inquiry_from_an_anti_library's reviews
649 reviews

The Elephant in the Brain: Hidden Motives in Everyday Life by Kevin Simler, Robin Hanson

adventurous emotional informative inspiring reflective fast-paced

5.0

Is This An Overview?

While socially taboo topics, issues, and behaviors are elephants in the room.  The elephant in the brain is an introspective taboo.  The way the brain processes information is not something people want to think about, or are aware of.  What the brain does, is enable the pursuit of self-interest, without acknowledging the self-interested motivation. 

 

Humans are designed for hidden selfish motives, while appearing to be selfless to others.  People rationalize their behavior as being more socially acceptable, than the behavior actually is.  To better hide the selfish motives, people undergo self-deception.  Self-deception is a strategic act for improving the effectiveness of deceiving others. 

 

For social support, to gain the approval of others, people show conspicuous behavior.  A lot of wealth, resources, and effort is used for intra-group competitive signaling.  Resources used to show off rather than for useful purposes.  Although the resources are wasted, the institutions have enabled people to cooperate.  Enabled methods of interacting that improve society, not just the person. 

 

Caveats?

As the authors acknowledge, there are a variety of reasons for why people behave the way they do, not just because of hidden selfishness.  Most of the book is filled with examples of when more resources are spent on an activity than is useful, finding how people act selfishly while not appearing as being selfish.  Although the examples are diverse, the explanations can become repetitive, and interest in the examples depend on the reader. 

The Swerve: How the World Became Modern by Stephen Greenblatt

adventurous funny informative fast-paced

5.0

Is This An Overview?

Books contain ideas that can change how a person thinks, they can swerve the behavior of society.  But the ideas contained in books are fragile, as the survival of books was under threat from various sources.  Until the advent of an educational system and mass literacy, there was low demand for books as few people read books.  Those who did read tended to remove books that were not aligned with their groups’ ideology.  Books were made of perishable material, which was damaged by weather, repeated use, and insects.  The book survival strategy, is to be copied.  Among those who could read, were the Benedictine monks.  Who kept to their code of requiring reading.  To read, they needed books.  Therefore housed, protected, and copied books.  Preserved ideas.  Preserved but not shared as much, for there was an ordeal to take a book out to read by someone other than a monk.

 

Few ancient books survived.  One book in particular was to be rediscovered, and influence the decisions of many people.  This was the book On the Nature of Things by Lucretius.  The ideas within the book stood in contrast to the religious fervor during the era when it was written and rediscovered.  Many ideas held in the book would later be validated through scientific procedures.  A book that swerved society from ecclesial to scientific. 

 

Caveats?

There were many sources of societal change than a singular book.  During the eras that the author was describing, there were various sources of influence and power struggles that culminated into the swerves.  There were other societies and groups that were interested in books.  

Industrial Policy for the United States: Winning the Competition for Good Jobs and High-Value Industries by Ian Fletcher, Marc Fasteau

adventurous informative reflective tense medium-paced

3.0

Is This An Overview?

Industrial policy is a deliberate governmental support for industries.  For government to support innovation, commercialization, retention of advantageous industries, reduce foreign competition for internal markets, and to manage the exchange rate to balance trade.  Government intervention is needed due to limits of the markets, to have government supply that which the markets cannot.  The limits to free markets include externalities, a focus on short term investments, and limited production and innovation to what provides the firm with readily monetized products.

 

Firms that rely on markets tend to lose competitiveness to foreign firms which are supported by governments.  Loss of competitiveness that leads to a loss of jobs, wealth, and tax revenue which hinders national defense.  Effective industrial policy includes a proactive mobilization of resources, long term strategies, coordinated related policies, and are consistent enough for firms to know how to allocate investments.  Policies need to enable advantageous economic activities, which are activities that contain increasing returns, high income elasticity of demand, susceptibility to repeated improvement, competition not limited to on a basis of price, and can accumulate human capital.  Industrial policy enables a mixed economy that is part public, part free-market private, part regulated private.

 

Caveats?

This book can be difficult to read, as various parts of the book contain a more technical manual on industries and policies.  The book is a guide for those seeking to know what policies are available and industries affected, not an introductory book on economic development.

 

This book can be used by every state, not just the United Sates.  The book provides an economic history of various states, with various successes and failures in using industrial policy.  As every state can use the same policies, each state can reciprocate a policy that is being used against them.  Each state can reciprocate the denial of technology and limit the internal market to foreigners.  This can exacerbate conflicts rather than provide opportunities for cooperation. 

 

The way the ideas in the book are expressed have contradictions.  1) The authors claim that the U.S. is supporting free trade with a lack of government support, then proceed to show how much government has been involved in developing industries.  The authors critique should be about the difference between what is publicly claims and what is being done, rather than on lack of government intervention.  2) The author makes the claim that government intervention is needed, as government can potentially improve outcomes when the free market provides suboptimal outcomes.  If government is needed when markets produce suboptimal outcomes, then markets can be claimed to be needed when government produces suboptimal outcomes.  Within the economic history provided, the authors provide references to governments not being optimal.  3) For effective industrial policy, governments require predicting the future of how technology will evolve, and which markets would be profitable.  Then to support those industries and markets with various policies, such as educating people for those future needs.  The problem is that this claim requires government officials to be rational agents.  Effective government intervention requires the same conditions which Neoclassical economic perspective held, that people are omniscient and omnipotent.  These views are no longer considered acceptable assumptions in economics. 

The Republic of Plato by Allan Bloom

adventurous challenging medium-paced

1.0

Is This An Overview?

The rule of the many cannot develop a just society, for the many are corruptible.  Most people would be willing to do harm to others to help themselves, but are prevented by the potential consequences of being caught.  The corruptible are those who cannot understand ideas that do not change, the perfect.  The corruptible mislead others, and therefore need to have their ideas removed from society. 

 

Within society, there are a few who can understand what is always the same, the philosophers.  The philosophers are those in possession of knowledge that make them worthy of being rulers, creating a necessary hierarchy.  Philosophers can become guardians of society, to preserve laws.  A just society needs philosopher-kings to lead them.  For a philosopher-king can withstand the corruption of the many, and educate the many to behave justly.  The soul of these guardians is filled by knowing that which is always the same, immortal and true. 

 

What Did The Ancillary Authors Think? 

The translator, and introductory author, claimed that The Republic was not written to be reasonable, to make valuable claims, but to be a drama of ideas.  To be outrageous and absurd.  To provoke thought.   To be read as dramatic irony rather than for political ideas. 

 

This claims seems to be problematic given that Plato’s contemporaries did not treat Plato’s ideas in such a way, and by dismissing the claims in the book removes Plato’s responsibility from the ideas.

 

Caveats?

This book is presented as a dialectic, a discussion of ideas, a dialogue.  The discussion is an illusion.  Plato uses Socrates as a method of explaining ideas, rather than explaining the ideas of Socrates the philosopher.  The characters who are part of the discussion, sometimes provide readily overcome criticism, but throughout most of the conversation, they just accept and praise every Socrates claim.  Deferring to Socrates rather than having a conversation with Socrates.  Just like how the people who are ruled are meant to defer to the philosopher-king who is supposed to know the appropriate decision.  The claims that are provided are generally flawed as they use irrelevant comparisons, have contradictions, and assume no possible alternative idea is acceptable. 

Bolivar: American Liberator by Marie Arana

adventurous emotional hopeful informative inspiring reflective fast-paced

5.0

Is This An Overview?

Even before Simón Bolívar was born, Spain was increasing how much control Spain had over the colonies.  Spain restricted political offices, increased taxes, monopolized production of various products, and monopolized trade with foreign states.  Spain restricted the flow of information to the colonies to keep them ignorant, to prevent the colonies from considering alternatives to Spain.  The colonies were prohibited from communicating with each other, which disabled collaborative efforts.  The income Spain derived from the colonies was not used to improve the conditions in the colonies, nor was the income spent on the public of Spain.

 

As the repression of Latin American people grew, so did the people’s willingness for independence.  Attempts at independence were made before Bolívar, without success.  Bolívar’s first attempt at a republic in Latin America came when France conquered Spain.  Although the first, and second of Bolívar’s attempt at removing the oppressive Spanish regime failed, the third was successful.  With each attempt, Bolívar gained experience and learned from failures.  Bolívar’s actions gained the people’s approval, becoming the Liberator.  Throughout the conflicts, Bolívar’s forces were generally underequipped, lacked supplies, and were inexperienced.  For all the deficiencies of the armed forces, Bolívar was still able to overcome the Spanish.

 

Bolívar wanted a united Latin America, but that was not to be.  Various people had betrayed Bolívar.  Regional politicians had their own personal ambitions, and began to denounce Bolívar.  Bolívar’s desire for a unified Latin American people required an authoritarian regime, for Latin Americans lacked the experience to govern themselves.  Bolívar became seen less as Liberator, and more as a king.  Even though Bolívar did not want the power.  Political competition and corruption prevented the unification of the people.

 

What Was The Latin American Experience With Slavery And Race?

Although the Spanish monarchy did not appreciate the atrocities committed by Christopher Columbus and other conquistadors, they accepted slavery as a method to make the people work.  To the monarchy, slavery was needed to keep the economy functioning.  Spanish people killed many Latin Americans, to the point of needing to import African slaves to compensate for the damage. 

 

Although Spanish and natives were mixing, there was a psychology of superiority.  Strict race dominance was developed.  It was better to be Spanish than indigenous Indian, and a culture of defining the different race mixes.  The penalty for being Indian, was to be forced to purchase food from the government, food that was often in poor condition.  Indians were forced to buy products they did not need for the government to acquire gold and silver.  Indians were forced to provide labor or taxes as tribute.  With persecution based on race, came various violent race related events.

 

What Was Bolívar’s Love Life?

Bolívar fell in love with María Teresa Rodríguez del Toro in Spain.  Their marriage was short, as María died shortly after arriving in Venezuela.  After María’s death, Bolívar traveled abroad.  Traveled to Paris were the idea of a person changing the course of a state’s identity took place.  Also traveled to the United States and witnessed how a former colony could quickly become a commercialized state. 

 

Bolívar was a measured hedonist.  Revolution was often mixed with pleasure, especially with Manuela Sáenz, who Bolívar fell in love with.  Bolívar hedonistic aspects at times created conflict with the armed forces.  Manuela later on joined the armed forces to be near Bolívar, to make sure Bolívar did not cause harm to their relationship.  On some of the assassination attempts on Bolívar, Manuela saved Bolívar’s life. 

 

What Was Bolívar First Attempt At A Republic?

France’s conquest of Spain gave the Spanish colonies the chance to gain their independence, and shape their own political and economic policies.  There were a variety of views as how to express their sovereignty, such as those who wanted sovereignty while expressing public loyalty to Spain.  Many people in the colonies had personal ties to Spain.  Bolívar was someone who wanted sovereignty without any limitations.  Various states did declared independence, declared their sovereignty, in the name of the king of Spain.  The colonies removed the Spanish officials.

 

Bolívar stayed away from the initial 1809 conflicts of independence, thinking that the revolution would be a failure due to the restraint.  As the independence movement seemed successful, Bolívar became a diplomate, for a mission to London.  The junta were cautious of Bolívar, but they lacked funds and Bolívar was willing to finance them. 

 

In London, Bolívar tried to convince Miranda to lead the revolution.  Miranda was someone who tried to gain independence for Spanish colonies before.  Bolívar and Miranda had disagreements, but appeared everywhere together.  Miranda did join Bolívar, and Bolívar enabled Miranda to occupy a government position.  Bolívar assisted Miranda in a variety of ways.  Although Bolívar supported Miranda, as Miranda became a commander, Miranda wanted Bolívar removed from a commanding officer post.

 

The problem with Venezuela’s new republic, was the distribution of power.  The officials claimed to be a full democracy, but the only people eligible to vote were property owners.  Enabling the perpetuation of the class structure, as power was handed to the rich. 

 

At this time, ignorance was endemic as Spain discouraged education.  Preventing people from understanding what liberty meant.  The people were divided by loyalty and race.  The military lacked experience, discipline, and arms. 

 

What caused the revolution to fail was an earthquake in Caracas.  An earthquake which the Church claimed was punishment for the insurrection.  Although Miranda accepted a dictatorship to unite the people, Miranda did not encourage military confrontations as Miranda did not think that independence was possible.  As Spain was regaining control, and under threat of potential civil war, Miranda made a pact with Spain.  Miranda surrendered, and tried to fee.  To Bolívar and others, these and other acts made Miranda seem like a traitor. 

 

Many revolutionary leaders were sent to prison.  Bolívar was saved by Iturbe.  After the escape, Bolívar had become an experienced revolutionary, who was humbled by defeat. 

 

What Was Bolívar Second Attempt At A Republic?

A few months after the failed Venezuelan revolution, Bolívar made plans and set out for another revolution.  Using people that society left behind.  Bolívar trained and took care of the people.  Made victories using guerrilla tactics, and continued to proceed on the offensive.  Many towns were freed before Bolívar’s arrival as the Spanish officials feared Bolívar’s troops.  The people being liberated, were interested in liberating their own people and land.  They had little interest in liberating other people and lands.

 

Bolívar signed a decree of war to the death, as a retaliatory measure.  A form of recrimination for the Spanish want to exterminate the republicans.  The decree was meant to support the republican troops, but had the effect of enabling violence.  Even with the decree, Bolívar allowed for a peaceful surrender, to show mercy. 

 

Bolívar’s success at overcoming Spanish forces using less people and supplies, eared Bolívar the title of Dictator and Liberator.  Two reasons for the failed second attempt at a republic, were race and lack of weapons.  Spain used race to divide the people.  Black, Indian, and mixed-blood accepted Spanish claims that it was the Creoles who were responsible for their misery, without understanding that it was the Spanish who made the Creole miserable who then oppressed others.  Race conflicts became civil war. 

 

The new enemy had become the llaneros.  Llaneros had a massive force, were undisciplined, and lawless.  Their apparent goal was plunder.  The people and regions were divided by people who proclaimed themselves supreme commanders.  Bolívar was faced with betrayal, traps, and Spain regaining the empire.  Spain wanted the colonies back and waged a war against democracy.  Bolívar was exiled by supposed allies, and fled to Haiti to avoid a trap in Cartagena. 

 

What Was Bolívar Third Attempt At A Republic?

Bolívar had difficulty uniting the people and leaders for the cause of the revolution.  Warlords had taken charge of Venezuela.  Although Bolívar lacked power and the armies of the warlords, the warlords did not have Bolívar’s reputation with the people.  Bolívar wanted to build alliances with Piar, Monagas, Zaraza, and Cedeño. 

 

This attempt at a unified republic created a need for establishing courts and due process in response to events that caused political turmoil.  While Spain tried to keep Americans ignorant, Bolívar made sure that Americans were informed.  The information gave Bolívar and the revolution recognition by foreign powers.  With foreign recognition, came supplies and foreign troops.  Supplies and troops did not stop many of the people in the army from deserting due to hunger.    

 

As Bolívar was getting older and had health complications, Bolívar wanted someone to become a younger version of Bolívar.  That someone was Sucre.

 

What Happened To Bolívar’s Desire Of A United Latin America?

Bolívar did not want to be a politician.  Bolívar’s goal was to remove the oppressors.  Although many regions favored a federalist system, Bolívar did not approve a federal system as there was too much division between the regions.  Division that needed a unified government to overcome.  Another reason for an authoritarian government was a consequence of colonial rule, Bolívar did not think that Latin Americans could rule themselves due to lack of experience.  Bolívar feared that illiterate masses would destroy order. 

 

Bolívar wanted a republic and authoritarian regime, by having a president appointed for life.  The president would be powerless to appoint legislature government or courts.  The appointment was powerful, and would be in perpetuity given that the president would influence who would be the successor. 

 

The problem was that the Bolívar’s idealism for a united Latin America and want for an authoritarian regime made people think that Bolívar wanted to be a king.  Bolívar gradually was seen less as a Liberator, and more as a king.  Bolívar did not actually want to be king, but these claims were in contrast to what people thought of Bolívar.

 

Political corruption and competition for power caused regional leaders to denounce Bolívar.  Trusted allies turned against Bolívar. 

 

Caveats?

The organization of the book can limit an understanding of the details.  Various details are provided on the events, that can create a confusion for the sequence of events.  As the book focuses on the complexity of Bolívar’s life, the interest in the different aspects depends on the reader.  

Seeing Like a State by James C. Scott

dark informative reflective tense medium-paced

2.0

Is This An Overview?

States can intervene in societies for plunder or public welfare.  Although a lack of information is acceptable when the intervention is small, a lack of information is disabling for interventions which are extensive, large scale or long term.  State interventions into their societies requires information about what to change and how to change, they need to understand what they are governing.  More extensive interventions into society need more information about the people and their behavior. 

 

The interventions into society can have disastrous outcomes.  Conditions for disastrous outcomes have four elements in common, which are 1) information simplification, 2) ideology, 3) authoritarian methods of change, 4) and a lack of resistance by those being changed.  Simplification of information has the advantage of developing measurable units, and focusing decision making on certain prominent limited aspects of reality.  The disadvantage is missing other information that can affect the outcomes, which can turn successes into failures.  The interventions are motivated by an ideology which justifies the prescribed changes.  Authoritarian regimes override various social obstacles to the plan, enabling a dictatorship of the planner.  No compromises are possible with the singular answer provided by the planner.  The lack of resistance means lack of tacit, specialized knowledge.  An inability to properly adjust to local conditions.

 

Caveats?

The focus is on how totalitarian regimes misused information.  The methods of how government intervention failed to resolve collective action problems.  There is a lack of information on how extensive interventions were or could be successful, with some support for interventions that are limited and local. 

Not the End of the World: How We Can Be the First Generation to Build a Sustainable Planet by Hannah Ritchie

adventurous hopeful informative inspiring fast-paced

5.0

Is This An Overview?

The problem with doomsday environmental narratives is that they can paralyze decision making efforts to solve the crises, and reduce public trust when the claims turn out to be wrong.  Doomsday claims contain a lot of misinformation, which enable policies that appear to be environmentally sustainable but are harming the environment.

 

Through human efforts in obtaining environmentally sustainable knowledge, people have changed practices of production and developed technology that can enable humanity to achieve sustainability in the 21st century.  Achieving sustainability for the first time in human history, as the world has never before been sustainable.  Throughout history, people either could not satisfy their present needs, or they compromised future needs.  There used to be a sustainability trade-off, a conflict between human well-being and environmental protection as each came at the expense of the other.  But, technology and methods have enabled the ability to achieve both human well-being and environmental protection at the same time.

 

There used to be a trade-off between cheap energy sources or environmentally sustainable energy sources.  But technology has enabled environmentally sustainable energy sources to become cost-competitive with unsustainable technologies.  Removing the trade-off as the cheap energy sources are the sustainable sources.  Economic policies no longer need to be in conflict with environmental sustainably, as economies can grow while reducing pollution.  Although energy use has increased relative to how much was used before, there is far less pollution than before.  There are many different ways that human society is much better than in the past such as life expectancy, food availability, education, and income opportunities.  But there is still much for humanity to resolve. 

 

Caveats?

To overcome environmental sustainability misinformation, various metrics are used to show the evidence of certain claims.  The evidence is presented in a way that does not require a statistics background.  As the author references, the focus of the metrics is on environmental sustainability, while societies have various needs for which different metrics would be more appropriate.  

1789: The Threshold of the Modern Age by David Andress

adventurous challenging dark emotional informative reflective slow-paced

3.0

Is This An Overview?

Many social changes were happening to the United States, France, and British during the 1780s-1790s.  Obtaining independence from a monarchy, to defending sovereignty, to economics, to social rights.  Each were forced to reconsider what they thought of liberty and freedom.  Each considered the rights and treatment of slaves, along with the penal system.  Methods were used to protect free speech, to prevent persecution for disagreement with those in power.  The privileges of the elite, the nobles were challenged.  Exploitation by those in power were to be resisted.  As power shifted to private entities, to the market system, those in power had their own exploitation methods which were challenged.  Developing a need for workers’ rights.  Technological development changed infrastructure. 

 

Caveats?

The book covers a range of topics, and therefore there is limited information on each topic.  More research would be needed to understand each society and event.  The history is represented using contemporary values, of the early 21st century.  Creating a narrative fallacy for what was right and wrong. 

The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements by Eric Hoffer

adventurous emotional hopeful informative inspiring reflective fast-paced

5.0

Is This An Overview?

Mass movements are a method for people to change society, a method for the individual to change themself.  Each movement might make different claims, but their methodology is the same.  Movements enable collective action, but at the cost of individual’s identity and sovereignty.  Each individual defers to the values and views of the group, rather than proclaim their own values.  Movements are perpetuated when members are willing to participate in collective action and self-sacrifice.

 

Movements enable change.  People who have accepted their conditions and are comfortable with their lives are not susceptible to a movement.  Those who want change are the dispossessed, the disillusioned, the discarded, the rejected, those who cannot find meaning in their lives.  Those who want change think that the future holds more value for them than the present.  They are willing to substitute their own lack of self-worth and meaning by seeking to change others and dedicate themselves to a cause.  Lack of self-worth enables the person to want to relegate the responsibility of choosing to others, to be free of freedom, to be free of one’s own individual failures and frustrations. 

 

Members of the group become willing to harm others, as their cause is perceived as righteous.  Persecution justifies more persecution as those acts validate the movements beliefs.  Movements have an enemy which must be vanquished for the better future to come about.  An enemy provides a common source of hatred, which unifies the members and reduces the opposition’s resistance.

 

Caveats?

The references to mass movements is of the totalitarian variety.  Not all movements are totalitarian, and various movements have factions that use different methods other than repression.  Not all change requires totalitarianism.  What this book provides is a way to identify totalitarian movements.  Explains how and why totalitarian movements develop.

Empire by Antonio Negri, Michael Hardt

challenging slow-paced

2.0

Is This An Overview?

Empire is a form of sovereign power that governs globalization.  The global economic and cultural exchanges.  The sovereignty of nation-states has declined due to an inability to govern economic and cultural exchanges.  The sovereignty of nation-states is being replaced by a sovereignty composed of national and supranational institutions.  Empire does not mean imperialism, and does not establish a territorial center of power.  Empire’s governance is decentralized. 

 

Empires seek to be inclusive to different values, to different people.  Creating methods for negotiating a perpetual and universal peace.  The empire’s justification for the use of force, is to use force in the service of resolving humanitarian problems, and imposing peace.  Empire is brought into being by the capacity to resolve conflicts.  Through empire, people have been overcoming repressive political and economic methods.  Through empire, people have been experimenting with alternative methods of liberty, while seeking international cohesion.  The power of empires comes from making people more productive. 

 

Caveats?

This book can be difficult to read.  Difficult because of the way the authors explain the ideas, using a myriad of philosophical and historic references.  The references are provided a short description, but read like jargon meant for those who already know the references.  References that could be interpreted differently based on what details have been added or left out.