Stockton’s
Comments
(group member since Jun 30, 2017)
Stockton’s
comments
from the A Very Short Reading Group group.
Showing 41-60 of 87
I do like a good podcast. I'll have to give Radiolab a try.
Sharing? That's dangerous talk... I did find the book very helpful in placing the current (apparent) divisions in American society in context, particularly the vehemence which some commentators react to perceived impingements on their liberty by either government or corporation. That this debate was one of the founding issues of the country, becoming part of its culture and ideology, is revealing in how entrenched it still is across the generations.
The first few chapters are very interesting, particularity in the difference between human language and the "sounds" other animals use to communicate. How these sounds became human language is a fascinating subject.
A couple of chapters in - plenty of interesting points. " For many linguists, their proper study is the structure of language as it now is, and it is presumptuous to suppose that we can understand how it evolved. But to think about the problem is at least a good way to appreciate what has made our species so remarkable." From chapter two it seems like the jury is still out on how language evolved.
Another interesting discussion for our September meeting. A very dense short introduction, packing in a lot of detail which really brought to light the intricacies, conflicts and contradictions of the U.S. Constitution. What stood out most was how culturally and emotionally significant the constitution is to the country, which can seem to outsiders as perhaps somewhat alien. This balance between power and liberty which was agonised and indeed fought over for centuries has far reaching effects in American society. Discussing the issues of civil rights and gun control, for example, in the context of the constitution was revealing, showing how aspects current attitudes and ideology have their roots in a document from over two hundred years ago. A very informative read and discussion.
Hi lisa_emily - We're delving into the U.S. Constitution for September. Should be a few talking points with this one!
One or two constitutional issues seem to be in the news at the moment... How well does this very short introduction deal with the "age-old antagonism in Western culture between power and liberty"? Any thoughts post them here!
Thank you for the comments – all very interesting points! At the group meeting on Tuesday there was general consensus that the book felt a little cluttered towards the beginning, with the author dotting around different cultures and times which made it a little difficult to follow. Once it got into the more analytical chapters things picked up. How fairy tales compare to biblical or other religious stories was a point raised, with the importance of interpretation of both stressed, which linked with the later chapters discussing feminist and psychoanalytic readings. We discussed whether we believed as children in these tales, or were captivated by them. Perhaps we are too much a group of grumpy realists but no one thought fairy tales had affected them to any great extent. This raised the question will fairy tales endure as it is only relatively recently that such story telling has been superseded by new forms – books, cinema, internet. The fact that the phrase “fairy tale” instantly creates a powerful mental image (castles, woods, trolls, witches, princesses etc) suggests that its legacy still has a long way to run.
...there was a very short introduction to Fairy Tales. Add your thoughts here!
Group consensus on Tuesday was that this was one of the better VSIs we’ve read so far. The science seemed to be well presented – perhaps a little heavy in places – getting the themes across to the layperson. It was probably outside of the scope of the book but a chapter on the more philosophical implications of alien life would have been welcomed. This was where discussion was most fruitful, with the big hypothetical questions generating plenty of discussion. If life was discovered elsewhere in the universe, would it alter what it means to be alive – the effect it would have on identity, religion, human psychology. Would there be a tremendous shift in how we see the world and operate in it knowing there is other life “out there”? Or would we just carry on as normal? Also, would anyone actually want alien life to exist? All dependent on whether a few bacterial blobs are discovered or an advanced interstellar civilisation, of course.
Fascinating comments and thank you for the puddle analogy - very useful! The group meets on the 31st so we'll see what thoughts people have about the book and the online discussion.
Good choice, thanks - We'll have that for August's discussion.
Hi - Welcome aboard and good luck with your VSI reading! There's no particular system for choosing a title. We try to avoid having two categories the same one after the other , but otherwise we're open to suggestions.
I think that was pretty much the group consensus yesterday. It was a very well written short introduction that had something of a page turning quality driven by the events of the Cold War. We talked about the different generational experiences of the Cold War, some with memories of the Cuban Missile Crisis others with only memories of the collapse of the USSR. The preponderance of “hot”wars during the cold war was remarked upon, with an alarming number of conflicts playing out US/USSR policies in the third world. It did seem as if none of the main players ever wanted to commence a nuclear war, with rivals repeatedly stepping to the brink and then backing down. This did however leave generations living with a constant background threat of nuclear annihilation for decades. Whether the threat has passed is open to debate, with states possibly less of a risk than organised groups or individuals gaining access to a nuclear warhead or two. Placing the period in the context of a response to the Second World War by traumatised nations was an insightful beginning to the book, and helped give a balanced view of both sides. A little more on Gorbachev’s background and the reaction to his polices within soviet Russia would have been useful. But, as ever, it’s a short introduction to a big subject. One delivered in a very accessible and intelligent way.
We'll have a whale of a time discussing it...
Lots of interesting points. Thanks both for the comments. The group meeting last week arrived at similar conclusions. As you say, one of the key difficulties is the problem of the human mind that works on timescales of, at most, decades, trying to solve a problem that is on a timescale of 100s if not 1000s of years. There’s also the difficulties instigating even small individual changes that could have a sizable cumulative effect. The plastic bag charge was one reasonably positive example cited. But finding a similar method to diminish the western world’s default use of the car, for example, seems less achievable. Most people felt that the book was a good primer on the subject and covered difficult ground fairly and clearly. A new edition would indeed be welcomed, considering the pace of research and developments in the subject.
Mixed reviews on this. From "great summary" to "an embarrassment to philosophy". Let's see what we make of this one.
... two contrasting opinions:"Its science is sound and its professional recommendations cover the ground"
"This book failed, I actually now have more understanding of the climate change deniers position"
Many thanks for your comment Nigel. At the group meeting last week the difficulties of having a spectrum to describe a condition was a major point of discussion. Such difficulties perhaps inevitably lead to debates between clinicians, parents and those who are able to advocate for themselves and articulate their experiences as autistic people. The line between difference and disability will vary depending on the person defining its position. Uta Frith clearly felt the need to state her position, focusing as she does on “classic and other severe cases of autism”. Which given her background and experience is understandable, but the book could perhaps have benefitted with more space the autistic voice. One interesting line of discussion, particularly in terms of currently legislation, was how far society has to accommodate the individual as opposed to how far the individual has to accommodate to society. Some people have been suggesting that rather than autism awareness week, autism acceptance week should be encouraged. Awareness can be the easy part, acceptance requires hard work on the part of society. Part of which could indeed be a role reversal to interrogate the realities and assumptions of neurotypicality.
