Non-Fiction

[EyeSeeCold]

I don't get it.





I'm interested in reasons why you enjoy it and any recommendations that could potentially gauge my interest.

This is open for discussion, FTR.

 

[Fukyo]

Are you saying you don't get people being interested in different fields of study such as biology, psychology, physics, history, sociology, what have you?

 

[Cogwulf]

I read non-fiction to learn about stuff.

currently I'm reading "steels: microstructure and properties" by KHDH Bhadeshia

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Are you saying you don't get people being interested in different fields of study such as biology, psychology, physics, history, sociology, what have you?

Hmm, inadvertently, yes. With more focus, I don't understand the appeal of texts that present information for the sake of detailing facts. I realize that some material may be interesting, but where is the general appeal?

 

[Fukyo]

Hmm, inadvertently, yes. With more focus, I don't understand the appeal of texts that present information for the sake of detailing facts. I realize that some material may be interesting, but where is the general appeal?

Depending on what you're reading, non-fiction can do so much more than straight up bland facts. In scientific texts you have the dynamics of all kinds of processes explained. Personally, I find reading about molecular biology and genetics fascinating and learning how the intricacies of these processes connect to functionality and composition of organisms.

On a different note, biographies too are technically non-fiction, but they often read more like a fictional tale.

 

[Words]

Hmm, inadvertently, yes. With more focus, I don't understand the appeal of texts that present information for the sake of detailing facts.

You make me question what "facts" are. Textbooks present you with theories(non facts but plausible explanations), which means that probably wasn't the version of "fact" you have in mind, which means the "fact" you do have in mind is relative to perspective.

How fiction is more general than non-fiction is beyond me. Although perhaps its because fiction questions assumptions about reality---a generality. In nonfiction, you already have a strict reality while in fiction...you are still abstractionally free.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Depending on what you're reading, non-fiction can do so much more than straight up bland facts. In scientific texts you have the dynamics of all kinds of processes explained. Personally, I find reading about molecular biology and genetics fascinating and learning how the intricacies of these processes connect to functionality and composition of organisms.

On a different note, biographies too are technically non-fiction, but they often read more like a fictional tale.

I see, I do like to read material which explains and synthesizes. My problem, I think, is that I don't like presentation in the name of aesthetics. I have little patience for information with no purpose.

You make me question what "facts" are. Textbooks present you with theories(non facts but plausible explanations), which means that probably wasn't the version of "fact" you have in mind, which means the "fact" you do have in mind is relative to perspective.

Textbooks that present theories are not included in "texts that present you with information for the sake of detailing facts". I meant what I said, you have created your own ambiguity.

 

[Words]

Textbooks that present theories are not included in "texts that present you with information for the sake of detailing facts". I meant what I said, you have created your own ambiguity.

I didn't notice the meaning of "with more focus." The ambiguity was actually brought upon by your earlier narrow perspective of "non-fiction." Specificity was in order.

I also don't understand the appeal of situational literature. At times, they form links but...they seem stagnant. The literary counterpart of small talk perhaps. But again, this is not Non-Fiction.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I didn't notice the meaning of "with more focus." The ambiguity was actually brought upon by your earlier narrow perspective of "non-fiction." Specificity was in order.

I also don't understand the appeal of situational literature. At times, they form links but...they seem stagnant. The literary counterpart of small talk perhaps. But again, this is not Non-Fiction.

Fiction is intentionally and inseperably subjective, thus the original appeal is creativity. I don't understand non-fiction's.

 

[snafupants]

Fiction is intentionally and inseperably subjective, thus the original appeal is creativity. I don't understand non-fiction's.

The appeal could be distinct for individual readers. Non-fiction books like No Logo or Anatomy of an Epidemic are geared towards putting information out into the world, albeit with a particular spin, in hopes of changing an infrastructure. In the two previously mentioned books, the authors aim at stimulating change in global economics and big pharma, respectively. Now, it is up to the reader to determine how reliable the presented information is, but the change process has to start someone, and that is with informing the public of some kind of perceived injustice.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

The appeal could be distinct for individual readers. Non-fiction books like No Logo or Anatomy of an Epidemic are geared towards putting information out into the world, albeit with a particular spin, in hopes of changing an infrastructure. In the two previously mentioned books, the authors aim at stimulating change in global economics and big pharma, respectively. Now, it is up to the reader to determine how reliable the presented information is, but the change process has to start someone, and that is with informing the public of some kind of perceived injustice.

Are you saying some people read non-fiction for inspiration?


What about the self-indulgent people?

 

[snafupants]

Are you saying some people read non-fiction for inspiration?


What about the self-indulgent people?

Once you put information out into the world it can be molded and interpreted an endless number of ways. In her secret heart though, an author wants her book to be taken seriously and to promote her vision; egocentric but true. Few authors would pen their books anonymously for the same effect.

 

[a detached retina]

Godel Escher Bach. anyone ever get through it? I felt I was approaching enlightenment but failed to reach the end. Sorry I couldn't put the dots over the o in Godel

 

[A22]

Roman History. Although I'm more into biology and chemestry, Roman History books are fucking awesome

 

[Yet]

I enjoy books on all sorts of topics. At the moment I'm reading a book someone wrote about his life works (Neurobiologist) but it is a bit ... well I do not agree with some of the statements, correlations he makes. I do not think it is available in english: Dick Swaab 'we are our brain' (translated title).

Books on history, biology, psychology, filosophy and fysics (the last ones if not too technical) and (auto)biographies are also oké. It's like documentaries but then in books.

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/A-Short-History-of-Nearly-Everything/Bill-Bryson/e/9780767908184
was nice (the first half, I never got around to finish the second half)

The Mating mind by Geoffrey Miller was a good read.
http://www.amazon.com/Mating-Mind-Sexual-Choice-Evolution/dp/038549517X

And a book on Darwin
http://www.amazon.com/Darwin-His-Daughter-Human-Evolution/dp/1573221929

& at the mo I have to read this one:
http://www.amazon.com/Systematic-Design-Instruction-Walter-Dick/dp/0205585566

but that's just study obligatory... I'm not sure what to think of that one yet

anyways ... I do not think it is self indulgent; people can also just be curious about al sorts of stuff, can't they?

I enjoy non-fiction a lot as well. Love to read.