What Are You Reading Now? Showing 901-950 of 2,435

[Luffy Sempai]

I had begun The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values, for the 3rd time. It gets very colloquial by midway, which I prefer.

[Charles]

I have just finished The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco which I found quite difficult as he has a tendency to ramble of on a tangent but I stuck with it, although not one of my best reads.
I am currently reading The Silk Roads: A History of the Great Trading Routes Between East and West by Georgie Torr. Not a novel but a documentary of the historical trades routes from the West to the East in search of silks and spices.

[Lynn, New School Classics]

Pharmacdon wrote: "I am reading A Bell for Adano by John Hersey. It won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 1945."

I have often thought I would like to read that one. Thanks for the reminder.

[Dave]

I have finished The Mauritius Command by Patrick O’Brian

[Terry]

Pharmacdon, i also have this book on my TBR. What do you think of it? Thanks.

[Pharmacdon]

Terry wrote: "Pharmacdon, i also have this book on my TBR. What do you think of it? Thanks."

I really enjoyed reading it. It is mostly about the foibles of American soldiers and namely, Major Joppolo, dealing with the local population of Adano. And the townspeople are getting used to the American occupation. It is a warm-hearted and poignant book.

[Eric]

Currently reading Great Expectations

I tried this when I was younger and couldn't get into it. Now I find the heavy sarcasm and comedy in it and it makes more sense to me. I think its much better to come to most of these classics later in life.

Then again, I just finished The Old Man and the Sea and felt that one would have been better to read when younger.

[Luffy Sempai]

I completed Moral Landscape yesterday, but couldn't be bothered to write a review for what seems to be the fourth time reading it. Would give it 4 stars unlike the previous perfect scores.

I am being also very disappointed in Age of Myth. The lame attempts to create twists are not agreeing with me. Will give this book 2 chapters to try to pull me back. Sorry for not bringing positivity to the table.

[Dave]

I finished An Occurence at Owl Creek Bridge and started The Awakening and Clarissa, or, the History of a Young Lady.

[Darren]

I am reading both Cora Sandel's Alberta & Freedom, and Henry Miller's Tropic Of Cancer, which coincidentally are both set in Paris in the late 1920's...
however, I think Alberta and Henry move in somewhat different circles!

[Dave]

I have started The Odyssey, Robert Fagles’’ translation, in preparation for reading Ulysses by Joyce later this Summer.

[Dave]

I started Middlemarch by George Eliot.

[Kevin]

Just finished Life on the Mississippi

[Dave]

I finished The Awakening by Kate Chopin and started Lincoln in the Bardo by George Saunders.

[[deleted user]]

Just finished Sister Carrie by Theodore Dreiser (1900) and enjoyed it very much! In the final pages I found a book recommendation:

In her comfortable chambers at the Waldorf, Carrie was reading at this time "Pere Goriot," which Ames had recommended to her. It was so strong, and Ames's mere recommendation had so aroused her interest, that she caught nearly the full sympathetic significance of it.

[Gavin]

Currently reading Song of Susannah

[Wreade1872]

Finished Mrs. Dalloway by Virginia Woolf [4/5] review very well constructed but not the most satisfying.
The annotations on my copy didn't help as it meant i had no idea where the end was and so hit it suddenly with a splat :lol .
Having read The Second Sex recently did add a different perspective on a number of the characters.

Anyway still reading West with the Night and just started The Player of Games by Iain M.Banks .

[Luffy Sempai]

I have read Uncle Vanya by the one and only Anton Chekhov.

This is my review.

[Dave]

I finished Treasure Island by R.L. Stevenson

[Tony]

Dave wrote: "I finished Treasure Island by R.L. Stevenson"

I LOVED that book! Great choice!

[Dave]

I started Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood.

[J_BlueFlower]

I recently read/heard the short story Katania by Lara Vapnyar. It is a free online story and part of the New Yorker Fiction Podcast series.

The story is absolutely excellent. It is a full novel in the form of a short story with all the unneeded cut away. I heard it as the audiobook/podcast version and the discussion afterwards pointed out several things I had not noticed. One of the best afterwards-discussions.

Link to podcast
https://www.newyorker.com/podcast/fic...

Thank you to the person who pointed me to the New Yorker Fiction Podcast series.

[J_BlueFlower]

Currently I am very happy with reading A History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russell. It will likely be 5 stars from me.

Russell often comment with his own opinion and critics of the ideas presented in a witty way. Try this one:

"The distinction between reality and appearance cannot have the consequences attributed to it by Parmenides and Plato and Hegel. If appearance really appears, it is not nothing, and is therefore part of reality; this is an argument of the correct Parmenidean sort. If appearance does not really appear, why trouble our heads about it? But perhaps some one will say: “Appearance does not really appear, but it appears to appear.” This will not help, for we shall ask again: “Does it really appear to appear, or only apparently appear to appear?” Sooner or later, if appearance is even to appear to appear, we must reach something that really appears, and is therefore part of reality. "
(Chapter XV. The Theory of Ideas)

It is funny and he proves a point at the same time.

We need to read some Bertrand Russell. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1950. These would be good candidates for a short nomination:
What I Believe or An Outline of Intellectual Rubbish: A Hilarious Catalogue of Organized and Individual Stupidity

Looking around I have seen both these (and Why I Am Not a Christian) as good places to start. People also point to A History of Western Philosophy.

[Kevin]

J_BlueFlower wrote: "Currently I am very happy with reading A History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russell. It will likely be 5 stars from me.

Russell often comment with his own opini..."

I agree. I read A History of Western Philosophy in college. I would be interested in reading more Bertrand Russell.

[[deleted user]]

Bertrand Russell wrote: "The distinction between reality and appearance cannot have the consequences attributed to it by Parmenides and Plato and Hegel.[...]"

More recently (see G. Reale in Sulla natura. Frammenti e testimonianze), some scholars propose a new translation of Parmenides' fragments and an alternative reading, compared to what was customarily understood to be his doctrine on nature (reality). Parmenides might have accepted as correct, real, also the "third way", that of doxa (general opinion, but also appearance).

There's a nice interview on YouTube where Russell explains how smoking saved his life...

[Luffy Sempai]

Fed wrote: "There's a nice interview on YouTube where Russell explains how smoking saved his life..."

Then halitosis isn't his only bad trait.

[Pillsonista]

Russell was as much a believer as any faithful religious adherent. It's just that his "God" (or "god") was reason and rationality. He's fascinating to read because he was as superstitious in his own way as any hagiographer.

This was equally true of his great admirer and greatest evangelist, Christopher Hitchens.

[J_BlueFlower]

Pillsonista wrote: "he was as superstitious in his own way..."

What I have seen so far, he seem thoughtful and reasoning. Can you give an example?

In the introduction he places philosophy as the space between science and religion. I would guess "believing" only belongs in religion, and not in science or philosophy. But maybe actually reading "What I Believe", will make that clear?

[Pillsonista]

J_BlueFlower wrote: "Pillsonista wrote: "he was as superstitious in his own way..."

What I have seen so far, he seem thoughtful and reasoning. Can you give an example?

In the introduction he places philosophy as the ..."

Yes, because I was actually thinking of What I Believe and Why I am Not a Christian when I wrote that.

Here's the thing. If philosophers are truly committed to honestly assessing the lives of human beings in the mass (to steal Clive James's very useful phrase), then one cannot avoid the truism that we human beings are simply not rational creatures.

Our lives are lived through the prism of barely-governable emotions, subjugated to the fiat of utterly stupendous and irrational forces (Mother Nature). We do not live our lives according to the scientific method and couldn't, even if we wanted to. Civilization affords those who live in technologically advanced societies the veneer of control. But all it takes is one powerful storm for levies to collapse or one economic depression to incentivize mass murder. Civilization and technology begin with an act of faith that we can subdue forces beyond our control.

Religions are not irrational, they are its opposite. They are attempts to explain that which is totally inexplicable and uncontrollable. Science may explain 'the how' of natural phenomena, but it will never explain, beyond the mechanistic, *why* something occurs. Rationally, we do not need to know 'the whys' of things (remember what every parent has said at some point when their child has asked "Why?": "Because I said so"). But spiritually? Spiritually, we never, ever stop searching for that. We may never find the answers, but the search for it is something profoundly, irreparably innate to what we are.

So Russell's emphasis on rationality and reason, in an existence that is dictated by external and internal forces that are nothing of the kind, is itself just as superstitious as any belief in spirits. Are rationality and reason often useful and productive? Certainly. But so is religion. To give meaning and purpose to an existence that is so often imperiled by suffering, hardship, and which inexorably, inevitably ends in death, is profoundly useful, if not downright utilitarian.

[Dave]

I am reading Alice in Wonderland.

[Lynn, New School Classics]

Pillsonista wrote: "J_BlueFlower wrote: "Pillsonista wrote: "he was as superstitious in his own way..."

What I have seen so far, he seem thoughtful and reasoning. Can you give an example?

In the introduction he plac..."



I hear what you are saying Pillsonista. Many religious writers speak of knowing God through the twin faculties of faith and reason. I have not read Russell except excerpts in a Philosophy 101 class I took in college decades ago. Hmmm rationality and reason as a twist on the theologians' faith and reason?

[Wreade1872]

Michael wrote: "I am currently reading:

Strata by Terry Pratchett"

I found Strata pretty hard to picture but some interesting tid-bits for Pratchett fans.

Currently reading The Player of Games by Iain M.Banks which i'm not really enjoying, for no particularly discernable reasons.
And just started The Bloody Chamber & Other Stories by Angela Carter.

[J_BlueFlower]

Pillsonista wrote: "So Russell's emphasis on rationality and reason, .... is .... as superstitious as any belief in spirits."

It is difficult for me to talk about a text I haven’t read. I only know Russell from A History of Western Philosophy. But here it seem to me that you use “superstitious” in such a broad sense that almost anything can be called “superstitious”. According to The Cambridge Dictionary “superstitious“ means based on or believing in superstitions (= beliefs based on old ideas about luck and magic rather than science or reason)
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dict...

Have you read both What I Believe and Why I am Not a Christian? Would you suggest reading one of them? Or maybe even like to nominate one? (I can guarantee a second.)

[[deleted user]]

Lynn wrote: "...Hmmm rationality and reason as a twist on the theologians' faith and reason?"

Two books coming to mind (from a scientist's perspective): Why God Won't Go Away: Brain Science and the Biology of Belief and Neurotheology: How Science Can Enlighten Us about Spirituality (the latter being the manifesto of a new discipline more than anything else).

[Klowey]

Pillsonista wrote: "J_BlueFlower wrote: "Pillsonista wrote: "he was as superstitious in his own way..."

What I have seen so far, he seem thoughtful and reasoning. Can you give an example?

In the introduction he plac..."

I thought this book was good Why We Believe in God(s): A Concise Guide to the Science of Faith.

[Dave]

I finished Swans Way by Proust and The Two Towers by Tolkien.

[Dave]

I finished The Boy at the Door by Alex Dahl.

[Janice]

Dave wrote: "I am reading Alice in Wonderland."

I love Alice in Wonderland <3

[Lynn, New School Classics]

Fed wrote: "Lynn wrote: "...Hmmm rationality and reason as a twist on the theologians' faith and reason?"

Two books coming to mind (from a scientist's perspective): [book:Why God Won't Go Away: Brain Science ..."

Thank you for the recommendations.

[Dave]

I finished “Alice in Wonderland” and Can You Forgive Her? by Anthony Trollope.

[Reed]

Wrath of Poseidon by Clive Cussler

[Pharmacdon]

I am reading The Member of the Wedding by Carson McCullers.

[Luffy Sempai]

I have finally finished reading Le deuxième sexe, I by Simone de Beauvoir , and I am embarrassed to say, I kept referring it as Le second sexe:-

If you can read my review that will be great:-

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

[Savita]

I am reading Crime and Punishment by Dostoevsky . I have read a little over a 100 pages so far . This author has a very powerful and brilliant pen . The descriptions of people and events are amazing ! But this book has to be read slowly , otherwise the literary pearls may be missed !

[Carter Reads Classics]

Savita I agree. I’m reading Gargatua and pantagruel. But I’m reading a reading guide to it before to increase my comprehension and it sucks. I’d rather just read the book straight away

[Leona]

Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea

[Darren]

I just started The Betrothed by Alessandro Manzoni

this is from the introduction:

"If Dickens had written only one novel, and there had been no Fielding or Thackeray; if his novel had foreshadowed the theme of a successful national liberation movement and had had a profound, lasting and beneficial effect on the English language; then we would have a book that would stand out in our literature in the same way that The Betrothed does in Italy."

[[deleted user]]

Darren wrote: "I just started The Betrothed by Alessandro Manzoni. If Dickens..."

To complete the hypothetical analogy, that book by Dickens should also be imposed – multiple times at different ages – upon generations of children and discussed to death in school classes, so that many students would eventually come to hate it and generations of adults to have mixed feelings about title and author. (Sorry if that starts sounding a bit like Brave New World). But after some time and some healing, it does happen that some people eventually manage to fully appreciate the book and its import again. Indeed, five hundred years after Dante Alighieri, Alessandro Manzoni is considered the second father of Italian language.

[Valentina]

I’m reading Notes from Underground by Fyodor Dostoevesky right now. I’m still early on but I really enjoy the writing and translation. The main character reminds me of a Camus character, maybe from The Fall.

Anything I should keep in mind as I read? When I’m done I have an 8-book long to-be-read. What should I read next?

Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man
Wind Up Bird Chronicles
Dirty Work
The Trial
People of the Whale
Flowers for Algernon
Kite Runner

Thanks!

[Savita]

Carter wrote: "Savita I agree. I’m reading Gargatua and pantagruel. But I’m reading a reading guide to it before to increase my comprehension and it sucks. I’d rather just read the book straight away"

Yes , I suppose , Carter , it is a bit tedious to have to read a guide first , but I suppose if the book is very renowned it will be worth the effort ? I hope you'll enjoy the journey !