What kinds of books do you like to read?

History: especially military and economic history books. Specific areas of history: am biased towards classical and Early Modern/Modern history. Also, works of military theory fall into that category, I suppose, with a strong bias towards von Clausewitz and Liddell Hart. Graphic novels (comic books): mostly Marvel, especially the Amazing Spider-Man line, even after Quesada's butchery of the last few years; also, have been reading Knights of the Old Republic and the Vector storyline. Philosophy: strong tendency towards Nietzsche and Nietzsche-oriented scholarly work. (Sorry, Fifty. :p) Really a big fan of most Russian literature, especially recently; expanded my interest to Pushkin, Saltykov, Lermontov, and Sholokhov in the last few months, in addition to the Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, and Solzhenitsyn that I always liked. (Oh, and Pasternak; Doctor Zhivago is one of my favorite books.) Goethe and Mann are also pretty big ('specially Mann; Magic Mountain is a really excellent book). And then I usually am bouncing back and forth between various national literature texts, mostly to improve knowledge for quiz bowl originally, but nowadays because I'm interested in good books. Nizami is usually good for sheer awesome, for example.

Stuff that I used to read but still remember very well and sometimes revisit occasionally include Tom Clancy books and other technothrillers, as well as spy novels like Day of the Jackal and The Russia House; Star Wars Expanded Universe novels; and humor books, mostly Dave Barry. Tintin, Asterix (and Obelix), and other comics are usually pretty good for laughs, too.
 
Philosophy: strong tendency towards Nietzsche and Nietzsche-oriented scholarly work. (Sorry, Fifty. :p)

Nothing wrong with Nietzsche! He maybe a so-called Continental philosopher, but he's still good. You should be very careful about what secondary literature on him you read, though, because there is more garbage put out on Nietzsche then perhaps any other philosopher. Avoid anything written by professors of anything other than philosophy. If the author is a philosophy professor, check that persons CV and see where they publish their work. Also look at the titles of their work. If the titles of their scholarly work contain lots of instances of words like "discourse", "post-structuralism", or the names of lots of 20th censtury French philosophers, its a good bet that the work in question is terrible.

Good secondary literature on Nietzsche is done by:
Brian Leiter
Bernard Williams
Maudemarie Clark
Richard Schacht
 
Nothing wrong with Nietzsche! He maybe a so-called Continental philosopher, but he's still good.
One of the reasons I like him, actually; his section (the Eighth Article, I think) of Beyond Good and Evil wherein he denounces nationalism, especially that of the German variety, was hilarious and resonates with me. (Dachspmg agrees with Winner, what?)
Fifty said:
If the titles of their scholarly work contain lots of instances of words like "discourse", "post-structuralism", or the names of lots of 20th censtury French philosophers, its a good bet that the work in question is terrible.
Post-structuralism, from what I know, is indeed garbage. I haven't seen anything involving that so far, but I will keep an eye out.
Fifty said:
Good secondary literature on Nietzsche is done by:
Brian Leiter
Bernard Williams
Maudemarie Clark
Richard Schacht
I read Nietzsche and the Morality Critics, which I thought was pretty good and a nice put-down for the teenage male form of Nietzsche that goes around. I think he cited Schacht in that too. Thanks for the tip! :)
 
Mostly nonfiction nowadays. I'll just tell you the latest batch of books I got:

Guns, Germs, and Steel, I am a Strange Loop, Collapse.

I also like to read Discworld. I just picked up Men at Arms.
 
I will read just about anything. Fixin' to start reading Point of Impact by Stephen Hunter. I have also enjoyed every book I have read from Harry Turtledove, the undisputed master of alternate history.
 
Historical biographies of people I admire.

Dinesh D'Souza's Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary Man became an Extraordinary Leader, Doris Kearns Goodwin's Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln... stuff like that.
 
I have also enjoyed every book I have read from Harry Turtledove, the undisputed master of alternate history.
...

That's not really healthy. I'm not a huge fan of the guy myself...
 
Nothing wrong with Nietzsche! He maybe a so-called Continental philosopher, but he's still good.

Indeed. Though I never felt the need to read any secondary literature on him; I've always preferred the original. Can't really understand why he would have been popular in nazist circles, as he is quite erudite. Also, I've always wondered why it is never mentioned he was actually a phililogist, not a philosopher.

On continental philosophy: I once read Russel's A History of Western Philosophy (I always like how they put "A" instead of "The") and found it terribly biased.
 
On continental philosophy: I once read Russel's A History of Western Philosophy (I always like how they put "A" instead of "The") and found it terribly biased.

Well everyone agrees that Russell's history is biased, but its more of a "pro-Russell" bias than anything else. That is, he says outlandish things about great philosophers just because he disagrees with them (for example, saying St. Thomas Aquinas is not a true philosopher :lol:)

In any case, the supposed continental-analytic distinction has largely collapsed. There is good scholarship and sympathetic readings of a lot of supposedly "continental" philosophers by analytic philosophers. The only thing that persists is that there is a lot more horrible scholarship done on continental figures still. So you'll see a lot more crap written about Nietzsche then you'd see written about, say, G.E. Moore.
 
...

That's not really healthy. I'm not a huge fan of the guy myself...

How is reading alternate history not healthy? To me it's great fun because I know the real history which he twists.
 
How is reading alternate history not healthy? To me it's great fun because I know the real history which he twists.
Alternate history is fine, so long as it's, you know, well written.
 
Sci Fi/Fantasy, Mystery, Science, Pure Math/Philosophy.

Actually I like all books, my personal preferences don't actually affect my choices. ;)
 
mystery, science, historical, nonfiction, fantasy, in that order
 
Mostly history, some basic science, a few novels. Currently reading Dracula, book about Napoleon next
 
- Novels (mostly historical fiction)
- Books of Poetry (sometimes)
- Plays (Williams, Albee, Miller etc...)
- Historical biographies and History books
- Tanakh (I have a beautiful Hebrew/English version)
- Christian New Testament (very rarely)
- Theravada Buddhist literature
- Language learning books
- Dictionaries (Collins French/English, Chambers Dictionary)
- Thesaurus (Roget's Thesaurus)
- Physics and Chemistry textbooks
 
Back
Top Bottom