3 ms·
Every socially awkward person who obsesses about their intellect is an in-depth explainer of Goedel, Escher, Bach. It's a fun read, and clever enough, but the r
by JasonFruit 4y ago
Every socially awkward person who obsesses about their intellect is an in-depth explainer of Goedel, Escher, Bach. It's a fun read, and clever enough, but the relation between the work of the three is pretty shallow, and if you understand only what the book contains, you haven't gotten very deep into their valuable work. The book is more an act of self-indulgence on the author's part, or at best a tribute to the brilliance of his subjects, than a profound intellectual achievement in itself.
- svat 4y ago> The book is more an act of self-indulgence on the author's part That's precisely what it is. And what makes it valuable too: such works of blatant self-indulgence are not very common in mathematics (at least, while remaining enjoyable to read). > than a profound intellectual achievement in itself Sure. I would call the book an artistic achievement in the intellectual realm: it talks about ideas, but is art. To put it another way: everyone knows "mathematics is not a spectator sport" — this is usually said in the sense of "you can't learn mathematics unless you do it yourself", which is true enough, but it's also a loss in the sense that there's no equivalent of sitting back and watching a game, watching someone play with ideas and do mathematics. This book comes close. How good the quality of the game is, and whether you'll learn anything from watching the game, is debatable (probably not much), but the experience itself is unusual, which makes the existence of this book a happy circumstance.
- mhneu 4y agoAgree (on sentence 2 and 3.) Gödel, Escher, Bach doesn't go very deep.