I'd say that even for more practical persons, skipping the historical parts would be partly missing the point. As a practical person myself, I enjoyed the less-

I'd say that even for more practical persons, skipping the historical parts would be partly missing the point. As a practical person myself, I enjoyed the less-obvious works much more because they show a different way of thinking and so you'll learn things that you wouldn't otherwise even think about. Some of the more practical/analytical writings are just like more computer science formalisms, except that they are less believable. I'm sure there is a lot of good things there too, but I personally prefer things that are a bit further from my daily job! (Aside, there is one chapter on "The Bayesian approach" in the 3rd edition of "What is this thing called science", so that one might be a good entry-point for this topic too.)