | to places where it's not).
        
               | RajT88 wrote:
               | I'll try. YMMV, but:
               | 
               | DC:
               | 
               | You can get just about any kind of food - because just
               | about every culture in the world is represented. You can
               | find some of the more home-y type menu options too for
               | the same reason. For example, Greek restaurants where I
               | am at don't generally have Taramosalata (carp roe dip).
               | Due to the shorter flights to Africa, the is a much
               | larger African population in the DC area. One trip, I
               | bought some Nigerian movies at a gas station. Then
               | there's all the historical stuff - tomb of the unknown
               | soldier, Vietnam wall, Air & Space Museum, etc. As I
               | wandered around town on one of my early trips there, I
               | keep seeing things I thought were very familiar - and it
               | turns out at least some were because Bethesda (HQ'd
               | nearby) had done an awesome job recreating apocalypse
               | versions of them in Fallout 3 (which I played a lot of).
               | 
               | SF:
               | 
               | I went cycling a few times with a friend of mine. We went
               | over the Golden Gate bridge, which was amazing. Also to
               | the top of some mountain (big hill?) overlooking the
               | city. What a view! I like to fish, and dropped a line
               | near my hotel and caught a leopard shark. I saw an old
               | Japanese homeless man wheel a little red wagon on a pier
               | near the Mozilla HQ (near the many-billion dollar company
               | I was visiting), and catch a pile of Jacksmelt using a
               | spark plug as a sinker. There is a lot of excellent
               | Asian-influenced dining options - my personal favorite is
               | Lilo Lilo Yacht Club. I got to see a tent city of what
               | appeared to be techies - all really nice huge family-
               | sized tents, well dressed and apparently happy and well
               | fed. One time, I was having a drink in a bar in SFO, and
               | chatted up a guy who had just come from an executive
               | meeting with a bunch of VP's and CTO's of Sony, where
               | chewed them out about their usage of Kubernetes. I saw a
               | shirtless man walking around with what appeared to be
               | pony boots? I assume part of the gay scene.
               | 
               | Now - you may not like all that, but you are not
               | generally having those experiences near suburban
               | corporate parks. Yes, they have Outback Steakhouses, but
               | they have rather a lot more going on.
        
           | mmooss wrote:
           | > I've flown all over the US for work, and in every location
           | found the same exact city.
           | 
           | I think you can find the exact same city if you like but I
           | also have found much more. Simply LA and NY are very
           | different places, as are different communities in those
           | cities.
        
         | harrall wrote:
         | There's also some self-selection here.
         | 
         | If you go to another place and someone lets you stay with them,
         | they are probably in a good place in life. You are selecting
         | yourself to meet with happier people.
         | 
         | You won't be making as many friends with unhappy people.
        
         | ahmeneeroe-v2 wrote:
         | I agree that this is a common trope but the rest of your
         | comment reads like, "Hey westerners, go find your own rural
         | people and stop appropriating mine".
         | 
         | Also completing your logic loop, this guy is apparently
         | stealing intellectual ideas from (mediocre) westerners.
        
         | concerndc1tizen wrote:
         | A simpler explanation is that Americans have succumbed to
         | consumerism to such an extent that the absence of it feels
         | enlightened.
         | 
         | Of course the reality is just that the US has become the axis
         | of evil, and perhaps always was, it just had the best PR.
         | 
         | I think you're doing yourself a disservice by belitting Asian
         | cultures and what insights they may have, that are apparently
         | incomprehensible as more than a trope to Americans.
        
           | monero-xmr wrote:
           | America is the best because citizens can do basically
           | whatever they want all the time. The latest complaints are
           | people took it too far (rampant drug use, camping on
           | sidewalks, and shitting everywhere in San Francisco, etc.).
           | 
           | But if you want to buy a rural cabin on a beautiful mountain,
           | it's available, and cheap. You don't need to go to Asia to
           | live like a hermit.
        
             | concerndc1tizen wrote:
             | > America
             | 
             | Obviously America refers to the continent, so I'll use the
             | shorthand country name "the US" instead.
             | 
             | > is the best
             | 
             | That may be true, but I do wonder if it was a lucky
             | accident. What if the Irish famine hadn't happened? What if
             | WW2 had been averted (but maybe the EU wouldn't exist...).
             | 
             | > rural cabin
             | 
             | That's nice, but what value is it if the forest burns down,
             | the lake is polluted, the wild life is dead, and there's
             | nothing left but neighboring land full of fracking wells?
             | Glory to god.
        
               | monero-xmr wrote:
               | You just have no idea how incredibly enormous and empty
               | the US is
        
               | concerndc1tizen wrote:
               | And yet, every viable plot of land is used for farming.
               | 
               | Similarly, I would argue that you should not
               | underestimate the harmful and wide-reaching effects of
               | industry.
        
           | jimbokun wrote:
           | > Of course the reality is just that the US has become the
           | axis of evil, and perhaps always was, it just had the best
           | PR.
           | 
           | Sigh.
           | 
           | Yes, the Soviet Union really was the worker's paradise with
           | free, prosperous, happy people!
           | 
           | Can we get away from the sophomoric idea the USA was ALWAYS
           | the ONLY source of badness in the world, just because right
           | now it's the most powerful nation in the world and also a
           | complete mess?
        
             | concerndc1tizen wrote:
             | I suspect that the communist project has lived under
             | constant fear of the US, that the economy ultimately was
             | bankrupted from having to defend itself against the US war
             | machine.
             | 
             | The US has waged war in virtually every country around the
             | world, for example Afghanistan, Vietnam, and Korea, which
             | were significant threats to both Soviet and China. China
             | has virtually been besieged since the 1950s, with Americans
             | present in Thailand, Philippines, Japan, Taiwan, and South
             | Korea.
             | 
             | How would you feel if the Soviet installed weapons systems
             | in Canada, Hawaii, Mexico, Greenland, and Cuba? And then
             | started a tariff war to hopefully bankrupt your economy?
        
               | sepositus wrote:
               | Wasn't communism influenced heavily by being anti-
               | capitalist? They fundamentally disagreed with the tenants
               | that the United States stood on. Your comment, if I'm
               | understanding it correctly, makes it look like the
               | communists were just trying to do their own thing in
               | their own countries and the big bad U.S came in and
               | bullied them out of existence.
               | 
               | I'm not defending either sides here. I'm not a Reaganot.
               | But to think most communist regimes were not hellbent on
               | the destruction of western capitalism would seem a bit
               | misleading to me.
        
       | patrick41638265 wrote:
       | Not sure about the intellectual part of it, but how to live a
       | rich life? Surely not by secretly cherishing a feeling of
       | _superiority_ and _sophistication_ because these sentiments will
       | cut you out of a lot of insights and encounters that make your
       | life _rich_. True, life is a farce in a lot of ways, but who
       | cares? Accept it where you can 't change it and find your own
       | islands of happiness. These may be intellectual if you like, but
       | don't expect the people around you to follow the same (high)
       | standards, that will only make you unhappy.
        
         | awanderingmind wrote:
         | Good insight about how feelings of 'superiority' or
         | 'sophistication' can suck the joy out of life. I fell into this
         | trap myself, and it took a long time to get out of it.
         | 
         | That said, there are times when a certain type of appreciation
         | of 'sophistication' is warranted - you just shouldn't use it to
         | believe you are therefore above other people, or beyond the
         | simple pleasures of life.
        
         | nicbou wrote:
         | Superiority and sophistication might ironically make you less
         | curious and appreciative.
        
       | magic_hamster wrote:
       | This stirs up a good discussion. My way of having a satisfying
       | intellectual life is not just by juggling many ideas, but also by
       | problem solving. I find immense satisfaction in making something
       | work or creating something that didn't exist before. Many times,
       | this requires problem solving with creativity, compromise and
       | tradeoffs. Some times, it requires deep diving into academic
       | papers and doing some math. When this ends up working it is truly
       | a triumphant feeling; however it might sometimes not work at all.
       | 
       | Another thing is meeting and absorbing knowledge from other
       | people. It's incredible to learn or even just watch skillful
       | people do their thing.
        
       | BoxFour wrote:
       | This is a little meandering so just to focus on one part:
       | 
       | Philosophy can be valuable, but applying the ideas meaningfully
       | requires discernment. I'm thinking particularly about the
       | popularity of "Meditations", for example.
       | 
       | Take Plato, for example: He and his also-famous mentor believed
       | knowledge was a form of recollection from past lives, an idea
       | illustrated with an unconvincing geometry lesson in Phaedo (EDIT:
       | It's Meno).
       | 
       | Sure, it's worth stepping back to reassess what's going to
       | increase your "PC" to borrow from seven habits. That could
       | involve leaving behind surface-level achievement in favor of
       | deeper reflection, as the referenced article suggests.
       | 
       | But let's not overly-romanticize ancient thinkers: Plato and
       | Aristotle held fundamentally different views on knowledge. Even
       | they couldn't agree; there's no need to treat any one of them as
       | infallible.
        
         | alabastervlog wrote:
         | > Philosophy can be valuable, but applying the ideas
         | meaningfully requires discernment. I'm thinking particularly
         | about the popularity of "Meditations", for example.
         | 
         | From one translation of _Meditations_ (I forget which), and
         | from memory, so I may have it slightly wrong:
         | 
         | "You can live your life in a calm flow of happiness, if you
         | learn to think the right way, and to act the right way".
         | 
         | The _act the right way_ is the hard part. The frame-of-mind
         | stuff that lots of people focus on is necessary, but not
         | sufficient. On its own it can be of some help, but it can also
         | lead to traps like going too easy on one 's own deficiencies of
         | action. The thinking bits that get most of the attention, at
         | least in stoicism, are largely reactive--the acting is
         | proactive, as is the thinking to support it (which gets less
         | attention in popular takes on Stoicism, and is harder).
        
           | BoxFour wrote:
           | Meditations is particularly interesting because it's clearly
           | just Marcus Aurelius's diary that was doubtfully ever meant
           | to see the light of day.
           | 
           | He spends a fair amount of it repeating mantras to himself
           | over and over again, or even arguing with himself in stream-
           | of-consciousness.
           | 
           | It's Marcus Aurelius giving himself a written pep talk. He
           | struggles to uphold those stoicism ideals his whole life,
           | failing constantly ant it, and Meditations is an artifact of
           | it.
        
             | alabastervlog wrote:
             | There's also an awful lot of really boring and silly Stoic
             | physics and metaphysics in there, which topics _for some
             | reason_ people who love the book rarely bring up, LOL.
        
         | dwcnnnghm wrote:
         | The dialogue you refer to is _Meno_ and the idea is a solution
         | to "Meno's Paradox".
        
           | BoxFour wrote:
           | Thanks, that is what I was thinking of.
        
         | safety1st wrote:
         | Philosophy is just one of the liberal arts. This idea has
         | declined in popularity in recent years but I still think
         | there's a lot to be said for possessing a liberal arts
         | education. If you have a good one your understanding of the
         | world around you gets broader and deeper. You recognize why
         | things are the way they are. In the long term you may spot
         | opportunities you wouldn't have otherwise, or be able to solve
         | problems that would have seemed intractable. Maybe most
         | importantly you end up developing a sophisticated moral
         | framework that's grounded in history and all the things that
         | eventually led up to you existing and living the life you live.
         | 
         | You don't have to major in a liberal art or even go to college
         | to get one, you can just read books. You also don't have to
         | learn it all in your early 20s. You can just incorporate the
         | great works into what you read throughout your adult life. It's
         | very easy to find lists and recommendations online for what you
         | should read if you want a broad-based liberal education. The
         | general idea is simply to be informed about and understand the
         | foundational concepts in philosophy, economics, political
         | science, psychology, history, sociology, law, and so on. There
         | is no need to go deep in any one them, unless you find it
         | interesting and wish to do so. Someone who reads one or two
         | foundational works in each of these subjects will have a wildly
         | better understanding of the world than someone who doesn't. To
         | me this is what living an intellectually rich life is and it's
         | very rewarding. If nothing else, due to my liberal arts
         | education I will never be bored in retirement, there are
         | thousands of books that I would find it interesting to read.
        
           | BoxFour wrote:
           | I don't have a problem with having a good understanding of
           | classics (liberal arts is a category that far encompasses
           | more than just classical education, though).
           | 
           | I do have a problem with blindly assuming Plato/other ancient
           | philosophers were some sort of omniscient super-intelligence
           | we should blindly follow, which I do see happen with some
           | regularity in my own life.
           | 
           | Plato et al might've been the start of our modern
           | understanding of ethics, but the concept of a moral life or
           | epistemology certainly didn't stop with him!
        
           | throwup238 wrote:
           | _> Philosophy is just one of the liberal arts. This idea has
           | declined in popularity in recent years but I still think
           | there 's a lot to be said for possessing a liberal arts
           | education. If you have a good one your understanding of the
           | world around you gets broader and deeper._
           | 
           | Look no further than all the AI debates on HN: from the
           | perspective of someone with a couple of college classes on
           | philosophy (not even a minor), it's looks like a bunch of
           | five years olds debating particle physics. Complete ignorance
           | of what the academic precedent is, retreading ideas that
           | philosophers have moved on from hundreds of years ago.
        
             | munksbeer wrote:
             | Yes, people are going to be ignorant of things they haven't
             | studied previously. So, people exploring the ideas and
             | debating them for the first time might look amateur to you,
             | but why is that a bad thing?
        
               | whatnow37373 wrote:
               | I believe the point was this is preventable by having a
               | slightly wider knowledge base.
        
               | nonethewiser wrote:
               | Wont discussing these things widen their knowldege base?
        
               | whatnow37373 wrote:
               | Possibly, but slowly and inefficiently.
        
               | throwup238 wrote:
               | This is a social media site; people can shoot the shit
               | about whatever they want and there's nothing wrong with
               | that.
               | 
               | But... what's the point? It's like going into a thread
               | about modern chemistry and debating about the four basic
               | elements of ancient Greece. Sure you can have fun
               | shooting the shit about what is essentially a historical
               | novelty, but if you really want to _debate about
               | chemistry_ you need to open a high school textbook and
               | get up to speed on at least the first few chapters.
               | 
               | The only difference is that nerds look down at philosophy
               | and not chemistry; and the former is rarely taught in
               | high school after which the arrested development seems to
               | set in. No one blinks an eye telling flat earthers that
               | they don't know what they're talking about.
        
             | nonethewiser wrote:
             | Why shouldnt people on a message forum explore "ideas that
             | philosophers moved on from hundreds of years ago?" It seems
             | to suggest philosophy is more about the conclusions than
             | the process. I cant think of an academic field where that
             | is less true.
        
           | nonethewiser wrote:
           | >If you have a good one your understanding of the world
           | around you gets broader and deeper.
           | 
           | The problem is, is it _unique_ to liberal arts? That is what
           | must be true to give it some purpose. If you can just read a
           | bunch of books or study something else with additional
           | positive benefits why do liberal arts?
           | 
           | I am a liberal arts and computer science degree holder. I
           | don't think liberal arts is _worthless_. I do think its a
           | terrible value proposition and that the positive side effects
           | can be achieved while studying something far more marketable.
           | Computer science has made me a much stronger general problem
           | solver and a better critical thinker than liberal arts did.
           | These are the primary skills touted by the liberal arts.
        
         | nonethewiser wrote:
         | >But let's not overly-romanticize ancient thinkers: Plato and
         | Aristotle held fundamentally different views on knowledge.
         | 
         | 1) everyone agrees "overly" Romanticizing is wrong. By
         | definition of "overly".
         | 
         | 2) why should having a fundamentally different view on
         | knowledge disqualify something from being romanticized? Isnt
         | romanticizing precisely for things that are different?
         | 
         | 3) i think its a mischaracterization to say Plato thought "
         | knowledge was a form of recollection from past lives." He was
         | not talking about "past lives" but the "soul" (which I think
         | wed both agree is a loaded term). He said the soul knew it
         | before the person was born. This goes to his theory on the
         | forma which I think is a better way to characterize his
         | thoughts on knowledge. In general terms id say he believes
         | truth exists in a timeless, non-empirical realm (the Forms).
         | With the physical reality being an imperfect imitation. Which
         | people have some mediated access to.
        
           | BoxFour wrote:
           | > everyone agrees "overly" is wrong
           | 
           | I mean, apparently not - this author alone takes Plato's cave
           | allegory at face value without spending even a moment to
           | criticize it.
           | 
           | > I think it's a mischaracterization...
           | 
           | It is not. Read Meno. Socrates thought this, and has a very
           | painful example of trying to prove it. Plato thought the
           | exact same.
        
             | whatnow37373 wrote:
             | The example he gives about geometry is actually quite
             | interesting. It is one of the early highlights of a deep
             | question: is this knowledge, geometry in this case,
             | learned/learnable or is it, somehow, innate? Do we learn
             | this from scratch or do we have innate pre-existing
             | cognitive structures that are "configured" by experience?
             | If the latter, what does "learning" mean? It's definitely
             | not what we usually mean. If the former, we meet Hume and
             | Kant and have to show how we arrived at space and geometry
             | ex nihilo.
             | 
             | If learning is essentially based on "configuring" innate
             | structures, you can IMO state it is eternal or uncovered or
             | whatever poetic vehicle you desire. I'd say give these pre-
             | modern guys a break.
             | 
             | These are issues being discussed way into the modern era
             | starting (again) with the likes of Hume and Kant and no
             | easy solutions are available. This is not a solved problem.
        
               | nonethewiser wrote:
               | Is math invented or discovered?
               | 
               | I think most people's intuition is that the methodology
               | and conventions are invented but are constrained by some
               | transcendental reality. It seems difficult to argue its
               | instead purely natural or purely convention.
               | 
               | This is very much inline with Platos theory of the forms.
               | I dont really understand the idea that Plato's ideas are
               | dated.
        
             | nonethewiser wrote:
             | > I mean, apparently not - this author alone takes Plato's
             | cave allegory at face value without spending even a moment
             | to criticize it.
             | 
             | Does HE say hes over romanticizing it? No.
             | 
             | He would probably argue hes not over-romanticizing it. So
             | the question isnt if over-romanticizing is improper (which
             | is true by definition of "over"). The question is if he
             | actually is over romanticizing.
             | 
             | >It is not. Read Meno. Socrates thought this, and has a
             | very painful example of trying to prove it. Plato thought
             | the exact same.
             | 
             | Im not contesting that Plato believed in reincarnation. But
             | its not true that he thought knowledge comes from "past
             | lives" (as in when you were previously some other person).
             | He believed the _soul_ had direct access to knowledge. In a
             | past life you would have only had an impression as well.
             | This is all downstream of his actual theory of the forms
             | though. Why not attack that if you want to attack his
             | theory of knowledge.
        
         | stevenwoo wrote:
         | I like How To Think Like a Roman Emperor's analysis of
         | Meditations but maybe it falls into pop self-help/psychology,
         | it discusses the history around the text and how modern
         | psychology has similarities with some of the techniques and
         | aphorisms.
        
         | Archelaos wrote:
         | > Take Plato, for example: He and his also-famous mentor
         | believed knowledge was a form of recollection from past lives,
         | an idea illustrated with an unconvincing geometry lesson in
         | Phaedo (EDIT: It's Meno).
         | 
         | I find the line of thought in "Meno" extremly impressiv. Let me
         | try to reformulate it in modern terms.
         | 
         | The literary form of a dialogue emphasizes that the thoughts of
         | the participants should not be considered as doctrines, but the
         | whole as an investigation of a problem domain.
         | 
         | The dialogue starts with a distinction between empirical
         | knowledge ("The way to Larisa") and mathematical knowledge.
         | Empirical knowledge is something that I cannot know from
         | introspection. In contrast, the nature of mathematical
         | knowledge comes from inside the mind. This is demonstrated by
         | an uneducated, but smart child (a slave boy). The child is
         | guided to discover a mathematical insight by questions alone.
         | At first the boy does not know the right answer to an initial
         | question. Then Socartes starts again with a simple question the
         | boy is able to answer. Then a sequence of other questions
         | follows each building on the previous answers. Socrates only
         | questions, the boy only answers. Finally the boy arrives at the
         | correct answer of the initial question whose answer he did not
         | know at the start.
         | 
         | This scene should demonstrate the essence of mathematical
         | proof. First we do not know the answer of a mathematical
         | problem. Step-by-step we clarify our understanding, until we
         | arrive at an answer. At this stage we know whether the
         | particular mathematical statement is true or false. We expanded
         | our understanding by only just thinking. In one way it is new
         | knowledge (we now know something we did not, when we looked for
         | a proof), in another way the knowledge was always there, just
         | hidden in our mind.
         | 
         | At this point Socrates hits a limit where he runs out of
         | questions to invistigate this further. This is when he starts
         | to tell a story (the greek word for story is "myth"). Such
         | stories are just tools to further investigate a problem when
         | purely theoretical thoughts come to an end. In the dialogue it
         | is also accompanied by a lot of joking, and "let me speculate"
         | and "don't take it too serious" sort of remarks. So he reminds
         | his fellows about some old stories (that he adapts and
         | decorates a little to match the problem) about reincarnation
         | where one looses the memory of one's past life but has
         | occasionally some sort of flashbacks. This is more or less the
         | whole point of the story: Perhaps we should think of
         | mathematical knowledge as analogous to memory, but in a in a
         | transcendent way.
         | 
         | Our modern doctrins are not very much off: Our ability of
         | mathematical thinking is something that is inherent to us, more
         | specifically to our brains. The blueprint (a sort of memory?)
         | for our brains are in our genes. This way we are a sort of
         | reincarnation of our parents, but in a state were we have to
         | undergo all the mathematical training again.
         | 
         | What Plato lacks is a theory of evolutionary epistemology. But
         | this is a really new development.
        
         | gregates wrote:
         | Here's how I would put this: reading the classics can be
         | valuable, but if you want to become wise you need philosophy.
         | 
         | Philosophy isn't a set of ideas or texts. It's a practice.
        
       | WillAdams wrote:
       | For my part, one of the most striking things which I recall from
       | my youth was reading Dumas' _The Count of Monte Cristo_ and the
       | Abbe Faria contending that everything a gentleman needed to make
       | his way in life was contained in less than 100 books --- which he
       | had memorized the content of, and could impart to the young
       | Edmond Dantes.
       | 
       | A naive younger me tried to brute force this by reading one non-
       | fiction book from each major section of the Dewey Decimal system
       | catalog, but was stymied by the paucity of a high school library
       | in a county in the second smallest tax base in the state....
       | 
       | Since then, I've actually been trying to put that list together
       | (and lightly updating it for availability from Project
       | Gutenberg/Librivox).
       | 
       | https://www.goodreads.com/review/list/21394355-william-adams...
       | 
       | Suggestions and comments and recommendations welcome.
        
         | js8 wrote:
         | I like your idea, but it's missing any sort of practical skills
         | (which Dantes and Faria certainly had).
         | 
         | What would be more interesting, IMHO, books that Cyrus Smith
         | from The Mysterious Island had memorized.
         | 
         | Just from what I saw on HN, I remember Gingery books on metal
         | workshop from scratch, and some homesteading manual from late
         | 19th century.
        
           | bluGill wrote:
           | The most important books are things like first aid and CPR.
           | Or better yet a class because hands on experience beat books
           | learning.
           | 
           | I love the Gingery books and they are great foundations for a
           | hobby. However even in a end of civilization scenario we only
           | need a small minority who knows that content who can teach
           | the rest - that is at best, but quite likely there won't be
           | enough industrial base to produce the aluminum needed and so
           | you are stuck with useless knowledge. Even your 19th century
           | homesteading tends to assume far more industrial base to make
           | some annoyingly hard things.
           | 
           | Most so called practical skills are either not practical in
           | modern civilization (there is far too much population for us
           | all the be hunter/gathers even if we want to); or they are
           | only practical in context of current times. I've seen how to
           | wire your house for electric lights books from the 1920s -
           | most of the things shown wouldn't pass code today. My house
           | was built in 1970, and there are a lot of things that still
           | work but there is good reason we don't allow that anymore.
        
             | WillAdams wrote:
             | Had Self-aid and buddy care when I was in the service, and
             | became qualified and volunteered as an EMT for a while
             | after getting out. I do have a Wilderness Survival First
             | Aid Book on my Kindle, and I'll definitely add it to this
             | list.
             | 
             | I actually had a copy of _The Metal Lathe (Build Your Own
             | Metal Working Shop From Scrap, Volume 2)_ ages ago, and
             | slotting in the full leatherbound edition of all 7 volumes
             | is likewise a good fit.
        
           | WillAdams wrote:
           | Trying to focus on intellectual things --- practical skills
           | invites the list becoming an extension of my various
           | interests (note the extant shelves on archery and
           | woodworking) and their various intersections, e.g.,
           | 
           | https://www.lumberjocks.com/showcase/archery-case-ascham-
           | of-...
           | 
           | Edit: did add a first aid book, as well as the 7 volume
           | edition of "The Gingery Books".
        
           | gen220 wrote:
           | "The Good Life" by Helen and Scott Nearing has an excellent
           | bibliography/citations section.
           | 
           | How to build stone houses, compost and farm organically, etc.
           | A good primer on homesteading. Contains references to things
           | like 19th century homestead manuals
        
             | WillAdams wrote:
             | I've considered adding "The Foxfire" books (which I read
             | when I was much younger) and perhaps a text by Roy
             | Underhill, but as noted elsethread, this is intended as an
             | academic/social list.
        
         | Y_Y wrote:
         | I love this idea, and the lost is full of gems, but I see a
         | couple of issues. If you actually intend you or anyone else to
         | read these and stay sane I'd remove the mathematical tables
         | (there is value in reading these, but only for a very rare
         | soul), the Bible (lots of really dry stuff about begetting and
         | knowing), the complete works of Shakespeare (hard to understand
         | without careful study, way too long to cafefully study).
        
           | mitthrowaway2 wrote:
           | Shakespeare is worthwhile but much easier to understand when
           | you see it performed, which is how it was meant to be
           | experienced anyway.
        
             | KineticLensman wrote:
             | Yes, exactly. A lot of people forget that he wrote 'plays'
             | and not 'reads'
        
               | mr_toad wrote:
               | He had to; a large part of his audience would have been
               | unable to read.
               | 
               | A lot of European literature was poetry for the same
               | reason. Its only because literacy rates have risen that
               | prose has become more popular.
        
             | dhosek wrote:
             | My Shakespeare class in college was based around performing
             | a play at the end of the semester. We read about half a
             | dozen plays, but the bulk of our work was based around
             | preparing to perform _Hamlet_ (each semester, a different
             | play was performed, with fall being Comedies /Histories and
             | Spring being Tragedies/Romances).
             | 
             | The big challenge is that a lot of plays are rarely
             | performed. I had the good fortune of hearing an interview
             | with Kenneth Brannagh where he talked about how Shakespeare
             | is better experienced by watching a performance than
             | reading a text and he made an aside about how it's unlikely
             | you're going to get to see Henry IV part II performed and
             | then spotting that there was a free performance of that
             | exact play being given at the Chicago Cultural Center. This
             | turned out to be part of a series of staged readings of
             | _all_ the plays. I missed the beginning of the sequence,
             | but stuck around to the end. One of the coolest moments of
             | this came when I was attending a play at the Goodman
             | Theatre which had the actors interacting with audience
             | members during intermission and one of the actors in the
             | play recognized me from the audience of the staged
             | readings.
        
               | TheOtherHobbes wrote:
               | There are more or less accessible TV performances. The
               | definitive complete collection is probably the BBC
               | Shakespeare, available on iPlayer and DVD.
               | 
               | Some of the plays have also snuck onto YouTube.
        
           | stryan wrote:
           | > the Bible (lots of really dry stuff about begetting and
           | knowing)
           | 
           | I'd suggest replacing the Bible with just the Gospels
           | (Matthew, Mark, Luke[0], and John). Removing it entirely
           | seems like a mistake since you'd lose a lot of the literary
           | and moral underpinnings of Western culture, but having to
           | read the bible in its entirely sounds exhausting. I did it
           | (reading all four gospels) recently and can attest even
           | outside of the religious aspects the retelling of the same
           | tragic story in four different was is a fascinating literary
           | experience.
           | 
           | [0] Technically we should through Acts in there too since
           | Luke-Acts are essentially one book, but it's not a gospel so
           | I left it out. Plus quite frankly while I did read it I found
           | it way more boring than the others; turns out that Jesus
           | fellow is a way more interesting main character than Paul :)
        
             | gen220 wrote:
             | I think the Bible can mostly be distilled to Genesis,
             | Exodus and the Gospels without losing too much. Each of
             | those books is eminently legible in its own right. You
             | could arguably make the sermon on the mount its own book,
             | "communist manifesto" style.
             | 
             | I think those individual chapters would be super compelling
             | to modern readers with or without a religious background,
             | but their legibility is held back by the rest of the
             | Bible's contents. How is someone non-religious supposed to
             | figure out that it's ok to start reading a book at section
             | 2, chapter 1? :)
        
               | Y_Y wrote:
               | I'm inclined to agree, except to add that Ecclesiastes
               | stands on its own as a great piece of philosophy, and
               | Revelations is pretty influential as well as having some
               | pretty entertaining madness.
        
               | ivape wrote:
               | It's argued that God had a plan (all-knowing). The
               | compelling argument to read the Old Testament in full
               | before the New Testament is that this whole thing was a
               | deliberate sequence. That's if you are willing to
               | entertain the notion on a literary level (forget about
               | belief). Take the story of Samson for example, one
               | argument is that God showed that humans would persecute a
               | man whom humanity couldn't even contemplate could have
               | gotten his powers from God. It's a setup for Christ.
               | 
               | You can distill if you are looking for moral teachings,
               | but you can't if you want to know this guys (that guy up
               | in the sky) full plan, in which case you have to
               | entertain that it was a sequence of events. It's very
               | weird, but almost makes going through the whole Bible
               | fascinating as a serial drama. One thing led to another.
        
               | gen220 wrote:
               | I totally agree. I think for theological reasons (if your
               | goal is to convince yourself that Jesus is the Messiah of
               | the Abrahamic religions), then it can't be distilled.
               | 
               | However, I do think the abrahamic origin stories
               | (genesis), the tribulations of the Jewish people in Egypt
               | and reception of the Ten Commandments (exodus), and the
               | moral teachings of Christ that replace those commandments
               | (gospels) are more or less self-contained and free-
               | standing, if you're trying to understand them at face
               | value.
               | 
               | The gospels in particular contain a good moral teachings
               | that are arguably more valuable than anything else in the
               | book. Like really clear directives on how to live and
               | carry yourself.
               | 
               | In my Weird Bible, I'd cold open with the sermon on the
               | mount, followed by the Pharisees and the passion, and
               | recursively hyper-link to every New Testament or Old
               | Testament thing that supports those "primary" stories. I
               | feel like if you arranged the Bible into a neat "tree"
               | structure that way, the main load-bearing trunks would be
               | the books mentioned.
        
               | ivape wrote:
               | I appreciate your points. Morality is what most people
               | want to take away from all of these books, but the thing
               | they want to leave behind is one requirement that God
               | seems to have, and that's straight up obedience.
               | Obedience doesn't really fit inside morality, and in fact
               | if you just distill morality out, obedience won't make
               | it. The Old Testament hammers home the need for obedience
               | to God's laws in story after story, until finally God
               | just kinda lets us know that "hey you guys really cannot
               | follow the law, so lets shift to a relationship framework
               | with Christ". That's how I've been making sense of WHAT
               | the Old Testament is in the context of the sequence, and
               | further, why I don't ignore it because it seems to be he
               | values both morality and obedience (and again, obedience
               | doesn't fit into morality - Just the story of Abraham and
               | his son, there's nothing moral about it).
               | 
               | It's a thoroughly Christian view, that being humans lack
               | the capacity to follow God's laws because we're
               | inherently sinners - but that's a whole nother' can of
               | worms. It's kind of like a Kindergarten teacher (God)
               | letting the kids run the show for a day (Old Testament),
               | just to make it clear, they can't manage it. It's quite a
               | thing to believe such a supreme being would run a
               | sequence like that on us (in fact, that's how I make
               | sense of a lot of the craziness in the world, that God
               | would in fact let things run its course, however messed
               | up (even in modern times, e.g - social media, wars,
               | factory slavery in China, slavery in Mideast construct,
               | abject poverty in third world, pure greed and gluttony in
               | the west, etc, where all of these things are just as
               | Biblically fucked up as parts of the Bible)). It's my
               | only case for why the Old Testament is quite relevant to
               | understanding the fullness of God.
               | 
               | Fun topic!
        
               | heyjamesknight wrote:
               | Yes, but the Gospels are "complete." You obviously gain
               | much by reading the OT before it--not to mention the
               | apocrypha like Enoch and Jubilees which are quoted
               | directly and indirectly in the NT--but the Gospels have
               | the entire "message" contained within them.
        
               | jimbokun wrote:
               | Isaiah for the poetic language and imagery deeply
               | embedded in Western culture. Psalms for raw expression of
               | the emotions at the heart of the human condition:
               | suffering, rejection, abandonment, joy, and praise.
        
         | kelseyfrog wrote:
         | St John's College is known for their Great Books curriculum -
         | the foundation of their four year program - where students read
         | the primary text of western civilization.
         | 
         | It's always held a soft spot in my heart as my own experience
         | was mostly reading derivative descriptions and the rare times
         | when I was able to read a primary text during my coursework
         | were always my happiest memories.
         | 
         | 1. https://www.sjc.edu/academic-programs/undergraduate/great-
         | bo...
        
           | uncletaco wrote:
           | I'll never forget the night sjc students invited me to smoke
           | weed and listen to some Charles Mingus.
        
           | kurthr wrote:
           | Trying to learn Newtonian Mechanics from Philosophiae
           | Naturalis Principia Mathematica is kinda dumb though.
           | 
           | I certainly noticed that it was ineffective in discussing
           | implications with the students. I found Boyle's observations
           | far more effective in teaching science.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophi%C3%A6_Naturalis_Pri.
           | ..
        
             | jihadjihad wrote:
             | > Trying to learn Newtonian Mechanics from Philosophiae
             | Naturalis Principia Mathematica is kinda dumb though.
             | 
             | It'd be like wanting to improve your cardio health so you
             | try to climb K2. The edition I have has 150+ pages of just
             | _introduction_. You have to wade through all of that just
             | to be able to figure out how to read the rest of the tome.
             | It is cool, though!
        
             | kelseyfrog wrote:
             | Let's be honest, trying to learn Newtonian mechanics by
             | majoring in the humanities probably isn't the best
             | approach. Maybe that's not really what the program is meant
             | for in the first place.
        
             | glial wrote:
             | I had an elective class at St. John's where we read
             | selections from Newton's Principia (ISBN 9781888009262)
             | together with William Blake's long poem "Jerusalem, the
             | Emanation of the Giant Albion".
             | 
             | The goal was not to learn how to do physics calculations,
             | but to understand each writer's concept of reality and
             | humanity's relationship to it. I remember that Blake really
             | focused on the worth of actually instantiated reality, what
             | he called "minute particulars", in contrast to Newton's
             | abstractions:                   He who would do good to
             | another, must do it in Minute Particulars         General
             | Good is the plea of the scoundrel hypocrite & flatterer:
             | For Art & Science cannot exist but in minutely organized
             | Particulars         And not in generalizing Demonstrations
             | of the Rational Power.
             | 
             | Also, Newton's Principia uses Euclidian-style
             | demonstrations to illustrate many of his points, whereas
             | today we would use algebraic calculus. That was fun, since
             | everyone in the room had also worked through the first book
             | of Euclid's Elements.
        
               | WillAdams wrote:
               | Similarly, a related project is an effort to assemble a
               | chronological list of books where the oldest text which
               | is still valid given contemporary knowledge of the
               | subject is listed includes Euclid's _Elements_ of course:
               | 
               | https://www.goodreads.com/review/list/21394355?shelf=chro
               | nol...
        
             | xphos wrote:
             | One issue I have with modern teaching of both Math and
             | Physics though is that they give the "correct" answer to
             | fast which teaches the material and accelerates learning
             | but I think it also leaves a lot of motivations for why
             | certain decisions were come to and how which is important.
             | 
             | Recently I've been following long with the Distance Ladder
             | challenge I saw on 3 blue 1 brown with Terence Tao. Going
             | through those question is motivating because those
             | questions are based in solving navigational problems. I
             | fear that with the ever increasing the low friction in life
             | we are stealing the challenge and things for people to
             | consider to build up there problem solving ability before
             | the curtain is pulled.
             | 
             | I think its also more motivating to learn considering more
             | interesting questions especially in math. All this to say
             | going back to the source material while not the most modern
             | accurate physics it usually does include large amounts of
             | motivation to explain why things are logical and what they
             | are doing it for. To be fair I haven't read the
             | Philosophiae Naturalis Principia but I have read other old
             | book and wager it has similarities
        
               | andrepd wrote:
               | Hmm but you _can_ (an in fact do, in many physics
               | programs) follow the historical development of theories
               | using modern textbooks. The pedagogical value is in
               | understanding, not exactly in wading through the archaic
               | language and the confused early papers.
               | 
               | Even for modern theories like general relativity people
               | study by textbooks written many decades after the fact,
               | with a clear picture after things were settled, and not
               | by Einstein's first papers :)
        
             | mr_toad wrote:
             | Newton intentionally made it difficult because he didn't
             | want to be bothered by questions from lesser minds.
        
           | WillAdams wrote:
           | A co-worker mentioned this school when his son selected it
           | for a visit, and I quite envy the young man the chance to
           | attend --- I believe I got everything from their reading list
           | --- if I missed something, let me know.
        
             | vonneumannstan wrote:
             | They have a graduate program available at a distance if you
             | feel particularly drawn to their learning style. Basically
             | covers a subset of the UG curriculum.
        
               | WillAdams wrote:
               | Yeah, I considered that --- just not an option
               | financially --- my workplace is actually next door to a
               | private university, and I've been considering getting a
               | Masters in CS there, then going on to get a PhD....
        
           | andrepd wrote:
           | I'm not sure what's the value in spending time reading
           | obsolete scientific books. "The Fahrenheit Scale"?
        
         | financypants wrote:
         | ah yes, read 100 books, abide by 1,000,000 rules
        
           | colecut wrote:
           | the proper framework can set you free
        
         | crims0n wrote:
         | I am about a quarter of the way through Modern Library's top
         | 100 and it has been a worthwhile journey. It is "just" literary
         | fiction but it is among the best humanity has produced. I have
         | learned so much about the human condition, my ability to
         | articulate ideas has improved tremendously, and I feel like my
         | mind has been "freed from the tyranny of the present" (to quote
         | Cicero).
         | 
         | https://sites.prh.com/modern-library-top-100
        
           | whatnow37373 wrote:
           | Seeing that I am on HN and can unleash unrestrained pedantry
           | I wish to ask where Cicero actually writes that because I
           | cannot find it?
        
             | crims0n wrote:
             | The full quote is allegedly "The purpose of education is to
             | free the student from the tyranny of the present." ...I
             | picked it up in Neil Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death,
             | but he didn't cite which work it came from. Goodreads
             | attributes it to "Selected Works".
        
               | literalAardvark wrote:
               | The Roman version of "trust me bro"
        
             | ChuckMcM wrote:
             | I thought Mark Twain said that. /ducks
        
           | DyslexicAtheist wrote:
           | would have loved to see some non native English speaking
           | authors on the list. (instead of listing some authors twice -
           | as great as they are). There were 2 Russians that stood out
           | but no Camus, Feuchtwanger, Remarque, Musil, Borges, ...
        
             | mediaman wrote:
             | Yes, it's kind of a strange slice - we get Faulkner three
             | times and we get Joseph Conrad no fewer than four times(!),
             | but not a single book from Dostoevsky or Tolstoy? No
             | Bulgakov, no Turgenev? No Flaubert?
        
               | S_Bear wrote:
               | Lermontov's 'Hero of Our Time' is probably my favorite
               | Russian novel, and I say that as someone who absolutely
               | adores Dostoevsky. It still feels relevant and modern.
        
             | haroldp wrote:
             | English was Joseph Conrad's third language.
        
             | jimbokun wrote:
             | Or just rename the list "Top 100 Novels in the English
             | Language".
        
           | WillAdams wrote:
           | I've read more than half of those, and every time I see that
           | list, I really wish that almost every book would be paired w/
           | one which enhances/comments on either the book or that same
           | theme.
           | 
           | e.g., _Kim_ by Rudyard Kipling should be paired w/ Robert
           | Heinlein's _Citizen of the Galaxy_, or _The Grapes of Wrath_,
           | which was cribbed from Sanora Babb's notes w/o permission
           | should be paired w/ her _Whose Names Are Unknown_:
           | 
           | https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1197158.Whose_Names_Are_.
           | ..
        
             | crims0n wrote:
             | I really like this idea. I didn't even know about Whose
             | Names Are Unknown... added it to the queue.
        
             | infecto wrote:
             | I'm not a literary scholar, but this seems like a great use
             | case for ChatGPT. I've used it for music explorations and
             | found it surprisingly good at providing context and
             | interesting suggestions. I tried your idea with The Grapes
             | of Wrath and it surfaced Whose Names Are Unknown, with a
             | thoughtful explanation. Obviously it's qualitative, but you
             | can shape the prompt to reflect your taste and still get
             | some worthwhile discoveries.
             | 
             | [1] https://chatgpt.com/share/68150654-bebc-8010-ad4b-050f5
             | b39d4...
        
               | fellowniusmonk wrote:
               | I would also suggest the childrens books Cheaper by the
               | Dozen, The Musicians of Brennan, Morris' Disappearing Bag
               | and The Red Badge of Courage.
               | 
               | I'd maybe throw in some of the little house on the
               | prairie books as well, especially the one where they all
               | almost froze to death.
               | 
               | I think being able to appreciate books as an adult is
               | pretty contingent on being exposed to good books as a
               | youth.
        
           | iandanforth wrote:
           | Anyone who puts "Ulysses" at the top of a best books list is
           | suffering from expertitis. Ulysses has a massive user
           | experience problem. It's hard. Dense, convoluted, absurd. If
           | your friend asks you for a good book, you don't recommend it.
           | The only time you do is when your college English major, or
           | advanced highschooler, who is bored with the tropes of even
           | very good novels wants to stretch themselves. Then you hand
           | them this book.
        
             | crims0n wrote:
             | I agree, and in fact I did not start with Ulysses and do
             | not recommend people do. I read 2-10 on the list, then
             | Hamlet, then Ulysses - which I feel mostly prepared me for
             | it. I did love it, but it is not an easy read, and took me
             | the better part of a month to get through.
        
             | bpshaver wrote:
             | Why are you conflating "best" with "what you would
             | recommend a friend"?
             | 
             | Many of the best things in life are hard. And you wouldn't
             | necessarily recommend them to a friend.
             | 
             | When you consider specific domains, often the best
             | instances of X tend to be harder versions of X. Or, when
             | people become familiar with many instances of X they seek
             | out the "best" instances of X. Its natural that those best
             | instances would be difficult for people unfamiliar with the
             | domain.
        
               | ChuckMcM wrote:
               | "Many of the best things in life are hard. And you
               | wouldn't necessarily recommend them to a friend."
               | 
               | Yup.
        
               | miunau wrote:
               | How did you find Ulysses, was it a good read for you?
        
               | gradstudent wrote:
               | >Or, when people become familiar with many instances of X
               | they seek out the "best" instances of X
               | 
               | I think you're saying the same thing as the GP? Ulysses
               | is a book for lit nerds, which I suppose the Modern
               | Library board were.
               | 
               | Looking at the list, there's hardly any books from after
               | mid 20th century. That makes me think that the board
               | comprised primarily old lit nerds, who stopped reading
               | long before voting. The list is also super ethno centric,
               | which makes me more dubious still about the claims for
               | "best" anything.
        
             | quantumgarbage wrote:
             | Yes, this list reads like one a Midwestern high schooler
             | would go through to impress his failed literature teacher,
             | who will write him a nice recommendation letter for the
             | ultra-conformist university of his dreams, dooming him to
             | 25 years of debt and a miserable life working as a
             | consultant
        
               | glitchc wrote:
               | Yes, but now tell us how you really feel.
        
             | _m_p wrote:
             | > Ulysses has a massive user experience problem
             | 
             | Seems this book is not intended for you then!
        
             | haroldp wrote:
             | > It's hard. Dense, convoluted, absurd.
             | 
             | These are a few of my favorite things!
        
             | piokoch wrote:
             | Exactly. This is extremely boring piece of writing.
        
             | m463 wrote:
             | There's definitely some of that going on.
             | 
             | I've gotten the same feeling watching old movies a second
             | time.
             | 
             | I would watch a movie when I was young, and it just came
             | out. It would be "modern", maybe state of the art, and it
             | would have an impact on me. But I was young, and easily
             | impressed by the cliche or trite.
             | 
             | And then I would watch the same movie decades later. Times
             | changed, the art has changed, casting, pacing, effects have
             | all advanced to support the storytelling. And I am older, a
             | different person, and maybe more aware of what is
             | "timeless" with a little more experience under my belt.
             | 
             | It might be a historical deep dive, but compared to the
             | available material our present has, some older media should
             | drop off the list.
        
           | dhosek wrote:
           | I've read 53 of the fiction, 10 of the non-fiction (which
           | tracks with my being an English major).
        
           | hungryhobbit wrote:
           | What an awful list!
           | 
           | And I say that as a Modern Literature major who has read a
           | lot on that list. FAULKNER IS A TERRIBLE WRITER! And while
           | James Joyce and some of the others are good writers, they
           | don't deserve multiple entries in the top 100.
           | 
           | It's clear this list is really "5 librarians personal
           | favorites."
        
             | WillAdams wrote:
             | It was from a list of 440 books (possibly what Random House
             | then had in stock) and voted on by the board members ---
             | it's been widely criticized/commented on, see the Wikipedia
             | article for some further links on this.
        
             | crims0n wrote:
             | Can you recommend a better one? I picked it at random when
             | I wanted to explore literature, but it seemed to be cited
             | often enough.
        
               | andrepd wrote:
               | One that does not omit Dostoevsky or Garcia Marquez over
               | mediocre books in the English language would be a good
               | start.
        
               | cgh wrote:
               | Again, this list is from Random House, a major American
               | English-language book publisher.
        
               | WillAdams wrote:
               | My suggestion would be to start with the authors
               | nominated for a Nobel prize for literature.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates_in_
               | Lit...
               | 
               | Filtering by those available in readily available English
               | translations should yield a workable list.
        
             | windowshopping wrote:
             | The sentence "FAULKNER IS A TERRIBLE WRITER" is one of the
             | most incredible sets of words I've ever had the misfortune
             | to lay my eyes upon.
        
             | morleytj wrote:
             | The Sound and the Fury is an incredible piece of art with a
             | beautifully structured narrative, in my reading of it. Why
             | do you say he's a terrible writer in your opinion? Who
             | would you rank higher?
        
           | brummm wrote:
           | I don't think this is a very good list that should call
           | itself top 100. Maybe anglophone top 100, but even then I'd
           | question some of the choices. I completely ignores a ton of
           | more important works in non-English languages.
        
             | cgh wrote:
             | The Modern Library is a publishing imprint of Random House
             | so it's pretty much focused on works in English.
        
           | inglor_cz wrote:
           | You inspired me to do the same. I just ordered the first
           | five, and will continue down the list.
           | 
           | Out of the list, I read 8 books so far, but all of them in
           | Czech.
        
           | piokoch wrote:
           | This list is kind of strange. Firstly, it is very "anglo-
           | saxon" oriented. It is a mixture of "Big Literature",
           | interesting for someone who is literature student, like
           | ULYSSES (which is at the same time a great novel and a boring
           | as hell novel) with true gems, like Orwell or Joseph Conrad-
           | Korzeniowski with additions like Robert Graves writing, which
           | has mostly entertainment value equal to average pseudo-
           | documentaries from Netflix and pop stuff like Vonnegut' books
           | (which are, at least, not boring).
           | 
           | Still, a lot of interesting stuff, Orwell, unfortunately,
           | never gets old, pity Ray Bradbury was omitted, as Fahrenheit
           | 451 is getting more and more up-to-date.
        
           | bigmattystyles wrote:
           | Really wish they had that list in order of difficulty - if
           | you start with Ulysses, you're gonna have a bad time.
        
           | andrepd wrote:
           | That's a dreadful list in my opinion. Absurdly Anglocentric
           | (esp. Americo-centric). I'm not saying they're bad books but
           | a really far cry from "among the best humanity has produced".
           | Not a single south-american novel? Not a single romance
           | language book as a matter of fact? I highly recommend you
           | diversify your reading choices.
        
         | jsbg wrote:
         | Some books I would put on this list: Knowledge and Decisions by
         | Thomas Sowell, Le Rouge et le Noir by Stendhal, Up From Slavery
         | by Booker T. Washington, 1984 by George Orwell.
        
         | rayiner wrote:
         | My mom grew up in Bangladesh with a classic British education
         | (augmented with Russian works that were popular in the country
         | given the socialist alignment). She speaks English with a heavy
         | accent despite living here for almost 40 years, but will
         | randomly reference great works in conversation. The other day
         | she worked a reference to a greek tragedy into a dig at
         | Pakistanis. I've come around to the idea that this isn't merely
         | a class flex, but rather these works have distilled
         | observations about the human condition as well as building
         | blocks of the society we live in even where we don't recognize
         | the provenance.
        
           | ChuckMcM wrote:
           | Exactly correct. In reading some highly regarded works two
           | things occurred to me, first that the author had captured
           | into words some fundamental aspect of the human condition.
           | Second was that it's easier to think about something
           | presented as a story than it is when it is presented as an
           | alternative to how you currently think.
           | 
           | If you tell someone there position on some topic is wrong,
           | they will argue with you. If you tell someone a story where
           | the character takes the same position they have and then
           | through experience and personal growth comes to understand
           | how it is wrong. They can come away realizing that they might
           | have it wrong. Great trick when it works.
        
             | WillAdams wrote:
             | One contemporary author who often writes fantasy and
             | science fiction on social issues is Steven Brust, and he
             | has a rule that when he puts his personal viewpoints into
             | the mouth of a character, he uses a character whom the
             | reader would have a narrative reason to dislike, which
             | forces him to be honest with himself, and more impartial
             | with the reader.
        
               | ChuckMcM wrote:
               | That is a great technique.
        
         | caycecan wrote:
         | There are some works from the more recent past that might add
         | to this list:
         | 
         | https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/books/best-books-21...
         | 
         | https://www.nypl.org/voices/print-publications/books-of-the-...
        
         | dukeofdoom wrote:
         | Judging from the French movie (with Pierre Niney) I saw last
         | year (which was awesome btw) , and my vague recollection of the
         | book, there's lots of physical skills involved. It's not just
         | an intellectual pursuit, but more like applied science in
         | getting vengeance. Really fun read. Big chunk of social media
         | is self improvement. Stumbled across this guy yesterday and
         | actually gives pretty solid advice.
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYsr2jkf_3A
        
           | WillAdams wrote:
           | Point!
           | 
           | Added:
           | 
           | https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/803453.The_Sword_and_the.
           | ..
           | 
           | (which I have a copy of and re-read when I was considering
           | taking up fencing, but my wife demurred)
        
             | dukeofdoom wrote:
             | You might enjoy the movie "Young Sherlock Holmes" than. If
             | you haven't seen it, great fun. And it ends in a fencing
             | scene like Hamlet.
        
             | jcynix wrote:
             | If your wife isn't happy to see you fencing (which I can
             | understand) you might want to take a look at archery
             | instead? And add this book (which impressed me during my
             | teenage years) to your reading list:
             | 
             | Zen in the Art of Archery - Wikipedia
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_in_the_Art_of_Archery
        
               | WillAdams wrote:
               | It's a long story, but my wife was fencing at the time.
               | 
               | As regards archery, it's long been an interest of mine:
               | 
               | https://www.goodreads.com/review/list/21394355-william-
               | adams...
        
         | soupfordummies wrote:
         | > reading one non-fiction book from each major section of the
         | Dewey Decimal system catalog
         | 
         | This actually sounds really fun. Not so much in an optimized
         | way, but more like just going to the library and picking a
         | decimal heading and then just selecting a cool-looking book in
         | that heading and reading it, then repeat.
        
           | WillAdams wrote:
           | It was.
           | 
           | Tried to do it again in college, but using the LoC headings,
           | but ran out of time and graduated before running out of
           | college/headings.
           | 
           | To this day, when going to the library, I try to keep this in
           | mind when looking over the new books, and if there is one on
           | a major/notable subject I can't recall having read a book on,
           | grab it.
        
         | dhosek wrote:
         | I actually did your Dewey Decimal project:
         | https://www.dahosek.com/category/dewey-decimal-project/ I read
         | one book out of each "decade" of the Dewey catalog from my
         | local library (which is reasonably well stocked). It was a bit
         | less than the predicted 100 books since there are some gaps in
         | both the system and the collection of my library, but it was an
         | interesting way to discover things I didn't know I didn't know.
        
         | runamuck wrote:
         | I only read great literature, classics, history books my whole
         | life. This year (Aged 48) I decided to pepper in a "fluff" book
         | or two. I forced myself to read something I normally wouldn't.
         | I read "The Situation" (Jersey Shore) and Mathew Perry
         | (Friends) "auto" biographies. I actually had some profound
         | insights about depression and substance abuse from those two.
         | Of course, I don't recommend you read either, but if you never
         | read "airport fiction" or "pop biographies" it might prove
         | interesting.
        
           | mmooss wrote:
           | How would you characterize the differences between the two
           | categories of books that you read?
        
           | djtango wrote:
           | I've come around to the idea that anything and anyone can be
           | interesting and enriching if you approach it with the right
           | level of curiosity.
           | 
           | Doesn't always play out but it adds to the spice of life when
           | you can draw insight from places you never expected to.
        
         | austinl wrote:
         | "Be careful... about this reading you refer to, this reading of
         | many different authors and books of every description. You
         | should be extending your stay among writers whose genius is
         | unquestionable, deriving constant nourishment from them if you
         | wish to gain anything from your reading that will find a
         | lasting place in your mind."
         | 
         | - Seneca, _Letters_
         | 
         | I was surprised to learn that the temptation to read too many
         | things was also a problem 2,000 years ago. This inspired me to
         | work on a short list of books that I know deeply.
        
           | aaronrobinson wrote:
           | That sounds horrific
        
           | andrepd wrote:
           | Sucks that the vast majority of those books were lost
           | forever. Early Christianity was a scourge in that regard, how
           | much culture we lost forever because of those zealots.
        
             | sepositus wrote:
             | I didn't realize Early Christianity had a monopoly on the
             | destruction of books? As far as I know the burning of rival
             | civilizations has been happening for thousands of years.
        
         | typon wrote:
         | I wish I could experience the feeling of reading The Count of
         | Monte Cristo again
        
           | WillAdams wrote:
           | Well, Steven Brust's _The Baron of Magister Valley_ is
           | basically TCoMC w/ the names changed and serial numbers filed
           | off in a fantasy setting.
           | 
           | Also, if you haven't read _The Black Count: Glory,
           | Revolution, Betrayal, and the Real Count of Monte Cristo_ by
           | Tom Reiss I'd strongly recommend that:
           | 
           | https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13330922-the-black-count
        
             | typon wrote:
             | thanks for the recs!
        
         | CGMthrowaway wrote:
         | Dumas himself had a personal library of about 6,000 books at
         | its peak. If you don't already have them on your list,
         | historians have mentioned several books that were known to have
         | strongly influenced him:
         | 
         | Walter Scott's historical novels, particularly "Ivanhoe" and
         | "Waverley," which inspired Dumas' approach to historical
         | fiction
         | 
         | James Fenimore Cooper's frontier adventures, which influenced
         | his action narratives
         | 
         | Lord Byron's romantic poetry and persona, which shaped Dumas'
         | conception of the romantic hero
         | 
         | Schiller's play "The Conspiracy of Fiesco at Genoa," which
         | Dumas translated and adapted early in his career
         | 
         | Shakespeare's dramatic works
         | 
         | Memoirs of historical figures, particularly those from the 17th
         | and 18th centuries, including Courtilz de Sandras' "Memoires de
         | M. d'Artagnan," which became the foundation for "The Three
         | Musketeers"
         | 
         | Plutarch's "Lives," which informed his understanding of
         | classical historical figures
         | 
         | Works by Abbe Prevost and other French novelists of the 18th
         | century
         | 
         | The Bible and classical mythology
        
         | primitivesuave wrote:
         | Based on your interest in Tacitus and Thucydides, I might
         | recommend the _The Histories of Polybius_. [1] It is absolutely
         | mind-blowing to me that he actually witnessed the events he
         | writes about, and how analogous it is to modern-day
         | geopolitics.
         | 
         | By the way, thank you for providing your list of books - I
         | picked up a few future reads from it.
         | 
         | 1. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/44125/44125-h/44125-h.htm
        
         | glitchc wrote:
         | Tony Judt.
         | 
         | "Reappraisals" and "When the Facts Change" should be on top of
         | everyone's reading list. Few indeed are those who can write
         | prose as crisp, succinct and erudite as he did.
        
       | parrot333 wrote:
       | The author seems to favor episteme (theoretical knowledge, sought
       | for its own sake) over techne (application of knowledge in a
       | craft).
       | 
       | I find the latter far more intellectually rich and rewarding.
        
       | fsckboy wrote:
       | there are 25 comments here now, but none of them yet mention the
       | opening idea of TFA, that if you click the first link you see on
       | wikipedia and lather, rinse, repeat, you will get to philosophy
       | every time.
       | 
       | if true, this is fascinating.
       | 
       | ...
       | 
       | i just tried it a few times, and it worked! although the reason
       | seems to be a bit less interesting. biography page: "so and so
       | was a botanist" --> and we're headed to philosophy. "political
       | party" --> decision making. "vehicle ramming attack" --> -->
       | power.
       | 
       | encyclopedias start each page by saying what category something
       | is in, and you inevitably category your way back to,
       | metaphorically speaking, earth, air, fire, or water
        
         | grimoald wrote:
         | I think the explanation is simple: The first link is usually
         | the category of the article's lemma. Or something else which is
         | a more general or abstract word. Following the links you will
         | lead you to the most abstract things and eventually to thinking
         | about abstract things, which is philosophy.
        
       | subpixel wrote:
       | This whole spiel is a piece of content marketing for a course on
       | creating a newsletter. Pfft.
        
         | TheOtherHobbes wrote:
         | Surprising how many philosophically literate comments missed
         | that this was an ad.
        
       | amos-burton wrote:
       | > Our ideas become Oscillators
       | 
       | it is the muscle working, the tide going back and forth.
       | 
       | i liked reading it, lots of things to unpack, new descriptions of
       | the elephant in the room to absorb.
       | 
       | The conclusion itches me, (sorry for the spoil, readers)
       | 
       | > After all, aren't we all trying to understand our place in the
       | universe?
       | 
       | are you sure about that ? that "you" are trying to do that, or
       | that, something else works hard on you, much like in those "Goals
       | that are physically, emotionally and economically crushing us"
        
       | dassicity wrote:
       | all big talk. feels like a linkedin post
        
       | js8 wrote:
       | I have been wondering lately if "intellectually rich" can be
       | found solely in books.
       | 
       | I read Jim Stanford's Economics for Everyone, and he recommends
       | to go out and talk to people and see what problems they are
       | having in life.
       | 
       | That's not to say that long time dead philosophers cannot give
       | good insights, but I feel that looking at other people's problems
       | (especially in different cultures) is a lot more relevant for
       | understanding the world.
        
         | lanfeust6 wrote:
         | I think one of the advantages of reading very old material is
         | a) it's not bogged down by modern ideology, b) imparting the
         | realization that some human issues and ideas have been around a
         | very long time (see for instance dialogues in Thucydides
         | History of the Peloponnesian War), b) some ideas and insights
         | have a timelessness to them. Take for instance the Tao Te
         | Ching. I found it retains influential power, despite my not
         | being completely on board.
        
       | hbarka wrote:
       | Can LLMs achieve intellectual richness?
        
       | tennysont wrote:
       | A lot of passion was put into this article. I appreciate that.
       | And I do think that there are several huge themes that need to be
       | periodically grappled with.
       | 
       | Just to pick one, the ego hit when jumping into a new field is
       | real (I'm currently immersed in math & ML from a CS background).
       | It's one of the things that I feel is least talked about. It's
       | very easy to peak in a field and then rest on your laurels.
       | Despite being particularly willing to start at the bottom, I also
       | identify as "being smart," and getting schooled by 22 year olds
       | stings.
       | 
       | But the rewards for "owning" two peaks are so huge, and much of
       | the process is so satisfying.
        
       | Retr0id wrote:
       | I was initially fairly sceptical of this essay, but getting to
       | the parts about Erdos I find myself more in agreement. The title
       | misled me!
       | 
       | Intellectualism for the sake of intellectualism is a road that
       | leads to isolation. And then, what's the point of it all?
       | 
       | Connection and collaboration is where it's at - which is more or
       | less what the author concludes, although still under the banner
       | of intellectuality. Perhaps my definition of intellect is/was too
       | narrow?
        
       | brojustchill wrote:
       | Bro, that was a lot of text... I mean, chill. Life is simpler
       | then that. Enjoy your flaws and get along with things as they
       | are, without the need of a "framework" to navigate life
        
         | rexpop wrote:
         | Congrats, yours is the most condescending comment on this site
         | today.
         | 
         | That sounds like you have already got a framework that works
         | for you, which is great for you. Too bad it's a framework that
         | drives you to upbraid innocent strangers on the internet.
         | 
         | Not everyone can take action on the words "just chill." We're
         | all in different places in life--think of it as a state space
         | model. The same vector of force results in different
         | coordinates when applied to different coordinates.
        
       | NetOpWibby wrote:
       | I was expecting a flowery puff piece but I'm pleasantly surprised
       | at how...helpful? Mindful? This is.
       | 
       | And lengthy, good grief. I'll be reading this over the weekend.
        
       | dangus wrote:
       | If living an intellectually rich life is as exhausting as reading
       | this article I want no part of it.
       | 
       | And I truly honestly mean this comment to be more of a thoughtful
       | contribution than my high level of snark makes it sound.
        
       | max_ wrote:
       | In finance there are some people that say "All roads lead to
       | quantitative finance"
        
       | iandanforth wrote:
       | I don't like this answer so here's mine.
       | 
       | "Read. Not too much fiction. Mostly books."
        
       | didgetmaster wrote:
       | As with nearly anything, an obsessive pursuit of knowledge,
       | simple living, or 'enlightenment' to the exclusion of other
       | things can be very harmful.
       | 
       | We should be constantly exposing ourselves to new ideas and
       | exploring new avenues; but diving down a rabbit hole for a years-
       | long journey is not the way.
       | 
       | Sitting in a mountain shack trying to digest the best 100 (or
       | 1000) books ever written, might yield some real benefits; but at
       | what cost?
        
         | nerevarthelame wrote:
         | I don't think this article is encouraging the reader to obsess
         | on the pursuit of knowledge at the expense of family, work, or
         | personal happiness.
        
       | lo_zamoyski wrote:
       | You might find A. G. Sertillanges's "The Intellectual Life"
       | interesting [0].
       | 
       | [0]
       | https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/549384.The_Intellectual_...
        
       | sadeshmukh wrote:
       | For those of you who're interested in the Wikipedia Philosophy
       | thing, check out this video:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-llumS2rA8I
        
         | bgoated01 wrote:
         | I didn't have time to get through the whole article today, but
         | I did spend some time with my kids playing the Wikipedia first
         | link game, which we enjoyed. We kept trying to find one that
         | didn't end in Philosophy, and my youngest son said we should
         | try Brick. Sure enough, it ended in a loop consisting of
         | Existence and Reality.
        
       | lgiordano_notte wrote:
       | In trying to live an intellectually rich life, there's a risk of
       | adding too much noise. Chasing more input, more ideas, more
       | learning. Sometimes less really is more. Depth often comes not
       | from adding, but from subtracting. Clear away the noise, and
       | what's left tends to have 'meaning'. Personally I prefer a deep
       | life to a rich life, but maybe that's just semantics...
        
       | dash2 wrote:
       | 325 points for this nonsense? Oh, HN.
       | 
       | From the title I expected something serious. I gave up halfway,
       | having pigeonholed the pompous verbiage as a first cousin to
       | Women Who Run With The Wolves. But really, the game was up when I
       | read the phrase "late stage capitalism", which is the verbal
       | equivalent of a plague bell, used by halfwits to warn us of their
       | presence.
       | 
       | Friends, here's how to have an intellectually rich life: read
       | serious authors. There's Montaigne out there. There's Orwell.
       | After a while, you'll recognize good writing and thinking, and
       | you won't waste your time on pap.
        
         | toader wrote:
         | Do you consider Werner Sombart, and Ernest Mandel to be 'half
         | wits' and unserious?
        
           | dash2 wrote:
           | I haven't read either, but if you mean that them using the
           | phrase legitimates it, then that isn't so. Clever people have
           | invented many phrases that later become stale or absurd. If
           | nothing else, consider that both men are long dead, whilst
           | capitalism's "late" stage continues unabated.
        
       | BhavdeepSethi wrote:
       | The universe is a cruel, uncaring void. The key to being happy
       | isn't a search for meaning, it's to just keep yourself busy with
       | unimportant nonsense, and eventually you'll be dead. - BoJack
       | Horseman
        
       | 1900-01-01 wrote:
       | It loops at Existence and Reality.
        
       | maj0rhn wrote:
       | Perhaps a more enlightening view is in the book "The Socratic
       | Method," by Ward Farnsworth, who is dean of the UTexas Law
       | School. This is a great book for those just starting on the
       | adulthood road, though it could have been shorter.
       | 
       | It analyzes the dialogs of Socrates with practicality in mind,
       | showing how to question the world around you, question your own
       | beliefs, and question the beliefs of others, all without coming
       | off like a dick (as Socrates often does). Moreover, as related to
       | the OP's article, it tells you precisely how Socrates would have
       | defined an intellectually rich life, and I think Farnsworth is
       | correct.
       | 
       | Farnsworth's Socratic method is about much more than just asking
       | questions. The trite "Know thyself" injunction is seen to be a
       | specific outgrowth of the Socratic method, echoing in some way
       | the OP's claim that everything tracks to philosophy.
       | 
       | Incidentally, the book includes a stunning revelation from Ben
       | Franklin saying that he found the Socratic method to be the best
       | way of getting people to change their mind and do what he wanted.
       | He gave it up, however, because it was too powerful a tool and he
       | decided to adopt instead a more diffident personality, which he
       | found also successful.
       | 
       | I would have thought a book like this would sell about 10 copies,
       | but it has 800 comments on Amazon! [I have no connection with the
       | author or with Amazon.]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-02 23:01 UTC)