/lit/ - Literature

Knowledge is a process, not individual opinions.

>>1183253
Doesn't mean he can't get started from recommendations.

Some of the greatest minds in history thought to themselves "Hey, I want to change they world, like -famous guy".

I suggest The Stranger. Like a lot of people will.
I've also heard Nausea is good, along with Being and Nothingness.

>>1183253
Your reply is mediocre and controversial. I'm not seeking the tranquility of a Stoic Sage or the proclaimed knowledge of King Solomon. I want a good read, on topics I enjoy reading about. Now be a good girl, and tell me things you've read.

>>1183260
Thank you very much.

Anyone else? Any good psychology books?

>>1183318
>good psychology books

I wish ;_;

Well, for me It's anything from Erich Fromm. Not sure if it made me any smarter but his thoughts can be very inspiring and refreshing.

>>1183318
"Do Your Own Research" is an amazing philosophical / psychology / general human intelligence book. It's among the BEST EVER.

Typical psychology assignment:
>"your concepts are good, but you need to speak less actively"
>rewrite in the passive voice and sprinkle on compound nouns.
>"excellent report!"
>mfw I realise why everyone hates 'real' psychology literature

My sociology teacher tried to tell me that inherent intelligence doesn't exist, and cannot be measured.

His reason being was that intelligence must be general, yet although David Beckham could be described as a genius footballer, he would by no means be described as an intellectual in anything else.

I tried to tell him that it was Darwin who proposed the idea of multiple intelligences, and he was grossly simplifying things.

He told me that it didn't matter what obsolete, archaic idea I held, this is what experts believe and I should just listen.

I walked out of the class, and never returned to sociology.

>>1183369

wow. you truely are a god amongst men. we'll never come close to your levels of pretense, I mean intelligence.

the ending of time jiddu kirshnamurti and david bohm

>>1183369
Howard Gardner introduced multiple intelligences in his book "Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences"

>>1183375

I never made a big deal about it, the guy was grossly polarising and diluting centuries of psychoanalytics so he could pedal his marxist bullshit.

We had an arguement in the previous class about talent, which he believed didn't exist as a genetic faculty but instead was a learned trait, like a skill. I tried explaining the difference between skill and creativity, but he started talking about Mozart and how his father pushed him to becoming the master he was.

I told him that if he really believed that, then he should believe that you can raise any child in exactly the same way as Mozart, or Bach or Beethoven, and you can create a musical genius.

And he said yes.

>>1183403
There's something called the Nature vs Nurture argument among psychologists and such. I think you should read up on it, it seems like your teacher was taking a gross bias on "nurture", but your taking a huge bias on "nature"

>>1183403
>pedal
>>1183417
>your

What the fuck are you illiterate plebeians doing on a literature board?

>>1183403
"drawing with the left half of your brain" and "drawing on the artist within" would have you see otherwise.

If you want philosophy, read Sophie's World by Jostein Gaarder.

It's mind blowing in a way that will teach you everything.

>>1183417

No, don't get me wrong I agree that the way a child is raised can have serious effects on his personality and knowledge, however your genes also plays a vital role in your development and it annoyed me that he completely discarded this with out anything more than anecdotal evidence.

>>1183422

To "pedal" something is to be an active proponent of it, sorry Americafag I forgot how much you guys corrupted your own language.

>>1183422
lul wut?

>>1183444

Oh God, I bet you're one of those nationalist socialist people... "Blacks are dumb because of biology..." "German is the best...derp derp derp."

>>1183425

I'm sure even Betty would agree that although you can electrify someone's creative drive, you can't make someone more intellectually creative.

>>1183444
Okay then well you get it, but perhaps visiting him and just slapping him upside the head would be best.

>>1183451
nope.avi
she states specifically that by learning how "see" and "draw" the way that it is presented in the book is a way to get both halves of your mind working to become more intellectually creative. like I said you need to read 'em

>>1183450

Haha, nope.

But my lecturer did try this argument on me. He said that if was I proposed was true, then perhaps he should give us all intelligence tests and only teach those who were clever enough to understand.

It's such a crass and emotional argument.

>>1183444

PEDDLE YOU FUCKING IDIOT

PEDDLE

PEDDLEEEEEEEEEEE

>>1183228

Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon.

Someone who becomes a teacher is naturally going to have a bias towards a belief in nurture. Wouldn't you want a teacher to believe any of their students are capable of being intelligent instead of having prejudices?

most good novels deal with these topics in one way or another.

for example Joseph Conrad's Lord Jim deals with the existence free will.
Unbearable Lightness of Being is about freudian perspectives on personality development.

if you want a more scientific book then try "dream of reason" by Anthony Gottlieb. it has been hailed as one of the best summaries about western pre-renaissance philosophy since Bertrand Russel's "A History of Western Philosophy"
another interesting author is John Gray, for example "Straw Dogs -Thoughts on Humans and Other Animals"

>>1183487

>Wouldn't you want a teacher to believe any of their students are capable of being intelligent

Fuck no. So much class time is wasted trying to get stupid shits to catch up to where everyone else is.

>>1183425
Do you mean "Right Side"?

>>1183488
yeah, this

most good novels deal in some way with some sort of Big Question, even if it's in a fairly subtle way or a way that's hugely open to interpretation. psychological realism and human nature are tremendously important topics in literature. arguably (extremely arguably) this is what makes novels art or literature or what have you - their ability to comment on and make us think about these kind of philosophical or psychological or human issues.

>>1183369

>Bertrand Russell


Don't do this

>>1183369

Confirmed for going at a shit-tier school

So do any of you fags actually have book recommendations on the topic the op presented or are you pretentious bastards just going to keep arguing all night?

Sometimes I wonder if you dumbasses actually ever READ anything about all the stuff you bitch about.

There was only one GOOD relevant suggestion so far. Anyone else?

>>1183465
I think you're right though, what he seems to believe to me is that we aren't individuals, afterall if we all can be brought up in the same way, we'd all be the same to his logic. He totally neglects the impact of our genes and the impact it has on the developement and functioning of our brain.

>>1184056
IM GOING TO FUCKING KILL YOU.

>>1184067
great argument

City of Glass by Paul Auster
...for all you claiming we have inherent individuality and AREN'T products of culture and language

facepalm.jpg

All of these recommendations suck.

>>1184196 OP here.
Fuck all the ones that spewed your philosophical bullshit. Inb4 you_mad.jpg. Thanks to all who added something worthwhile. /b/ gave me enough suggestions in 3 minutes.

Paper Rock Scissors - Game Theory in Everday Life

>>1184287
Please share, op. I was really interested in reading the recommendations for what you asked, but /lit/ has their heads up their asses today I guess.

>>1184343
A mind of its own - Cordelia Fine
Delusions of Gender - Cordelia Fine
Blink
Buyology

Those are all about general psychology, for philosophy they recommended A brief history of.everything - Ken Wilbur
Nausea
Smile at Fear
A guide to the good life

those were the ones that caught my eye, I didn't write down the other ones.

>>1184292
I read this, great book!

Psych is dead
Neuroscience is real.

Read "Phantoms in the Brain" by Cognitive Neuroscientist / Philosopher of Mind V.S. Ramachandran

op sounds like somebody who also loves the self-help sections in book stores

Thanks, op

>>1185349
pic related to neuroscience

Thanks, op

>>1185349
pic related to neuroscience

bump for moar books