UPDATE: 30 November 2006. a) I didn’t link Diesel; remedied. He inspired this post. b) Diesel’s brother-in-law, John, died earlier this week. Please keep John and his family in your thoughts and, where if you pray, in your prayers.
“Yes. All the books have to be in English.”
“So no Pynchon or Joyce?”
– Diesel
Alas, I’m posting too slowly… So, here’s where I steal someone else’s idea, respond to it, and turn it into a post.
These are just a few rapidly sketched thoughts. What are your favorite slightly lesser-known/intellectually regarded books and why? (We exclude the OBVIOUS canon — 1984, Animal Farm, Brave New World, etc.)
Here are some of mine. 1 on philosophy, 2 on pre-WW1 history, 2 SF novels about war and revolution. I’m going to deliberately avoid anything published within the last 10-15 years if I can. Let’s look for classics. (all these are lazily from memory, so apologies for typos):
“Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid by Douglas R. Hofstader”
Nearly 30 years old. A series of discussions ostensibly on music, computing, thought, philosophy, mathematics, art and consciousness.
Dreadnought, by Robert K. Massie.
http://dannyreviews.com/h/Dreadnought.html
A fascinating book. Admittedly it’s in my field so I’m biased. Well, one of my fields. A Naval history of Britain and Germany, leading up to the First World War, where the “lamps went out all over Europe and [were not] lit again…”.
The Guns of August, Barbara Tuchman. A classic. She writes very well. Lead up to WW1 from a more diplomatic/political/land perspective than the sea/naval perspective of Massie.
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, Robert Heinlein. A great work of libertarian (science) fiction. Though not many regard Heinlein as a stylist, he certainly is one here, as his narrator has a limited and functional grasp of English.
Forever War, Joe Haldeman. A commie-pinko (I say that in jest, for new readers) SF antidote to Heinlein’s classic “Starship Troopers” (forget the film, read the book). Well written, and says a lot about America and the 1970’s. I don’t agree with him, but I think everyone should read what he wrote, and try to understand his perspective. I also think everyone should do the same with Heinlein.
Update: gwallan has mentioned Dune. I agree. I’ll add more to the update section as suggestions flow.
-wolfe
I haven’t read any of them. I like the title “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress,” though. Although, it would be hard to convince me thus.
The Guns of August is probably the most readable.
Then? Yeah, if you’re smart (which you are) , probably Moon is a Harsh Mistress.
I think you’d like it, Teri. It largely fits your political beliefs and some of mine.
Then the others.
-wolfe
Boy, I might have to read all of these. I think I’ll start with the Hofstader book, because I’m interested in reading some non-fiction in those areas. I’ve read a bit of Heinlein and some Tuchman; I will definitely have to read those at some point as well. (Starship Troopers was a godawful film, wasn’t it? I assumed that the book was much better. Most early Heinlein is pretty good.)
BTW, Since Wolfe didn’t mention it (technically freeing me from the responsibility of reading any of these books), this post is more-or-less in response to my Make Diesel Read a Book post, which was admittedly a desperate cry for attention. Just in case you were wondering who this “Diesel” guy is….
Thanks, Wolfe!
@I was relieved from the obligation because all my readers are so super-smart they know who Diesel of the world-famous Mattress Police is!
And my bad. I thought I hyper-linked your name, above. I didn’t. Remedying.
GEB (Godel Escher Bach) is probably the smartest of the lot; be warned, the computing stuff is somewhat dated, though not ludicrously so.
Yep, Starship Troopers was pretty dreadful, though I liked the shower scene because it featured boo… err, yes the film was a total travesty without any redeeming features!
If you’ve not read Moon is a Harsh Mistress, then put it very high on your list. I think you’d like it a lot, given what you’ve said of your beliefs as well — more Republican/Conservative than Teri, like me, but still somewhat libertarian. I also think it’s one of his best novels, stylistically.
I’m astonished you hadn’t read any on my list. This will be easier than I thought!
-wolfe
@Everybody: Since wolfe’s choices are on topics near & dear to his heart, I have a couple of picks that will either have you doubled over laughing (at me, for suggesing them) or will be a happy surprise to you. I think - I hope - they are readable. I’m sure they can be quite fascinating. Is that a long enough disclaimer?
Fermat’s Enigma: The Epic Quest to Solve the World’s Greatest Mathematical Problem (Simon Singh)
Elegant Universe (Brian Greene)
The latter was a topic on Public Broadcasting’s Nova series, I believe.
~Z~
Wolfe - Now that I think about it, I did read The Guns of August. I was thinking of another Tuchman book (The Proud Tower?) that I was supposed to read for a history class and never got around to it.
Also, thanks for the prayers, kind words, and link, in that order.
I will update my reading list today.
I know this is a bit strange but has anyone else read Siddhartha by Hermann Hesse? I am not sure if it classes as an intellectual book, but a university lecturer of mine recommended it as a good read so it must have some intellectual worth..right? :S
@Luka: It was assigned reading when I was an undergrad. I think you would find much to contemplate in it. Not sure how I feel about it, as being directed to read takes all the life out of the best literature. (Which is why I gave my son “To Kill A Mockingbird” before his school could ruin it for him).
I am wondering if anyone has read any Orson Scott Card? I read some of the Alvin Maker series and Hart’s Hope, which I really liked. Apparently there is quite the political hubbub about his new novel, Empire, which the left (of which I am admittedly a member) is skewering. I shall have to drag my lazy ass to the library now to see for myself.
@Luka-I went through a Herman Hesse phase when I was in high school, read almost everything. Siddhartha was assigned reading in my English class in high school. I really liked all of his books.
@Luka yes, I was a big fan of Hesse in high school (like Ally, gasp!). Siddhartha was also the book that got me started reading Hesse.
@Ally I’ve read a little Card. I suppose I should check Empire out.
From what I’ve read, he has a good point about vocal people on the left being harsh and exclusionary if you stray off the reservation of Correct Thought for activists. It is my perception (granted I’m biased) that the right is more tolerant of a range of ideas. I agree with him that campuses and the media are overwhelmingly left; the former intolerantly so, the latter almost unconsciously so.(pace Fox News, Washington Times and the editorial page of the WSJ).
Utimately, I gather he wrote the book (at the request and suggestion) of the makers of a video game. They wish to create a franchise based on his book. I think that says a great deal.
-wolfe
Maybe when I grow up, I can be like you guys. I’ve never even heard of these authors that you all went through “phases” with while in high school!
Be careful what you wish for, Teri.
Perhaps our esteemed host will offer wolfe points for anyone who can match the following quote with the author, cited in this thread, who made it:
“Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea.”
~Z~
@zogmama
Heinlein
Here’s one for you:-
It is astonishing how foolish humans can be in groups, especially when they follow their leaders without question.
@zogmama
Should have added that the author of the quote I cite is not mentioned in this thread but…
@wolfe
… should be.
(which is probably a dead giveaway as to his identity).
@Teri-I have always read in “phases” since I was quite small. Perhaps it is an obsessive component to my personality. Anyway, I have a thorough grounding in the lives of Thomas Edison, Abraham Lincoln, and George Washington; along with the women reformers Dorothea Dix and Jane Adams (Addams?), at least from a second-grader’s perspective! And for some unknown reason, a few years later, the Holocaust. Sixth grade, anything I could get my hands on by Ray Bradbury…and it goes on…
@gwallan Yep, Heinlein definitely. On G’s quote… Could be a bunch of people… Pournelle would be my top choice, then, dunno, Herbert (I admit your dead giveaway comment hinted at that), since it sounds like his world-view. After that? Some of the libertarian authors of the 80’s.
From googling, I suspect it’s Dune. Good enough.
True, it should be on the list, but so should a great many other books. But that’s definitely one. Updated!
Add your suggestions below, and I’ll update with those that seem sound.
-wolfe
@gwallan: wolfe’s a spoiler….I was going to guess Herbert - because of your affection for Dune. I’ve already earned my wolfe points, but still retain my competitive nature.
@wolfe: I submitted two suggestions previously, which were sucked into the gaping maw of unfathomable ennui. That’s cool - I’m used to it. Ha.
~Z~
@wolfe @ zoggy
Yes Herbert, my current fixation. That quote is not entirely original I believe. I’ve certainly used it, or words to that effect, myself in the past but only noticed it in House Corrino - the prequel to Dune - in the past month.
@wolfe
I haven’t read much Heinlein in the past decade but most recently did read Job. Very irreverent, so not out of character, and amusing in ways. Definitely not his best. I’ve cherry picked some of his quotes that stood out while I was looking around. My favourite Heinlein would have to be Time Enough for Love.
Sin lies only in hurting other people unnecessarily. All other sins are invented nonsense. (Hurting yourself is not sinful–just stupid.)
When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, ‘This you may not read, this you may not see, this you are forbidden to know,’ the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything–you can’t conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.
The nice thing about citing god as an authority is that you can prove anything you set out to prove. [If This Goes On]
I’ve never understood how God could expect His creatures to pick the one true religion by faith - it strikes me as a sloppy way to run a universe.[Jubal Harshaw in Stranger in a Strange Land]
You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity. [Logic of Empire]
(Which I would say is a direct steal from Bonaparte. Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.)
Every law that was ever written opened up a new way to graft. [Red Planet]
Most women are damn fools and children. But they’ve got more range then we’ve got. The brave ones are braver, the good ones are better — and the vile ones are viler, for that matter. [The Puppet Masters]
The capacity of the human mind for swallowing nonsense and spewing it forth in violent and repressive action has never yet been plumbed. [Revolt in 2100]
Democracy can’t work. Mathematicians, peasants, and animals, that’s all there is — so democracy, a theory based on the assumption that mathematicians and peasants are equal, can never work. Wisdom is not additive; its maximum is that of the wisest man in a given group. [Glory Road]
Widows are far better than brides. They don’t tell, they won’t yell, they don’t swell, they rarely smell, and they’re grateful as hell. [To Sail Beyond the Sunset]
There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men. [Starship Troopers]
Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. [Starship Troopers]
The most noble fate a man can endure is to place his own mortal body between his loved home and the war’s desolation. [Starship Troopers]
That old saw about “to understand all is to forgive all” is a lot of tripe. Some things, the more you understand them, the more you loathe them. [Starship Troopers]
Morals — all correct moral laws — derive from the instinct to survive. Moral behavior is survival behavior above the individual level. [Starship Troopers]
Correct morality can only be derived from what man is — not from what do-gooders and well-meaning aunt Nellies would like him to be. [Starship Troopers]
Love is the condition in which the happiness of another person is essential to your own. [Stranger in a Strange Land]
Time Enough For Love (1973)
Most, if not all, of these quotations are of the recurring Heinlein character “Lazarus Long”, and most were labeled as from the “Excerpts from the Notebooks of Lazarus Long”. Many of these were later published as a separate poster book, The Notebooks of Lazarus Long.
A “critic” is a man who creates nothing and thereby feels qualified to judge the work of creative men. There is logic in this; he is unbiased — he hates all creative people equally.
A fake fortuneteller can be tolerated. But an authentic soothsayer should be shot on sight. Cassandra did not get half the kicking around she deserved.
A generation which ignores history has no past — and no future.
A poet who reads his verse in public may have other nasty habits.
A touchstone to determine the actual worth of an “intellectual” — find out how he feels about astrology.
All men are created unequal.
Always listen to experts. They’ll tell you what can’t be done, and why. Then do it.
An elephant. A mouse built to government specifications.
Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human. At best he is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to wear shoes, bathe, and not make messes in the house.
Beware of altruism. It is based on self-deception, the root of all evil.
By the data to date, there is only one animal in the Galaxy dangerous to man — man himself. So he must supply his own indispensable competition. He has no enemy to help him.
A true lady takes off her dignity with her clothes and does her whorish best. At other times you can be as modest and dignified as your persona requires.
Does history record any case in which the majority was right?
Everybody lies about sex.
If it can’t be expressed in figures, it is not science; it is opinion. It has long been known that one horse can run faster than another — but which one? Differences are crucial.
It is a truism that almost any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so, and will follow it by suppressing opposition, subverting all education to seize early the minds of the young, and by killing, locking up, or driving underground all heretics.
(I consider feminism to be all of sect, cult, and religion)
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.
Sin lies only in hurting others unnecessarily. All other “sins” are invented nonsense.
You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don’t ever count on having both at once.
Z gets double wolfe points, I believe her. I only got it since I’d recently reread Kevin Anderson’s (yes, yes, and Brian Herbert’s) prequel trilogy, plus Dune itself. I had no idea where it was from, just that that was the genre. Sorry to spoil it for Z!
On Heinlein quotes: quite a list. I would say this one is exactly wrong:
The first sentence? Maybe. The second? Might be true of the braver. Maybe. That’s a stretch. The second half of the sentence? The vile women viler than men? No… I don’t think so from a societal perspective. In terms of personal viciousness? Dunno. Maybe. The problem is that we all see what we want to see and what we look for.
I think this is substantially true, for good and ill.
Yeah, I confess I had this quote in the background of my mind when it came to a certain mutual acquaintance from your fine country. In fairness, she never claimed to be an intellectual.
Darn straight. Admittedly that is a commercial for my secondary profession.
I could say far more, but an interesting list.
It’s fascinating that the evil socialist Gwallan and the evil quasi-fascist wolfe can agree on at least some quotes!
Cheers,
-wolfe
To Z-I don’t think I could get used to any gaping maw. I googled your second choice, and actually I remember reading a book review of it a while ago. It sounded like something I might read in spite of myself, as long as the terms were lay enough. I thought I might have read recently, out of the corner of my eye, something about string theory being disproved, but I can’t remember the precise wording of what I read. I googled it and came up with a blog with folks arguing it round and round…
Re Dune: Gaping maw of unfathomable ennui, thy name is Paul Atreides.
Right now I have a …different “method” of obtaining my reading material. Our town has a book barn at the dump, where people drop off their unwanted books and you can take what you want. Right now I am reading the 1968 Nebula Awards, Stories Three, edited by Roger Zelazny. I just finished a story by Harlan Ellison that I liked, “Pretty Maggie Moneyeyes.” Great title. It was especially resonant as I just finished reading “Leaving Las Vegas” by John O’Brien, also set in Vegas. Both stories really sad, althoough opposite sides of a coin, in a way. I hadn’t read any sci fi for a while, forgot just how much I liked it when I was younger.
@wolfe
“Braver”? Sometimes. Women facing the same dangers with less to work with? Certainly.
“Good” is meaningless to me in any context.
“Viler”? Oh, yes, no question. At an individual level at least.
@AllyC
I was bored shitless the first time I read Dune. Try again in, say, ten years. Paul Atreides is but a mote in the gaping maw of Herbert’s universe. He’s a fly speck in a thirty thousand year saga.
I think you’re reading the ‘67 version of the Nebulas. Zelazny was realy busy in the late sixties.
Winners that year were
Novel: The Einstein Intersection by Samuel R. Delany
Novella: “Behold the Man” by Michael Moorcock
Novelette: “Gonna Roll the Bones” by Fritz Leiber
Short Story: “Aye, and Gomorrah” by Samuel R. Delany
By contrast the Hugo’s from the same year
Novel: The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress by Robert A. Heinlein
Novelette: “The Last Castle” by Jack Vance
Short Story: “Neutron Star” by Larry Niven
Dramatic Presentation: “The Menagerie” (Star Trek)
Professional Magazine: If
Professional Artist: Jack Gaughan
Fanzine: Niekas (Ed Meskys and Felice Rolfe, eds.)
Fan Writer: Alexei Panshin
Fan Artist: Jack Gaughan
Special Award: CBS Television for 21st Century
I’ve always found the differences in these two SF awards quite startling particularly in the late sixties. There may have been some politics going on that I’m not familiar with.For example “And Call Me Conrad” by Roger Zelazny and “Dune” were joint Hugo winners in ‘66. Neither were even nominated for the Nebula that year(which, incidentaly, was also a tie - “Babel-17″ by Samuel R. Delany and “Flowers For Algernon” by Daniel Keyes)
If you’re interested
The Hugo Awards By Year and Nebula Awards By Year
@gwallan That’s rather interesting that “Good” is meaningless to you, but “Viler” isn’t.
No on Delaney and Moorcock (could have been an age thing); yes on Vance, Heinlein, Niven, Panshin. And Leiber.
@AllyC I like the bookbarn idea. I used to have such a thing where I lived in days of yore. No longer.
I feel much the same way about SF. I’m 90% off it… yet used to love it. I’m making a conscious effort to reread some old classics.
@gwallan Did you ever read Brunner — especially the Shockwave Rider? (and Stand on Zanzibar)? Seems to me he’d be your kind of socialist… he’s almost my kind of socialist.
-wolfe
@gwallan-Dune did not bore me. I was ascribing the ennui to the character of Paul, crushed between the twin boulders of prescience and determinism. Plus, he had all those troublesome women. Count ‘em: Jessica, Alia, Chani and Irulan, and even the troublesomely unforeseen Ghanima. Those gals just would not stay in line, no matter what he did. How wearisome indeed. But you’re right, the true unfathomable ennui belongs to Leto II, the chimera/chimerical worm.
About the Nebulas: It might be you’re right. The year is not on the cover, so I looked at the copyright, which was 1968, but the awards might have been for ‘67. As to Hugo vs. Nebula, I cannot comment. What kind of politics?
@wolfe
“Good” is too vague for my liking. You’ll note I never use it in my written vocabulary. “Viler” is comparative rather than descriptive in the context used.
I’ve read no Brunner. I’ve had to spend so much life reading manuals and text books that I look only for light entertainment now. The political persuasion of authors has never been an issue. I have no problems with getting to know my enemy.
On the left/right dichotomy have I refered you to The Political Compass which introduces attitudes to authoritarianism and libertarianism to the equation? I’d recommend it to anybody here actually. I go through it myself every year or so to test movement in my personal ideology.
@AllyC
Paul was certainly trapped in the way you suggest. The messiah prophet creates the future. He created a bind that locked the species into gradual decay because of a population increasingly unable to think for itself. He faked his own death to change this. He adopted a new personna as the “Preacher” to undermine his own godhead. He still failed. Leto II took the path Paul knew of but was unwilling to dare. He became the “ultimate predator”. He understood that competition is necessary to the future of the species. Without it stagnation is inevitable. He took a path designed to enable the species to expand exponentially and infinitely thus guaranteeing it’s survival.
Of the female characters you mention only Alia could be considered “troublesome”.
Re the Hugos and Nebulas I use the term “politics” in the general sense that they were competing awards. I’d have to research it but I have vague recollections of reading something to this effect back in the seventies.
Incidentally the latest work “Hunters of Dune” was released a couple of months ago. I have first dibs on it at the local library(assuming I don’t succumb and buy it first).
You may enjoy the Wiki entry Dune universe.
@gwallan I still think you’d like him. Writes thoughtfully and well.
On the “Political Compass”, I don’t think I’ve taken that particular test, though I’ve taken a number like it. The concept of measuring economic freedom on one axis and political freedom on another goes back a way. This looks to be roughly along those lines, but I must say the first question stopped me cold:
Uh… ok no agenda there!
But neither choice is a good one. What the heck does “serving humanity” mean?
It’s like “freedom fries” — a bunch of nonsensical pap (this time from the left rather than the right). It could mean anything, up to, and including genocide. For after all, if it’s in the name of humanity, no evil is too great to pursue that goal (or so argue many).
At least trans-national corporations have shareholders to whom they are ultimately accountable, even if those shareholders are increasingly remote and irresponsible funds. And they’re not as likely to commit genocide as those who “serve humanity”, since even the most evil mega-corp doesn’t want to eliminate its customers outright.
Yet that’s almost as objectionable a goal as “serving humanity”.
I’ll take the rest of the test, but there’s my first reaction!
UPDATE: Midway through it, a lot of the test seems ripped off the F-scale. (At 2.8 on that, I’m a “liberal airhead”.) They’ve thrown in a lot of “whiny left-wing rhetoric” to dress it up a bit though.
UPDATE2: So I’m a 5.00, -0.15. (mid-right economically, middle of the road on authoritarian). I think the test is somewhat unreliable though. For example, it shows George W. Bush as being as authoritarian as Robert Mugabe. That’s just… bizarre. Wacky-land insaneo moonbat country. Wake me up when George Bush is seizing the property of citizens based on their race, and forcing them off it at gunpoint. Wake me up when he’s running a program of near genocide. Wake me up when he’s having reporters executed and newspapers seized and supreme court justices terrorized. (I won’t deny Bush has somewhat authoritarian tendencies; I’d be concerned if he didn’t in response to 9/11 though reasonable people can differ here. But to suggest he’s a Mugabe? That’s just… out there.)
Moreover Bush scales as fairly far right economically. And that is also nutty. Mr. Protectionist Steel Tariff Bush?
-wolfe
*sigh* I say we toss all the abschickens into the gaping maw, since (idiomatically speaking a la wolfe-ese) it’s now surpassed the abschicken in general overuse.
On second thought - naw to the maw. Keep the abschicken in all his genetically modified glory.
@Ally: there are at least two schools of thought regarding string (or “M”) theory, but don’t let that stop you from reading the Greene book. It can be very mind-expanding for lay folks, and the rest? Pfft. Physicists are a bunch of pompous asses anyway.
Z
Z-Okay, the aforementioined phrase shall never issue forth from my keyboard again…only it shall come to mind from time to time, but unspoken, unexpressed, when I chance to visit the main site…
I shall keep Greene’s book in mind, but as it would be most serendipitous for it to turn up at the book barn, I shall have to actively seek it out. It’s not at all certain that it would be at my local library, either. Cash money will be required, probably.
Hey, did anyone (US) read the New York Times Magazine this week? It was the 6th annual year in ideas. Some really fascinating stuff, and, by the way, a direct refutation of an oft-cited statistic on the main site.
I didn’t see the Times stat Ally, but would be most interested to hear it.
Okay, here goes, in toto:
“Here’s an unpleasant figure for a man to ponder: 10 percent of all children conceived in the context of marriage (or a less formal heterosexual pairing) have been fathered by someone outside the couple. “Dad” has been cuckolded. Or so many biologists and anthropologists have been saying for decades.
But in the June issue of Current Anthropology, Kermyt G. Anderson, a professor of anthropology at the University fo Oklahoma, cast serious doubt on the 10% figure. Girlfriends and wives, it seems, are less worthy of distrust than many scientists have thought. “The upshot,” Anderson says, “is that you shouldn’t be worried, if you are pretty sure the kid is yours.”
Anderson’s was a meta-study: He examined every paper or reference he could locate that touched on the topic. First he identified 22 studies, dating back to 1949, in which men with few or no doubts about their paternity learned they weren’t related to one of “their” kids. These studies were mostly designed to explore genetically linked traits in fathers and children. Presumably, if you or your wife suspected you were unrelated to a child, you’d find an excuse not to take part in a genetic study like that, so Anderson determined that these men had high paternity confidence. Collectively in these studies, only 1.7 percent of men learned that they were not true fathers.
Anderson then looked at a second set, of 31 studies, done at paternity labs over the past 4 decades. Those labs exist laregly to resolve paternity disputes, so Anderson classified the men involved in these studies as having low paternity confidence. As it turned out, 30% of the children tested in these studies turned out to be children of other fathers.
These 2 studies establish a rough estimate of the links between confidence in paternity and actual paternity. Anderson then calculated what mix of the 2 groups of fathers–paternity-confident and -unconfident–would have to exist in the real world for the famous 10 percent figure to be true. He found that, for the figure to hold, men would have to have strong doubts about 1 in 4 of all children. And that, he concluded, just seems way too high. But we don’t have to rely on intuition alone. In another study, Anderson, drawing on a survey of 1325 men in Albuquerque, found that even when granted total confidentiality, they expressed doubts about only 1.5% of the 3066 pregnancies in which they were involved.
Barring a study that trumps Anderson’s, the 10% figure goes in the dustbin. And that son who looks nothing like you? Relax: He must look like some forgotten uncle.” Christopher Shea
Thanks for that Ally, it’s as I suspected, men are prone to paranoia.
This is a trifle blunt. Sorry Ally! I do very much appreciate you posting it and I think it’s an excellent (though somewhat disturbing) topic to discuss.
AllyC, that’s interesting, but I think it’s nonsense. Seems like junk science to me. Studying studies (yes, can work, but…) well, you’re only as good as your weakest link. And studying a nearly 60-year-old study as part of your meta-study… given the social differences present at the time, and the lack of genetic testing, that boggles the mind.
Moreover an anthropologist is making claims about genetics based on 60-year-old studies?
There’s an easy way to tell, and it’s via genetic testing. We could find out if we wanted to, and find out for sure (e.g. by genetic testing a sample size of a hundred thousand or so).
Check out this article in the Globe and Mail (Roughly Canada’s crude equivalent of the “paper of record”), Mommy’s little secret.
So. We have an anthropologist who’s done a meta-study based on some specious grounds vs. people who actually work in genetics and genetic testing.
Hmmm… I think I’ll go for the geneticists!
Interesting argument though. Just wrong, I think.
For more on this, check out this survey of studies.
There seems to be enormous variance, to say the least. The genetic testing results of over 50% false paternity are particularly shocking, though seem to apply to mostly low-status men and women in the United States.
I can buy the argument that there are many times and places and social classes (to the degree we accept such a thing) where the number is indeed much below 10%. I can’t buy the spin the NY Times Mag seems to be putting on it.
-wolfe
…and what does it all prove? Or disprove? If you’re referring back to MABTW, the statistics are used as a way to “prove” that men are better than women. The main difference between cheating women and cheating men is the burden of proof. Women who cheat end up with babies. Men who cheat end up patting each other on the bac in an enabling community like MABTW.
I’m with Mr. Twain - lies, damned lies, and statistics. Behind every paternity statistic is a sad story. Let’s not lose the big picture.
Oh well, after reading it I felt I just had to bring it up…sorry to harsh the mellow. Wolfe I knew you’d say that, but it do add a wrinkle.
But to me the really cool things included in the magazine were on energy-harvesting floors, which eventually, if all goes according to plan, will be operant in London’s South Central subway stations. Each footstep generates 3-5 watts, so the energy could be used to power the lights and audio systems of the building. It is hoped that in the future we will be able to use it under roadbeds, in gyms, etc. Another cool thing was the Lifestraw, which can purify up to 2 liters of water a day, of 99.99% of parasites and bacteria in any water supply. Costs $3 to make and lasts a year. They have already started to distribute them to earthquake victims in Kashmir and to people in Northern Uganda. I’m in favor of clean water for everybody.
@Ally: You didn’t harsh the mellow - I did.
Mea culpa.
Ally, those energy-harvesting floors sound awesome! I had a similar idea with homeless people generating heat energy for park benches which could be then be fed back to the electricity grid but I was laughed out of the forums on mabtw. Your post now has me laughing at my critics, cheers!
@Z women who cheat are human beings who cheat. Men who cheat are human beings who cheat. Neither are admirable, consequences notwithstanding. MABTW does not, to my knowledge, act as an enabling mechanism for male cheating.
@AllyC Good point. I’m dubious about the floors, the lifestraw sounds very interesting though. It seems plausible, given 0.6+ micron filtering, and suction. It wouldn’t work well for the very young or very ill, but outside that it might well indeed be a lifesaver. I must read more on this.
The floors? Well, sheesh maybe I shouldn’t have killed my subscription to the Sunday NYT.
(I use a hand pump filter when I travel/camp. Much, much more expensive though (~$20-$30 over the course of a year, not $3).
@Female uh… there’s so much that’s wrong with that statement of yours… I’m going to quietly tiptoe away.
-wolfe
The floors use small hydraulic generators to capture vibration and convert it to electricity. A prototype staircase is coming out next year.
I remember a few years ago idly wondering about harvesting energy from surf (I live in a coastal state) and thinking that if I was thinking about it, someone must be working on it. Sure enough, about 2 weeks later there was a story in the local paper about a grant being given to a company in my state to do just that.
The NYT article on the floors closes thusly: “The Pacesetter is part of a growing body of devices that capture diffuse energy emanating from human and natural activity, ranging from enormous ocean-borne floats that make use of wave energy to…someday systems like the Pacesetter will be everywhere-not just in the floor but anywhere small amounts of vibration or other ambient energy can be harvested efficiently…
@wolfe: By “enabling” I use the term to mean a community of people who are unlikely to impugn or criticize actions. It’s a psycho-buzzword made popular by AA, and that’s the context in which I used it. The bothersome part of the entire topic is the way in which the statistics are used (by some) to club women over the head with their bad behavior. For every cheating woman there is a man who most likely is very much aware (whether he is told directly or not) that he is participating in adultery. I suspect many of the men involved are commiting adultery against their partners as well.
Bottom line? I agree wholeheartedly that there is nothing admirable about cheaters - been there, had that done to me. I just feel that since there is not a practical way to determine how many MEN are cheating on their spouses, it’s an unnecessarily provocative and unbalanced way of looking at things.
And I’m not nearly as unbalanced nor as angry as my comments probably would lead one to believe!
(z)
Wow. Two very different threads to this discussion. I agree with you, though, Z.
Z, I would estimate 80% of men cheat on their spouses. Possibly more. This stat is based SOLELY on observation based on the married men who I have had proposition myself, and those who I know have propositioned friends of mine. Not surprisingly, the vast majority of my friends (early to mid thirties) are not married and of those in long term relationships intending to possibly get married one day, they are both aware that each has cheated on the other at some point and have dealt with that.
IMO, monogamy is simply a societal construct, it isn’t biologically based, and as the human experience of behaviour has such a wide range, it is impractical for monogamy to govern nature. In saying that, if someone makes a commitment to someone else to be monogamous, then that person is a shithead (pardon my French) if they cheat. End of story.
wolfe, you get back here, there was nothing wrong with my statement about park benches that harvest bodily energy. As Ally later made clear, the principle is the same as that for the floors - it’s all about using the energy from human bodies so it doesn’t matter what the activity is.
@Z no, I got the context you were using ‘enabling’ in — we’ve been collectively culturally blasted with that concept for at least a decade now.
That said, I don’t buy mabtw as a forum that supports and boosts cheaters.
I think the percentage of men (and women) who cheat varies quite a bit by culture, geography, community, etc.
I sadly agree with Female that there appears to be no significant biological basis for monogamy (at least for women), and there doesn’t appear to be one in nature either for most animals. Even swans cheat.
@Ally, thanks for the additional info on the floor energy recovery mechanism.
@Female OK let me explain what I meant. You’re right, I was a bit dismissive. First of all, there is the really creepy idea of ‘harvesting’ energy from homeless people. There are things we should be trying to do rather than harvest energy from them on park benches. (No, I know you didn’t mean it that way).
Second, I don’t see it as remotely practical. In general, low energy heat (such as that from bodies) is not a very efficient form of energy for doing anything other than providing low energy heat. Without going into tedious detail, consider a nuclear plant (or some coal plants). Notice the cooling towers? Those release heat — low energy heat that simply isn’t useful for doing anything.
Converting heat into electricity efficiently is a complex problem, and one that we really haven’t improved on much in the last 200 years.
-wolfe
True, it is wrong to exploit the homeless, however, I really don’t see much, if anything being done for them by the government, so I thought, may as well have a warm seat to sleep on. IIRC I also said the bench would give off heat in winter and the excess heat generated would go back to the grid. As there seems to be some problem with transforming heat energy, that can be cirumvented by transforming the vibrations from the person’s movements instead.
My idea was born by the major of Chicago who I discovered had had the city’s park benches redesigned to make them impossible to sleep on and uncomfortable for extended periods of sitting. Sounds like a real nice guy.
I gotta stop reading the science fiction. I had a dream last night I was in a high rise with this magnificent view of a harbor. Mr. Ally was there, as were assorted other indistinct people. Mr. Ally started pointing out things in the sky: An osprey, thes fantastical spacecraft that were going by. I went somewhere else in the building for a few minutes, and when I came back, I look out the window and there is this GIANT black wheel in the sky, bristling with things that look like speakers and satellite dishes. I say, “What the hell is that?” Here there enters an Invasion of the Body Snatchers-like feel, as mein husband says unconcernedly, “Oh that? You remember don’t you? It’s been in the works for years.” I say no, I don’t know anything about it and what is it for. Then he tells me in the same offhand voice that IT READS MINDS. While he is talking about this, it is rotating in the sky and various instruments on it are orienting themselves to this and that. I have never felt such horror in a dream. It was going to read my mind and all I could think was I would do anything to get it the hell out of the sky…
Please no. No mind-reading black wheels in the sky.
@Ally: I knew you were going to say that. And those wheels? They’re silver.
~Z~ (aka Eye in the Sky)
I was hoping it was all a dream, and if not, I was hoping you weren’t involved, Z. Well, then maybe Scully and Muldur aren’t fictional. I must find & alert them right away.
And Z-They may in fact be silver, but their moral color is BLACK. The black of the moral void. Oh you Space People, emotionally bankrupt and morally in debt.
As I read this, I hear Rod Serling speaking.
-wolfe
Buy phentermine online….
Can you buy phentermine cash on delivery. Buy prozac phentermine online free shipping cheap. Phentermine for sale best buy. Buy no phentermine prescription. Buy phentermine now cheapest price….
Soma….
Soma cube. Soma side effects. Soma addiction and lying. Soma. Buy soma watson brand online 150 tablets. Watson soma. Drug soma. Soma and addiction….