Book Recommendations?

I’m about to finish reading ‘Ishmael’ by Daniel Quin. I was looking for some book recommendations in the area of social science/history.

I’ve read some great things about the book ‘The Unsettling of America’ by Wendel Barry. Also ‘Guns, Germs, and Steel’ is also said to be good. Has anyone else read these?

Help me out ladies and gents, anyone have a “must read” for me?

Dustin

I’d recommend Story Of B or My Ishmael by Daniel Quinn. They’re both pretty good in my opinion.

It’s pretty crazy how these books can change your perceptions about the world, religion, everything.

“With Gorilla gone, will there be hope for Man?”

[quote]cannonstar wrote:
I’d recommend Story Of B or My Ishmael by Daniel Quinn. They’re both pretty good in my opinion.

It’s pretty crazy how these books can change your perceptions about the world, religion, everything.

“With Gorilla gone, will there be hope for Man?”[/quote]

Yeah, Quinn is a great writer. Ishmael is real easy to read.

My friend who pointed Ishmael out to me also suggested Story of B.

Dustin

I read ‘From Scrawny to Brawny’ and it seemed really good. I tried following his diet, but ended up crapping my brains out all night the first day…but I stuck with it. I got all bloated, constantly, so I just stopped.

Human Natures by Ehrlich is good.

“In Over Our Heads” by R. Kegan

My favorite history book would have to be Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. It is a tough read at times but, a very good book nontheless

[quote]Poised wrote:
My favorite history book would have to be Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. It is a tough read at times but, a very good book nontheless[/quote]

Read Zinn if you’re looking for some anti-American, Chomskyite twisting of history, and also want to make sure you get a completely innacurate picture of the Vietnam War.

‘Anna Karenina’ by Leo Tolstoy

Check out Weber’s “Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.”

Check out
“Atlas Shrugged” or “Fountainhead”
by Ayn Rand
they are great thought provokers

[quote]Dustin wrote:
I’ Also ‘Guns, Germs, and Steel’ is also said to be good.

[/quote]

I read this a while back, and really enjoyed it. It’s the best book I have read to undermine the arguments of those who believe in racial superiority. The only problem is that he gets in to a LOT of detail to prove his points. Sometimes there is only so much information you need about the evolution of different species of potato.

[quote]Augustus wrote:
Dustin wrote:
I’ Also ‘Guns, Germs, and Steel’ is also said to be good.

I read this a while back, and really enjoyed it. It’s the best book I have read to undermine the arguments of those who believe in racial superiority. The only problem is that he gets in to a LOT of detail to prove his points. Sometimes there is only so much information you need about the evolution of different species of potato.[/quote]

Yeah, from reviews I’ve seen Diamond doesn’t think race and culture are related. I disagree with this. He also claimed that if Africans were living in Europe, for instance, they would have developed like other Europeans. This is also untrue, as Native Americans and Africans are sitting on “gold mines” of natural resources but essentially lived the same way for thousands of years. They also had plenty of rivers for transportation, trade, and commerce, yet remained hunter gatherers.

Anyone read much of Marvin Harris’s work?

Dustin

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Poised wrote:
My favorite history book would have to be Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. It is a tough read at times but, a very good book nontheless

Read Zinn if you’re looking for some anti-American, Chomskyite twisting of history, and also want to make sure you get a completely innacurate picture of the Vietnam War.[/quote]

Actually Gmoney it’s you who has the distorted picture of history. Keep reading the corporate sponsored news and history books and you’ll be sure to keep staring at the shadows on the wall.

Anything by Chopmsky is fantastic but I’d recommend the book he co-authored with Professor Edward S. Herman titled Manufacturing Consent. It helps to give you a clear view of the propaganda that passes as news in this country. However be prepared to sacrifice some of your closely held beliefs. They will soon be seen as the illusions that they are. It can be a difficult pill to swallow but better to get as close to the truth as possible no matter where it leads.

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Poised wrote:
My favorite history book would have to be Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. It is a tough read at times but, a very good book nontheless

Read Zinn if you’re looking for some anti-American, Chomskyite twisting of history, and also want to make sure you get a completely innacurate picture of the Vietnam War.

Actually Gmoney it’s you who has the distorted picture of history. Keep reading the corporate sponsored news and history books and you’ll be sure to keep staring at the shadows on the wall.

Anything by Chopmsky is fantastic but I’d recommend the book he co-authored with Professor Edward S. Herman titled Manufacturing Consent. It helps to give you a clear view of the propaganda that passes as news in this country. However be prepared to sacrifice some of your closely held beliefs. They will soon be seen as the illusions that they are. It can be a difficult pill to swallow but better to get as close to the truth as possible no matter where it leads.[/quote]

GDollars, I agree with Zeppelin795 to an extent. When I hear people say that an individual disorts history, I make it a point to read said individuals work. There is no such thing as historical revisionism, as history is always revised and “traditonal views” change.

Dustin

Ballad of the Whiskey Robber by Julian Rubenstein

Non Fiction Story of a Hockey Player Bank Robber in post communist Hungary.

Very entertaining.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Check out Weber’s “Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.”[/quote]

Weber is an intellectual orphan-child compared to Heidegger!

[quote]Dustin wrote:
There is no such thing as historical revisionism, as history is always revised and “traditonal views” change.
[/quote]

It either happened, or it didn’t. History is not, nor should it be, a matter of interpretation. It is the recounting of facts, as fully and completely as possible. To the extent that the historian ignores or suppresses certain facts while giving preference to others, or he chooses to portray opinion or speculation as fact, he is not writing history; he is writing an editorial.

[quote]Dustin wrote:
Yeah, from reviews I’ve seen Diamond doesn’t think race and culture are related. I disagree with this. He also claimed that if Africans were living in Europe, for instance, they would have developed like other Europeans. This is also untrue, as Native Americans and Africans are sitting on “gold mines” of natural resources but essentially lived the same way for thousands of years. They also had plenty of rivers for transportation, trade, and commerce, yet remained hunter gatherers.
[/quote]

I’m not following your logic. Europeans were essentially tribal until exposed to the Romans. The Romans were essentially uncultured warriors until they were exposed to (and conquered) the Greeks. European culture is largely the blend of “Jerusalem and Athens,” with some paganism thrown in; not a unique and original creation of the Europeans themselves. Because of the way Europeans were exposed to this culture, they adopted it, modified it, and carried it forward. Europeans, btw, were conquered by the Romans but then allowed Roman citizenship… unlike, for example, the South Americans who were enslaved by the not nearly so egalitarian Spanish.

It’s also bizarre that you say that the Africans “remained hunters and gatherers.” I take it you haven’t read much about Egyptian civilization?

[quote]nephorm wrote:
Dustin wrote:
There is no such thing as historical revisionism, as history is always revised and “traditonal views” change.

To the extent that the historian ignores or suppresses certain facts while giving preference to others, or he chooses to portray opinion or speculation as fact, he is not writing history; he is writing an editorial.[/quote]

Then why do some historians still contend with a straight face that the civil war was fought to free the slaves. When in fact, that really wasn’t true. My point was simply that bias does come into play, even when examining history. An American historians account of WWII isn’t going to be the exact same as a German or Russian historian.

So-called “trusted” historians often pick and choose which facts to use or ignore.

Perhaps my initial statement wasn’t as clearly stated as it should have been. My apologies.

[quote]nephorm wrote:

I’m not following your logic. Europeans were essentially tribal until exposed to the Romans. The Romans were essentially uncultured warriors until they were exposed to (and conquered) the Greeks. European culture is largely the blend of “Jerusalem and Athens,” with some paganism thrown in; not a unique and original creation of the Europeans themselves. Because of the way Europeans were exposed to this culture, they adopted it, modified it, and carried it forward. Europeans, btw, were conquered by the Romans but then allowed Roman citizenship… unlike, for example, the South Americans who were enslaved by the not nearly so egalitarian Spanish. [/quote]

As I said in my previous post, I haven’t read Guns, Germs, and Steel, but was simply responding to some of the reviews I’d read (and what I was told by a friend who did read it). I’m not sure how far Diamond goes back historically in his book, but he claims that because of Europe’s geographical location, that they prospered and their accomplishments (good or bad) were felt around the world. His whole thesis seems revolve around geography. He does this while seemingly ignoring how biology and culture are all pieces of the puzzle as well. Do you understand what I was saying now?

[quote]
It’s also bizarre that you say that the Africans “remained hunters and gatherers.” I take it you haven’t read much about Egyptian civilization?[/quote]

Pre-dynastic Egypt was ruled by mediterranean people similar to the peoples living along the mediterranean and/or Aegean sea in Italy and Greece.

It was not until later dynasties that the Egyptian ruling class begins to look like “Africans”.

So Yes, as I said previosly, (sub-saharan) Africans remained hunter-gatherers.

Dustin