Books that changed the way you think

Post books that have fundamentally changed the way you think and have affected your day-to-day life, pragmatically speaking.

I'll start.

Thinking, Fast and Slow, a book on cognitive biases and behavioral economics), has taught me to assess real-life probabilities more carefully (since our intuition isn't that good) and to reconsider my purchasing habits. It also contains some of the most practical advice on gaining happiness that I have not seen elsewhere.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=UGJQPkfwlAc
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring#Focusing_effect
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Cognitive biases don't exist

If I could get everyone to read one book it would be this one. It illustrates where and how pretty much everyone gets science wrong, and how you, as an individual, are affected by this.

It will turn you into such a sceptic you'll never be able to read a newspaper or go to a doctor again without feeling dubious.

This had a big effect on me when I was younger.

This is still the best book I've ever read. It doesn't really change your perspective, but whenever I'm having a conversation about any area of science, this book has served me well in providing related facts and stories.

This book makes me stop and think about how judgemental I am. Makes me believe the hippies were right about just getting along. Overcoming jealousy and realising you are only jealous because of your self hate.

This is an introduction to leading a simple life. I've since read more on the topic but this definitely made me realise I don't need 90% of the shit I have and that I can achieve happiness through non-material things.

yes that is a good one
if you haven't already read them have a look at his other books, bad pharma and i think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that which is a collection of his journalism

also if you liked bad science you'll probably like pic related

Pragmatically speaking, thought doesn't make you change but change makes you think. Changing your thoughts will change the way you think. What's the impetus for change? Is it the book? Or is it you? Books read you. cue in free will vs determinism

I put it down half way, is it worth finishing?

oh fuck off ya pseud

...

Yeah Bad Pharma is also good, although most of it is an expansion on the points made in Bad Science.

Really made me hate the way government regulated drugs more than anything. Which reminds me, pic related made me hate the way government does anything.

Side note: Simon Singh's the Code Book is the best introduction to cryptography. If you're at all interested in computer security, even modern stuff, start here.

Is this Red Pill material or a bit more scholarly? ADL calls it antisemetic but they suffer with victim complex.

It's *the* redpill. And it's a very scholarly work, not to mention one of the most important books ever written.

Fair enough. I'll add this to the list.

Ever wondered why everyone knows what Hitler did, what the gas chambers were, and how many Jews were killed in WW2, yet the average person knows very little about Stalin, Mao, communist Russia/China and the death toll in other genocides? Why does Hollywood produce so many Holocaust movies? Why Jews today still feel like they need reparations because of what happened in Germany almost a century ago, even though they're the most powerful group of people in the world?

I don't think it is even that clever, but I will still have to say this. It introduced me to some philosophers and the field of complex systems.
Besides this, psychology and political science with biological underpinnings, like the book Predisposed.

...

pop sci "FIFTY WAYZ 2 REWIRE UR BRAIN!!" and the drugstore paperbacks of economics
summer is in full swing

Reading David Hume's Enquiry made me understand the point of philosophy. Before then, I just thought it was just the ramblings of intelligent people, and it sounds that way when you look at any watered down explanations. Then I read Hume and both found myself viscerally agreeing and disagreeing with what he had to say, only to realize that there was a whole unexplored world ahead of me, and I hadn't even begun to be able to justify why.

youtube.com/watch?v=UGJQPkfwlAc

Good, now read Descartes to see where Hume is coming from, and Kant to see where his thought goes.

Dubs confirm the most powerful book of all time

...

Second dubs reaffirm.

Really comes together well unless you have a massive problem with misogynistic free love.

It is better to read original papers but popsci can be good in the sense that it brings it all together, and the quality differs between books
I've found some excellent textbooks but introductory textbooks tend to be boring and most of it you can find on Wikipedia and so on and so on

Already did a long time ago.

You are unironically comparing the lifetime work of a Nobel Prize winner to BuzzFeed articles. Amazing contribution.

Care to explain why? I've read secondary texts on Hegel and found it to not be of any contemporary relevance.

about philosophy; very much mindfucked right now. I guess I think I don't wana think about it too much, the concept of good n bad n a Gods play in it, just that God knows what is good because he says what's good and bad , and u either do what he says or u can choose to create ur own views of good and bad, they are not necessarily wrong just a different perspective.

Doesn't every book change the way you think in some degree?
What's more important is to take something from everything you read.

By the sheer amount of stupidity in your post I assume you're one of those shills that keeps creating anti-Hegel threads. Fuck off.

In my experience not everything sticks, maybe its because they are not relevant to the information already inwebbed into my brain and no connections are being made, but that's a load of neurobabble
There are certain books that tend to stick, there are certain books I've completely or mostly forgot

Some books give me a kind of pleasant rush, while others never do
I imagine that what you said is to some extent true though, and we might not be able to consciously access all of that is imprinted into our brains

literally my niggas

...

Not me but I expect the reason people post those threads is because nobody has yet been able to explain why his ideas worth shit.

Then instead of reading secondary sources and Veeky Forums posts actually fucking read him, you stupid faggot.

can i get a quick rundown on these

hahahahaha

You call me stupid but you can't seem to grasp the simple notion that people aren't going to spend their money and time reading something just because you tell them.

Reviews, ratings and recommendations exist for a reason. Some angry fat fuck from the internet is not going to convince me to pick up a book when everyone else consider it a waste of time.

democracy was a mistake

Senpai-san, stick with your plan and ignore the Hegelboo, he writes nasty and is probably a tankie as well
You read for yourself not to impress others desu

what type of name is Ben Goldacre? Is he like a forest jew?

Hegel should have been tried for crimes against humanity.

I hate Hegel so Goddamn much.

>brainlets who can't understand all philosophy avenge themselves on hegel

Bad Science: don't trust anyone when it comes to science, not even medical literature. We don't know shit about medicine and it's pretty much a bunch of companies trying to sell you crap you don't need.

It's your problem then, but don't come here arguing about Hegel this or that if you never read him.

It's clear by now that there is a group of posters that consider Hegel's philosophy very dangerous for their ideological purposes and will do anything to stop people from reading him.

...

I simply asked for a fucking elaboration, since what I've read so far, apparently, doesn't do it justice. Jesus.

>It also contains some of the most practical advice on gaining happiness that I have not seen elsewhere.

Which part of the book? I haven't finished it but I'd love to skip to that part.

You said you never read him, then I suggested to read the primary source. Anyway, philosophy doesn't exist to impress anyone, go read genre fiction is that's what you want.

The Tao of Pooh

the jealousy wrt to objects, ideas included, stems from ''non-equanimity'' towards sensuality, ie hating and enjoying the sensuality.

two specific things come to mind

in one study, they asked 2000 women to 'rate' how happy they were while doing certain daily activities such as cleaning, socializing etc. (it's a bit more sophisticated than this but you get the point) and the findings showed that spending time with their children was about as enjoyable as doing house work. this goes against the idea that having kids is the greatest experience in life, which is somehow still what these mothers believed: even though 95% of the time spent with your kids is a fucking hassle, when you're asked about it, you think about the *idea* of having children, not the experience itself, and come to the conclusion that it's enjoyable.

the other thing is similar. you think buying a car will make you happy, and when asked about it, you tell yourself that having this experience car is a good thing. but how often do you spend thinking about having a nice car? initially, a bit, after a few weeks, the novelty wears off.

the point is you have to think about whether something brings you joy or not a bit more intelligently so you don't con yourself into buying shit you don't need

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring#Focusing_effect

Same, I read that when I was 13 or 14

Ah yes, I remember now. The book definitely alters the way you consider how personal assumptions are formed.

worthless virgin faggot

...

Stranger in a Strangeland is about a human born on mars who comes to earth and doesn grasp the concept of, property, ownership, jealousy, or even laughter and through his time on earth learns to adapt and adjust society to his whim.

>having kids isn't one of the greatest experiences because it's a hassle
That's entirely missing the point, though. If you ask my mom how much she enjoyed raising us, she'd tell you that she abdolutely hated it, but also that it made her life worthwhile and fulfilling. Having kids isn't about the experience, it's about having kids. Don't get me wrong, I don't think that kids are anywhere close to the greatest experience in life. But I do think that people (especially women) will ultimately be exceptionally unhappy if they don't have them.

It's hard for us to go against the evolutionary process: through natural selection we developed emotions like love so that we could mate and raise offspring successfully--no matter how you rationalize it, it's difficult for us to avoid experiencing those feelings and just die without children. But let's put them aside for a second and ask ourselves, are those few moments of joy, for instance, when we see our kid open a Christmas present, or graduate college, or get married etc. worth $100,000 and a third of our own life? I doubt it. I'd rather deal with once a while feeling a little sad that I never have kids, which is not going to be very often. I hear shit like "enjoy dying alone" all the time, who gives a fuck if I feel regret on my deathbed? Totally worth it.

enjoy dying alone senpai

since you're probably an "autodidact," how about reading about the replication crisis in priming studies before you integrate this book into your suite of dipshit thinking

I was curious about this book since I saw it on a "nature-core" chart or something like that (posted on another imageboard). Definitely going to read it, now that someone said something about it.

...

if you're defending this book then it's pretty clear you haven't read much about it outside the book itself (if you even read the book)

Ah there he is, the autodidact hater. Already read it, in fact, I'm pretty sure it's covered in the book itself.

>THE FUCK YOU THINK YOU ARE, LEARNING BOOKS ON YOUR OWN, YOU UGLY MAGGOT?!?! I'M IN OVER $350,000 DEBT FOR MY PHD IN HUSSERL STUDIES, OKAY? I'M VALUABLE AND NO UNEMPLOYMENT WILL CHANGE THAT. FUCK YOU AND YOUR COMMITMENT TO INDEPENDENCE, MANCHILD!!!

It's a simple case of cognitive dissonance and jealousy.

>You wasted $150,000 on an education you coulda got for $1.50 in late fees at the public library

>>I'M IN OVER $350,000 DEBT FOR MY PHD IN HUSSERL STUDIES, OKAY?

i don't know a single philosophy phd that doesn't have a fellowship

The book covers how the Israeli government and Zionists use holocaust discourse . Internal Jewery' doesn't exist outside of /pol/, did you even read this?

...

Hes a total fucking asshole, and his ego is insane. His online persona is often annoying, and the feuds he gets in seem like 90% publicity stunts.

But fuck if he isn't one of the only actually thought provoking public intellectuals out there. Will happily admot Antifragile had a huge impact on how I live my life

>9786156
It's called a review article

Unless you're a genius of ridiculous degree the Phenomenology of Spirit is too much even with a commentary.

The Science of Logic, however, is good enough that the first two chapters reveal the grand mystery of how to read every other Hegel work. His method is so simple it's amazing almost no one can tell you what it is despite having PHDs and decades of study on Hegel works.

...

...

...

The SoL is certainly better written but I disagree about the necessity of commentaries for the PoS, I also think the Logic is way harder to understand.

>the best book I've ever read.
These are the YouTube's of books. Go read something with literary merit.

That's a bit like saying your favourite movie can't be a documentary because it has no artistic value. Fuck that, I read it for the information it contained and enjoyed it.

can u really take a book written by a dude named marty seriously tho

Anybody identifying as an 'autodidact' is cancer. I didn't go to college and read on my own as well but when you're toting these garbage, airport-bookstore paperbacks as equal to a doctorate? Go fuck yourself, this thread is embarrassing.

No, it's like saying your favorite film can't be a WebM. These books are worse than not reading at all.

>I didn't go to college

Which is why you lack critical thinking skills. Books that are life changing are usually introductory texts, because people that know nothing about a subject suddenly get introduced to it and feels revolutionary.

Also nobody is trying to get PhD level education in everything, it's okay to read a popsci book and pick up a few interesting ideas, then do the same for humanities.

The Logic is more abstract and pure thinking, which is something you are allergic to without practice. It is much easier than the Phenom in that concepts are not presupposed and instead it is all built from the ground up.

The Phenom >appears< easier, but in fact is much harder at first than the Logic is. Most people never see past the veneer of the historical context into the actual engine: the logic and method.

>These books are worse than not reading at all.
I think it's best if you never post in this thread again.

Fair enough.

I self identify as an autodidact, but I agree with you. These books are cancerous pleb trash. Like the other gentleman said, don't lump us in with everybody else who gives us a bad nae.

>I went to college
Which is why your whole post is about chasing "life changing" experiences and something that "feels revolutionary." These pophis and popsci books are more detrimental than they are helpful, it's like encouraging someone to watch Crash Course or the School of Life. You'd be better suited by working through an intro textbook from a community college and zoning in on a specific period that interests you.

>he still thinks reading is a virtue in itself
The medium doesn't matter. The quality of the work does.

Since you're still here shitting up the thread, can you tell me exactly why the book is question, A Short History of Nearly Everything, is not worth reading?

>comparing an popsci book to Crash Course/School of Life
Can't take you seriously when you say shit like this.

I have a degree, it's not in psychology. I specialized in my field and work in it too. Sometimes I like to read other topics, so I picked up a psychology book and learned a few things. I'm not going to read a textbook because I'm not trying to educate myself in the classical sense, I'm just reading for my personal edification.

Somehow this is bad and I should just not read anything at all. Great mentality you have there.

because it's mass market schlock high on rhetoric and short on knowledge, perfect for tricking slobs like you

>self edification

Yes, because consuming information which within the field itself is considered wrong is so edifying.

reading a book is not edifying

I'm not a fan of Bryson because 'A Walk in the Woods' is a misrepresentation of thru-hiking the AT.

Broadly, I'm against mass produced paperbacks about academic subjects for the same reason I'm against "Fuck, I Love Science." I already explained why.

>Daniel Kahneman
>Nobel Prize winner in Economics
>Highly respected and influential economist
>"considered wrong"

I mean, if that was your entire point you could have just said you didn't like the book (not that any one gives a fuck about your opinion), but you went off on autistic rant about popular science books.

I'm outta here, have fun reading textbooks and getting mad at other people on the internet for wanting to expand their knowledge, if it makes you feel better.