6 ms·

An intellectual starter kit

20 points by Bostonian 4y ago

fs111 4y ago
step 1: Be rich and have a lot of time on your hands
- sandworm101 4y ago
  Step 2: instead of apending your time and money helping others or solving problems, spend it alone in a room reading old books to make yourself feel smart. Intellectualism is great, but can easily become a selfish activity.
  - gonzo41 4y ago
    Step 3: When you do see people, and they talk about their problems. Offer them books, and say "You must read this, it will change everything"
    - Cthulhu_ 4y ago
      "Have you tried mindfulness?"
- telesilla 4y ago
  Or be time-rich, so maybe poor-and have a library card. Edit: from the replies, the library of my youth is not as common as I imagined, or no longer exists
  - sandworm101 4y ago
    I visited a library last year looking for a book. Of the many lost souls saw there, none were reading. Libraries have changed.
    - Cthulhu_ 4y ago
      I've browsed libraries in recent years, I can't help but think "Where are all the books?". There were a lot of fairly low shelves but... it wasn't inviting at all to browse the books or sit and read. If I ever get filthy rich (low chance lmao) I'd build a traditional library, organize book clubs / reading lists, the works. Make it a social hub of sorts.
  - Cthulhu_ 4y ago
    The ability to read and have intellectual pursuits is, unfortunately, a lot lower on the Maslow scale than home/food; I mean if you live in a socialist country where you don't have to worry about these things if you're out of a job that's great, but most (western) countries no longer have these safety nets, or if they do exist they're inadequate.
  - twiceaday 4y ago
    time-rich is a great term. I'm surprised I haven't heard it from the FIRE community.
- Bostonian 4y ago
  Lots of people, both rich and non-rich, spend a lot of time on their phones and watching TV that could be used to read instead. It's a choice.
leto_ii 4y ago
I've come across this kind of advice many times and I've learned to identify it for what it is: a recipe for a boring and ossified intellectual life. What works best, I think, is to go with what deeply interests you while periodically challenging yourself with things that are out of your comfort zone. This way you can start anywhere - in my case it was Harry Potter, but it can be anything else: LOTR, Stephen King, anything. A possible progression would look smth like: Harry Potter -> the Hobbit -> LOTR -> A Song of Ice and Fire etc. Each step is a bit more challenging than the previous. Once you get to ASOIAF the world is your oyster: you can focus on history, sociology etc. Always challenge yourself, always approach things critically, always pursue things that spark your curiosity, not some static list of "great books". With enough time you'll get to some of the great books anyway, but you'll do it in a way that makes sense for you. Also, use books as tools, make notes, fold pages etc. Buy cheap paperbacks, use them, re-use them. Become a professional learner, not a coffee-table "intellectual" full of other people's pre-digested ideas.
tristor 4y ago
I'm surprised this got flagged, and at the nature of some of the comments in this thread. The advice in the article is good with several high quality recommendations of specific places to begin getting up to speed with a grasp of current Western thought. I'd add a recommendation to read "What Does It All Mean?" By Thomas Nagel, and then first "The Problems of Philosophy" and then if you find yourself wanting to dig deeper "The History of Western Philosophy" both by Bertrand Russell. Being an intellectual isn't all navel-gazing, it's the necessary foundation to being able to properly communicate and wrestle with your own ideas. It's something that provides the underlying structure and skillset necessary to be a good thinker and good communicator, both of which will serve you well in your career and your relationships. It is not, as some other commenter put it, "to make yourself feel smart". I am frankly a bit shocked to find anti-intellectualism to abound on Hacker News of all places. The core of intellectualism is curiosity, the same driving force behind the hacker spirit, and intellectualism at its base is closely aligned to the hacker ethos.
msie 4y ago
Surprised to find an article like this in the Republican rag National Review. But it’s a way to soften its image I guess. While I am browsing this article I am listening to a Chicago news channel (WGN) recount the lives of the Highland shooting victims. “An Intellectual Starter Kit”? - Im just shaking my head at anti-gun control “intellectuals”.
- rayiner 4y ago
  What’s the need for scare quotes around “intellectual?” The founding fathers were anti gun-control “intellectuals”: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed46.asp https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed46.asp (“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes.”). But it might be time to acknowledge that the “Americans” the founders were talking about are a dead people that no longer exist. After all, more households in the 1950s had guns than today, but mass shootings were unheard of. Society is very different today and maybe that makes the Constitution obsolete. As James Madison wrote, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Maybe we’re no longer such people and can no longer be trusted with the responsibilities the Constitution requires of us. In that case gun control makes total sense.
  - a4a4a4a4 4y ago
    > Maybe we’re no longer such people and can no longer be trusted with the responsibilities the Constitution requires of us. In that case gun control makes total sense. The problem is, how do you determine who can be trusted and who not? Let's take NY for example. If I would move to upstate NY, I cannot possess or shoot a handgun for the next 4-10 years depending on the county application procedures (because of arbitrary rules related to how long you've lived in the county, number of references, how long they've lived there, how long they've known you, etc). On paper, I'm the "perfect" person to allow to buy guns (if you're going to allow anyone to buy them): good job, stable relationships, no criminal record, no kids in the house, no mental health issues/records, good education, and extensive existing firearms training. If someone with my "profile" is, in effect, prevented from buying guns, then which regular citizens should be allowed to buy them? What more can the approving body (government) really ask for before the process is considered insane or abusive?

20 points by Bostonian 4y ago

fs111 4y ago

step 1: Be rich and have a lot of time on your hands

sandworm101 4y ago
Step 2: instead of apending your time and money helping others or solving problems, spend it alone in a room reading old books to make yourself feel smart. Intellectualism is great, but can easily become a selfish activity.
- gonzo41 4y ago
  Step 3: When you do see people, and they talk about their problems. Offer them books, and say "You must read this, it will change everything"
  - Cthulhu_ 4y ago
    "Have you tried mindfulness?"
telesilla 4y ago
Or be time-rich, so maybe poor-and have a library card. Edit: from the replies, the library of my youth is not as common as I imagined, or no longer exists
- sandworm101 4y ago
  I visited a library last year looking for a book. Of the many lost souls saw there, none were reading. Libraries have changed.
  - Cthulhu_ 4y ago
    I've browsed libraries in recent years, I can't help but think "Where are all the books?". There were a lot of fairly low shelves but... it wasn't inviting at all to browse the books or sit and read. If I ever get filthy rich (low chance lmao) I'd build a traditional library, organize book clubs / reading lists, the works. Make it a social hub of sorts.
- Cthulhu_ 4y ago
  The ability to read and have intellectual pursuits is, unfortunately, a lot lower on the Maslow scale than home/food; I mean if you live in a socialist country where you don't have to worry about these things if you're out of a job that's great, but most (western) countries no longer have these safety nets, or if they do exist they're inadequate.
- twiceaday 4y ago
  time-rich is a great term. I'm surprised I haven't heard it from the FIRE community.
Bostonian 4y ago
Lots of people, both rich and non-rich, spend a lot of time on their phones and watching TV that could be used to read instead. It's a choice.

leto_ii 4y ago

I've come across this kind of advice many times and I've learned to identify it for what it is: a recipe for a boring and ossified intellectual life. What works best, I think, is to go with what deeply interests you while periodically challenging yourself with things that are out of your comfort zone. This way you can start anywhere - in my case it was Harry Potter, but it can be anything else: LOTR, Stephen King, anything. A possible progression would look smth like: Harry Potter -> the Hobbit -> LOTR -> A Song of Ice and Fire etc. Each step is a bit more challenging than the previous. Once you get to ASOIAF the world is your oyster: you can focus on history, sociology etc. Always challenge yourself, always approach things critically, always pursue things that spark your curiosity, not some static list of "great books". With enough time you'll get to some of the great books anyway, but you'll do it in a way that makes sense for you. Also, use books as tools, make notes, fold pages etc. Buy cheap paperbacks, use them, re-use them. Become a professional learner, not a coffee-table "intellectual" full of other people's pre-digested ideas.

tristor 4y ago

I'm surprised this got flagged, and at the nature of some of the comments in this thread. The advice in the article is good with several high quality recommendations of specific places to begin getting up to speed with a grasp of current Western thought. I'd add a recommendation to read "What Does It All Mean?" By Thomas Nagel, and then first "The Problems of Philosophy" and then if you find yourself wanting to dig deeper "The History of Western Philosophy" both by Bertrand Russell. Being an intellectual isn't all navel-gazing, it's the necessary foundation to being able to properly communicate and wrestle with your own ideas. It's something that provides the underlying structure and skillset necessary to be a good thinker and good communicator, both of which will serve you well in your career and your relationships. It is not, as some other commenter put it, "to make yourself feel smart". I am frankly a bit shocked to find anti-intellectualism to abound on Hacker News of all places. The core of intellectualism is curiosity, the same driving force behind the hacker spirit, and intellectualism at its base is closely aligned to the hacker ethos.

msie 4y ago

Surprised to find an article like this in the Republican rag National Review. But it’s a way to soften its image I guess. While I am browsing this article I am listening to a Chicago news channel (WGN) recount the lives of the Highland shooting victims. “An Intellectual Starter Kit”? - Im just shaking my head at anti-gun control “intellectuals”.

rayiner 4y ago
What’s the need for scare quotes around “intellectual?” The founding fathers were anti gun-control “intellectuals”: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed46.asp https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed46.asp (“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes.”). But it might be time to acknowledge that the “Americans” the founders were talking about are a dead people that no longer exist. After all, more households in the 1950s had guns than today, but mass shootings were unheard of. Society is very different today and maybe that makes the Constitution obsolete. As James Madison wrote, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Maybe we’re no longer such people and can no longer be trusted with the responsibilities the Constitution requires of us. In that case gun control makes total sense.
- a4a4a4a4 4y ago
  > Maybe we’re no longer such people and can no longer be trusted with the responsibilities the Constitution requires of us. In that case gun control makes total sense. The problem is, how do you determine who can be trusted and who not? Let's take NY for example. If I would move to upstate NY, I cannot possess or shoot a handgun for the next 4-10 years depending on the county application procedures (because of arbitrary rules related to how long you've lived in the county, number of references, how long they've lived there, how long they've known you, etc). On paper, I'm the "perfect" person to allow to buy guns (if you're going to allow anyone to buy them): good job, stable relationships, no criminal record, no kids in the house, no mental health issues/records, good education, and extensive existing firearms training. If someone with my "profile" is, in effect, prevented from buying guns, then which regular citizens should be allowed to buy them? What more can the approving body (government) really ask for before the process is considered insane or abusive?