[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 87 KB, 600x450, wat.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1471625 No.1471625 [Reply] [Original]

I looked at the recommended reading list but it seems like it's all fiction. What's something non-fiction you'd recommend (includes biographies)?

>> No.1471629

Any particular fields?
Same education related ones:
Democracy and education - John Dewey
Pedagogy of The Oppressed - Paulo Freire

>> No.1471633

The Autobiography of Malcolm X
Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!
A Short History of Nearly Everything

>> No.1471634

Any biography where the subject is the biographer, eg; Bush writing a biography about himself.

>> No.1471642

>>1471634
An Autobiography?

They're not exactly non-fiction, see Richard Wright's Black Boy.


OP, the Wiki. It's got loads of non fiction.

>> No.1471646

>>1471633
>A Short History of Nearly Everything
This sounds interesting, I'll check it out.
>>1471642
Which wiki?

>> No.1471647

>>1471633
Of course..., Gödel, Escher, Bach, how could I forget.

>> No.1471650

>>1471646
It's the very first link in the sticky.

It's only philosophy non-fiction atm, but hey, that's still some.

>> No.1471651

Speak, Memory by Vladimir Nabokov.

>> No.1471653

>>1471650
>I looked at the recommended reading list
I already saw that wiki, thought you were talking about a different one.

>> No.1471655

>>1471646
Don't judge a book by its cover, i.e., don't judge a book by its title. Read all the titles I suggested; you won't be disappointed.

>> No.1471659

>>1471653
Then how come:
>I looked at the recommended reading list but it seems like it's all fiction
And it's not all fiction? Get it together!

>> No.1471673

>>1471659
I wouldn't personally call philosophy non-fiction.

>> No.1471680

>>1471673
Oh, so you've made up your own definition that no one else uses, and we're meant to work that out with our mind powers are we?

>> No.1471711

Walden

>> No.1471715

>>1471680
Non-fiction is when something is presented as fact. Philosophy doesn't strike me as a presentation of fact so much as an expression of ideas.

>> No.1471717

>>1471715
You're trying really hard, but I hope you know you're just chatting shit now. You do know that, right?

>> No.1471719

>>1471717
>Ad hominum all day errday

>> No.1471720

>>1471719
>Excuse me librarian/bookstore clerk/similar, why are all your philosophy books not in the fiction section?
>Why would they be?
>[some bullshit]
>Yeah, whatever guy.

>> No.1471721

>>1471720
At my local library philosophy and mythology are next to eachother and they're off to the side of the other non-fiction books.

>> No.1471723

>>1471715
>>1471717
Both of you are wrong. Philosophy is neither fiction nor non-fiction. Did I just blow your mind? It did blow mine.

>> No.1471724

>>1471723
I never said philosophy is fiction, it's just doesn't fit into non-fiction.

>> No.1471725

>>1471724
>It's not cheese, but it's also not non-cheese
derp

>> No.1471728

>>1471725
>Everything is black and white.

>> No.1471731

>>1471728
No but everything is black and non-black.

>> No.1471733

>>1471731
Not if non-black is defined as white. Do you even know what non-fiction means?

>> No.1471734

>>1471723
>Philosophy is neither fiction nor non-fiction

A = ¬B & ¬B

>> No.1471735

someone here needs to consider the "fact" that all non-fiction is published with an angle, to skew what may be fact into whatever point the author is trying to prove. Philosophy books just do this self-consciously. I would hate to read books that consist of a list of "pure observation," that isn't theory-laden

>> No.1471736

>>1471723
>>1471721
All that's required of non-fiction is for the Author to believe what is being written and present this as fact.
>>1471715
Expression of ideas can be presenting facts or fictions, so that's not a point.

>> No.1471739

>>1471736
Philosophy that I've read hasn't been presented as fact but as possibility.

>> No.1471741

>>1471735
>>1471733
Auto-biography straddles the line between fiction and non-fiction. It's the only grouping I know of to do so, since there's always going to be substantive author bias, and verification is impossible.

>> No.1471743

>>1471739
>implying a possibility isn't a fact
Hurr durr.

>> No.1471747

Bad Science: Quacks, Hacks, and Big Pharma Flacks

Read this book, and then realize that a large portion of scientific theories many people hold true today will be proven to be retarded in years to come. The reason Einstein and Newton were considered geniuses is because they went against the current views of the scientific community. The problem with the modern scientists of today is that they are too scared to experiment AGAINST current theories, and instead live under them without any critical thinking or criticism at all.

I am not a scientist, but if there are any aspiring scientists on there they must read this book and take my words to heart.

>> No.1471753

>>1471734
I don't think you understand how to use boolean operators, or you misunderstood me completely.
Let A = Philosophy, B = Fiction, C = Non-fiction, with that said, A NAND (B NOR C)

¬B & ¬B is the same as just ¬B.
Would you mind explaining what you mean by that?

>> No.1471757

>>1471741
Have you ever read anything historical or scientific? Hell, even language is theory-laden. I'm sorry, but you are unaware of how little of what we identify as fact is truly fact

>> No.1471760

>>1471753
Deep&Edgy is just a troll/flame trip people put on here, just ignore those comments.

>> No.1471763

>>1471753
you don't understand how negation works, and you're also angry that I showed how stupid and obvious what you said is

>> No.1471765

>>1471763

Let A be Philosphy, B = Fiction, C = Non-Fiction.

B C | A
0 0 | 1
0 1 | 0
1 0 | 0
1 1 | 0

Therefore A = ¬B & ¬C;

>> No.1471766

>>1471757
This is not what my post is saying at all. Auto-biography presents a problem because the writer is not separate from the subject. It's also subject to massive publisher changes.
Check it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twb_APQpzkk

>> No.1471767

Here are some more to check out:

The Physics of Consciousness: The Quantum Mind and the Meaning of Life
Thinking in Systems: A Primer
Complexity: A Guided Tour
Sync: How Order Emerges From Chaos In the Universe, Nature, and Daily Life
The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives
About Time: Einstein's Unfinished Revolution
Food of the Gods: The Search for the Original Tree of Knowledge A Radical History of Plants, Drugs, and Human Evolution
The Moral Animal: Why We Are, the Way We Are: The New Science of Evolutionary Psychology
God Theory, The: Universes, Zero-Point Fields, and What's Behind It All

And of course, Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World

>> No.1471768

>>1471765
you don't understand how negation works

>> No.1471769

>>1471768
I am waiting for you to try to make your point. At things are now, everyone on /lit/ will think that I stand corrected. You are just using a logical fallacy.

>> No.1471771

>>1471769
It's cool, bro. I had to do logic (with the phil dept) and gate logic as part of my Engineering undergrad, first year. I see what you're saying, and you're right.

>> No.1471772

>>1471769

Let me try again...
Philosophy = A
Fiction = B
Non-fiction !B

Therefore, A = !B & !!B
!!B, negated twice, is the same as just B.
A = !B & B is 0, or false.

I am still here, Deep and Edgy, waiting for your reply.

>> No.1471773

>>1471765
He didn't use C

>> No.1471775

>>1471773
It was still correct, just not minimized.
But I made it simpler, so he could understand.
>>1471772

>> No.1471778

>>1471766
I don't especially care what you're saying specifically about autobiography, I am responding to your claim that it is the >only grouping to do so.
Which is just not true, and trying to red herring it up does not change my point at all

>> No.1471783

>>1471767
Thanks for actually posting books. Anyone else want to post things relevant to the thread instead of arguing about whether philosophy is fiction or nonfiction? Fiction and nonfiction are just fucking words. The fact that you care to argue so much about words shows how pathetic and ignorant you really are. Language isn't even real. You all need to read some linguistics books.

>> No.1471784

>>1471778
Well, let me copy paste:
>Auto-biography straddles the line between fiction and non-fiction. It's the only grouping I know of to do so
First of all, give a counter example. Second, quote properly. The original comment also has the disclaimer:
>I know of
You are welcome to provide a counter-example. Not so welcome to be throw a hissy fit about nothing.

>> No.1471785

>>1471784
People.

Stop. Arguing. About. Words. That. We. Made. In. The. First. Place.

These words don't even exist.

>> No.1471787

>>1471783
Linguistic books are in the philosophy section of the wiki. Don't know exactly what you mean by:
>Language isn't even real
But sounds like you need some..

>> No.1471788

>>1471785
>>1471783
Neither does time, it's still very important.

>> No.1471790

>>1471783
>The fact that you care to argue so much about words shows how pathetic and ignorant you really are.
>arguing about language
>on a literature board
Yeah totally pathetic and ignorant.

>> No.1471792

>>1471785
I didn't personally make the words. They came out of the language for me.

>> No.1471798

>>1471766
>>1471739

Holy fuck nobody knows what nonfiction is in this thread.

Autobiography is most certainly nonfiction. Because Black Boy uses fictive elements, that doesn't discount the entire genre. Plus, all nonfiction is the product of artifice, and recreation from memoir is in itself a construction and can never actually be "real," etc, etc, etc.

Philosophy is most certainly nonfiction as well. Montaigne, the father of the genre "essay," wrote primarily about the personal and the philosophical. It doesn't matter if the ideas one is expressing aren't right, the point is that it's a representation of the author's mind weighing a topic on the page. Just because someone says "suppose" in their work, that doesn't mean it's a piece of fiction.

More important, at least these days, is the distinction between nonfiction and poetry. Because these aren't distinctions between content, but form. See the list that follows.

Anyway, OP, here's a list of some mostly contemporary stuff, because it's what I've been reading lately:

Montaigne's Essays
James Baldwin's The Fire Next Time
James Baldwin's Notes of a Native Son
Richard Wright's Black Boy
John D'Agata's anthologies: The Next American Essay, and Lost Origins of the Essay
John D'agata's books: About a Mountain, and Halls of Fame
David Shields' Reality Hunger
Virginia Woolf's A Room of One's Own
Nabokov's Speak, Memory
Capote's In Cold Blood
Susan Sontag's Under the Sign of Saturn
Simone Weil's Gravity and Grace
Annie Dillard's Pilgrim at Tinker Creek
Anne Carson's Nox
Anne Carson's Eros the Bittersweet
Jenny Boully's One Love Affair
Jenny Boully's The Body: An Essay
Maggie Nelson's Bluets
Maggie Nelson's Jane: A Murder

I could keep going.

>> No.1471801

>>1471798
>doesn't know the lack of a line between autobiography and autobiographical novel
Cool story, bro.

>> No.1471802

>>1471792
>Made
>past tense of make
>talking about the collective human race and its creation of language over and over again
>language can never, ever, accurately convey a thought

Everyone in this thread read this last fucking point. This is why people argue about language. This is why YOU ALL IN THIS THREAD are arguing about language. You are arguing because words cannot be attributed to a specific thought. It is impossible for words to do so.

>> No.1471807

>>1471801
Black Boy is an autobiography that uses fictive elements.

Everyone still treats it as nonfiction though. Just "experimental" nonfiction.

I'm a graduate student studying literary nonfiction. Your post is irrelevant.

>> No.1471809

>>1471798
>>1471801
And Montaigne didn't invent the essay style, it just had fallen out of use. He brought it back out of the classical period,

>> No.1471812

>>1471809
What? He coined the term. I didn't say he invented it, I said he was the father of the genre. Why do you think I put quotes around "essay?"

>> No.1471815

The Basque History of the World - Mark Kurlansky (or something like that)

>> No.1471820

>>1471784
The thing is, my point is that everything is a counter-example. Anything you read is information that has been taken in by a person, processed by that same person, based on the experiences that they have had and the way they see the world, and used to bolster whatever theory or idea or point they are trying to make and written down to be published. And, even using language to do so shifts the perspective some, since words can never recreate what someone sees, only attempt to. Whoever reads it will process it based on their perspective. Non-fiction usually makes the attempt to present things as facts, but there is no way for it to be accurate. Technically, the only way for a non-fiction books to be all that accurate is by saying "some people believe.." before every point it tries to make, but no one would take that seriously. And even that would suffer from the same problems or "no pure observations". This may be a bit quick for me to say, but pretty much anything non-fiction you read is trying to convince you of something. Philosophers try to convince you to see things as they do. Scientists want you to believe their theory. Autobiographers (usually) want you to think they're a pretty cool person. Historians want to convince you things really happened exactly as they say. All of these sources are more accurate the less distinct they are, but who wants to read that? I'm not sure I see how this qualifies as a hissy fit about nothing, but I understand how hard it is to keep belligerently ignorant with so many people pointing out that you're wrong. Have a good day anyway

>> No.1471824

>>1471812
Oh, no, you're right. Misread a sentence in a book.

>> No.1471828

The best political histories (UK) are written by Roy Jenkins.

Read his biographies of Churchill & Gladstone to be truly impressed.

>> No.1471847

>>1471820
These are good points, but they don't have a bearing on the differences between Fiction and Nonfiction.

It's kind of understood that Nonfiction, as a blanket term, includes these debates between actually, fact, truth, and Truth. It should have an asterisk with a footnote saying "and by nonfiction we mean not fabrication but reconstruction," or something similar.

I'm glad you mentioned historians. If you're interested in the fallibility of truth, Greek historians are a perfect example. Herodotus gave reports of strange lands and nonexistent peoples that were, for all intents and purposes, true. Thucidydes, in his History of the Peloponnesian War, made up the generals' speeches.

I think you'd like Reality Hunger by David Shields, anon.

It's largely a text assembled of uncited, appropriated material discussing what the differences between truth and fact are, why we have distinctions between fiction and nonfiction, how they are and aren't important distinctions, and how "originality" is essentially a myth.

It's pretty cool. Not necessarily as groundbreaking as it propels itself to be, but it still weighs some interesting ideas.

>> No.1471855

History of Western Philosophy - Bertrand Russell

>> No.1472467

>>1471769
again, you don't understand how negation works
>You are just using a logical fallacy
saying you're wrong isn't a logical fallacy

>> No.1472473 [DELETED] 

>>1471772
I like how you did it again right because I showed how wrong you were the first time, good stuff

>> No.1472477 [DELETED] 

>>1471772
>A = !B & B is 0, or false
Also, glad you showed for yourself how full of shit your original statement was, which was what I did in the first place

>> No.1472503

>>1472467
>bump thread after 4 hours
>no comeback, win argument
>totally not sad and/or obsessive

>> No.1472508

>>1471772
>neither/nor
let phil = A
let fiction = B
let nonfic = !B

A = (!B v !B)

work it out for yourself
(¬bV¬b)
T F
F T

invalid argument detected

>> No.1472516

>>1472503
welcome to /lit/ it's a very slow board, i stumbled upon this thread on page 1 and remembered to respond

>> No.1472523

>>1472516
If by page 1 you mean page 6.

You're only lying to yourself.

>> No.1472540

a b a ↔ (¬b V ¬b)
T T F
T F T
F T T
F F F

dat invalidity/fullofshitness

>> No.1472543

>>1472540
ffs 4chan format my posts properly

>> No.1472547

>>1472508
>Still cannot into boolean
Keep trying.

>> No.1472549

>>1472547
hahahahaha, look how the tables have turned except when I did it I actually knew what the fuck I was talking about lol

>> No.1472562

Anything? Outside of ficiton my other interest is poltics and philosophy. If you're interested:
Jonathan Wolff - An Introduction to Political Philosophy
Edward W. Said - Culture and Imperialism
Noam Chomsky - Failed States
Mill - On Liberty and Other Essays
Russell - The Problems of Philosophy
Bagehort - The English Constitution
Adam Smith (check your 20 pound note britfags)-Wealth of Nations

>> No.1472568

>>1472549
>One semester of logic don't know about them boolean matrices
Not the guy you're replying to, but you've got to do this stuff first term of EE.
>>1471765
is not challenged by
>>1472540

>> No.1472581

>>1472568
NO SHIT, BECAUSE
>>1471765
IS NOT A CORRECT USE OF NEGATION, YOU STUPID FUCKING COCKSUCKER. HE'S ESSENTIALLY PRETENDING NON-FICTION IS AN ENTIRELY SEPARATE ENTITY IN ORDER TO CLASSIFY IT AS C, ESSENTIALLY CHANGING THE PREmISES

>> No.1472597

>>1472581
bumping for impetuous shitheads

>> No.1472606

>>1472581
He's given you an example where it's valid. So what if one is called C? It's still NOT B.

It's hard stuff if you are inadequate with the math. You shouldn't sweat being wrong on something difficult.

>> No.1472630

>>1472606
seriously, I don't fucking care. You have no idea how negation works, I've already demonstrated firstly how this halfwit has needed to make up another premise in order for his argument to be valid and secondly how he has changed one of his premises in order to conclude in a tautology, I'm not interested in repeating the same thing again and again in here for you myopic retards

>> No.1472640

>>1472630
No need to get all uppity because you oversimplified negation. It's a difficult concept to grasp for sure.

The guy didn't change his premise or conclude a tautology, there's no need to start accusing people of things unnecessarily.

>> No.1472647

>>1472640
blow it out your fucking ass, you moron. This is going to be the tenor of my responses to ignorant dipshits like yourself in this thread from now on.

>> No.1472652

Cancer on $5 a Day by Robert Schimmel

his battle against cancer is more hilarious than it is touching at least in the way he puts it

>> No.1472663
File: 149 KB, 468x344, 1294307861677.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1472663

>d&e trying his paws at logic

>> No.1472667

Why did you guys get into Boolean? He said it's "neither fiction nor non-fiction", so he's saying it's not fiction and it's not not non-fiction either, so the double negative means he's suggesting Philosophy is non-fiction. Simple as.

>> No.1472670

>>1472647
It's funny how butthurt you get with something like this. It's no big deal.

"To learn that we have said or done a stupid thing is nothing, we must learn a more ample and important lesson: that we are but blockheads"
Montaigne

Don't get worked up over nothing. No one cares.

>> No.1472678

>>1472663
onionwrong you're not a butthurt anonymous tell me am I wrong here

>> No.1472688

>>1472667
To parse an argument like that is a bit weird. If somebody says "It's neither this nor that" you don't set this and that at either end of a binary.

Even if you do, it can be more complicated than "It must belong to one set or another" or "It cannot belong to both sets" anyway. Negation is a tricky thing after all.

>> No.1472690

>>1472678
Get a job, you fucking failure.

>> No.1472697

>>1472678

And once again, D&E provides nothing of value.

Quality>Quantity

>> No.1472703

>>1472690
I don't really need to because I get by sufficiently on my Grant, and I don't really have the desire to retard my studies or spend a single hour unnecessarily wasting myself away in employment.

>> No.1472707

>>1472697
>doesn't know whether I'm right or wrong, has to wait until I call myself into question

lol, fucking brainless nitwit

>> No.1472712

>>1472703
Way to run on sentence.

>> No.1472715
File: 45 KB, 307x440, cone7-31-4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1472715

>>1472712
I am the best.

>> No.1472718

>>1472707
>Has to insult and call others into question because he was wrong
There is no need to feel inadequate about being wrong. No one is thinking any less of you.

>> No.1472727

>>1472712

That's not a run-on.

>> No.1472729

>>1472718

I am

>> No.1472730

Quick review:
>D&E searches for a thread 6 pages in
>D&E bumps thread after 4 hours to be proven wrong
>Gets butthurt and starts calling names
>Posts loads of statue pics

>> No.1472739

>>1472727
True. Still a horrible sentence though.

>> No.1472743

>>1472678
that anon's claim of philosophy being neither fiction or nonfiction clearly involves an understanding of nonfiction to be not simply a negation of fiction, but "a factual account of things." it's pretty easy to understand what he's talking.

>> No.1472744
File: 33 KB, 468x487, supaman.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1472744

No-one has proven me wrong in this thread.

>> No.1472752

>>1472744
They have proven you wrong. Oh, shit, it's happened again.

>> No.1472763
File: 282 KB, 531x750, tea time.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1472763

>if d&e can't read the ambiguity in a 4chan post, how can he into heidegger?

must be trolling

>> No.1472773

>>1472743
>The negation of statement p is "not p."
or "non-p" for example, it is that stupid asshole's fault he didn't clarify his terms to begin with

>> No.1472779

>>1472773
Non-p isn't the same as not-p in formal logic.

>> No.1472791
File: 60 KB, 390x479, arno_breker_blesse_01.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1472791

fuck you guys, srsly
it is perfectly intuitive and logical to take non-fiction as the negation or not-fiction of fiction because anything more than this is entirely speculative

fuck yall i'm out

>> No.1472801

>>1472791
It's perfectly arbitrary. And cool; can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

>> No.1472802

>>1472791
I bet Shallow&Flaccid faps to these faggy statues.