4 ms·

So people say; I usually have a pretty high tolerance when it comes to difficult books, but just couldn't keep my eyes open trying to read this one. Maybe I sh

by codr7 3y ago

So people say; I usually have a pretty high tolerance when it comes to difficult books, but just couldn't keep my eyes open trying to read this one. Maybe I should give it another try...

lxe 3y ago
I'm also struggling with it despite having it on my bookshelf for a while. Not an easy read. It's cited and referred to all over the place, so maybe it's worth getting through it.
- Vecr 3y ago
  I've only read a few pages around a couple of cited parts, just to make sure the citing author is not just making things up. It's too long otherwise.
hobs 3y ago
I would say give yourself license to skip some stuff, the parable stuff (for instance) is either super fun or a chore, depending on the mood you are in. A lot of the Achilles stuff is more akin to poetry instead of an illuminating guide.
tetris11 3y ago
Same. It has the exact same junior high-school giddiness of excitement as The Martian, another book that I just couldn't tonally work my way through. I don't mind books that explain concepts in fun ways, but I do find it jarring if I'm being treated like a child with an overbearing parent, telling me why I should be excited about something instead of just telling the story and letting me feel how I want to feel about it.
OldGuyInTheClub 3y ago
I share your experience and I've tried it three times. Couldn't get through any of his Metamagical Themas articles in Scientific American, either. I thought he was in love with writing, not communicating, and didn't want to remove a word once he'd put it down.
- nightowl_games 3y ago
  That exactly describes my view on his writing. I was struggling to articulate it in another comment that I drafted.
munificent 3y ago
There's a point in the middle where he's building a foundation of formal systems that's a real slog. If you push through that, it gets progressively more interesting.
perrygeo 3y ago
I wanted to love this book. I understood the concepts and found them legitimately thought provoking - I just disliked the writing style. He uses elaborate metaphors, strained socratic dialogue, peppered with cultural references and visual cues... and relatively few paragraphs actually articulating the core ideas. I only understood Godel's incompleteness theorem when I looked it up elsewhere. It's like he focused entirely on the mystical "look how deep all this stuff is..." story and forgot to actually explain the subject at hand.

by codr7 3y ago

So people say; I usually have a pretty high tolerance when it comes to difficult books, but just couldn't keep my eyes open trying to read this one. Maybe I should give it another try...

lxe 3y ago

I'm also struggling with it despite having it on my bookshelf for a while. Not an easy read. It's cited and referred to all over the place, so maybe it's worth getting through it.

Vecr 3y ago
I've only read a few pages around a couple of cited parts, just to make sure the citing author is not just making things up. It's too long otherwise.

hobs 3y ago

I would say give yourself license to skip some stuff, the parable stuff (for instance) is either super fun or a chore, depending on the mood you are in. A lot of the Achilles stuff is more akin to poetry instead of an illuminating guide.

tetris11 3y ago

Same. It has the exact same junior high-school giddiness of excitement as The Martian, another book that I just couldn't tonally work my way through. I don't mind books that explain concepts in fun ways, but I do find it jarring if I'm being treated like a child with an overbearing parent, telling me why I should be excited about something instead of just telling the story and letting me feel how I want to feel about it.

OldGuyInTheClub 3y ago

I share your experience and I've tried it three times. Couldn't get through any of his Metamagical Themas articles in Scientific American, either. I thought he was in love with writing, not communicating, and didn't want to remove a word once he'd put it down.

nightowl_games 3y ago
That exactly describes my view on his writing. I was struggling to articulate it in another comment that I drafted.

munificent 3y ago

There's a point in the middle where he's building a foundation of formal systems that's a real slog. If you push through that, it gets progressively more interesting.

perrygeo 3y ago

I wanted to love this book. I understood the concepts and found them legitimately thought provoking - I just disliked the writing style. He uses elaborate metaphors, strained socratic dialogue, peppered with cultural references and visual cues... and relatively few paragraphs actually articulating the core ideas. I only understood Godel's incompleteness theorem when I looked it up elsewhere. It's like he focused entirely on the mystical "look how deep all this stuff is..." story and forgot to actually explain the subject at hand.