**spoiler alert** Mare cocainar Paler asta, jumatate din carte am crezut ca omul e pe heroina/cocaina sau ceva psihedelice....cand defapt a scris poat**spoiler alert** Mare cocainar Paler asta, jumatate din carte am crezut ca omul e pe heroina/cocaina sau ceva psihedelice....cand defapt a scris poate romanul cu bataia cea mai lunga din ce am citit.
A construit o intreaga luma/scenariu/"script" in jurul ideii de frica de cum frica afecteaza societatea.
Este prima oara cand cineva isi ia indatorirea de a explica atat de laborios cat de nemernica este frica in societate si indiferenta fata de semenii nostri.
Fiecare dintre noi in goana noastra prin viata decidem sa ne izolam cu un asa numit "dom de sticla" , dom prin care nu mai putem auzi necazurile altora, tipetele lor de ajutor. Gonim uitandu-ne doar in fata zicandu-ne ca nu e problema noastra sa ii ascultam pe ceilalti cand in definitiv oricum cu totii ajungem in acelasi loc.
Poate cea mai grozava idee este aceea ca frica naste mai multa frica si incet incet, daca nu actionam, daca toti ne retragem in grota noastra sigura ca sa traim, societatea cade prada fricii, se degradeaza, iar cei ce favorizeaza frica capata puteri din ce in ce mai mari.
Mi-sa parut superb modul in care autorul spune ca mai vinovat decat Robespierre pentru toate crimele comise in timpul revolutiei franceze a fost insasi multimea. Multimea care de frica doar a asistat , a privit esafodul in timp ce executiile se desfasurau in lant. Multimea e cea mai vinovata , oamenii care au acceptat toate acestea de frica sau ca pe un spectacol.
Poate cel mai interesant a fost faptul ca executiile lui Robespierre ar fi continuat mult si bine caci avea gloata in jurul lui agregata ori de spaima ori pentru spectacol, pana cand dusmanii sai au trimis politisti sa-l inhate facand o declaratie multimii cum ca cei ce il sustin vor ajunge pe esafod si ei. In acel moment gloata s-a dezintegrat lasand-ul pe Robespierre prada celor cativa politisti.
Imi pare ca aceeasi situatie o gasim si in cadrul Orientului Mijlociu. Degeaba ni-se spune ca Islamul este o religie a pacii si ca doar X% din credinciosi sunt radicali. Daca restul de 99 % dosr asista si accepta inseamna ca tolereaza si ca sunt de acord cu asta. Multimea este mai nemernica si mai vinovata decat calaul si cel ce ordona aceste fapte oribile !
Cartea dupa mine, e un apel la societate intru lepadarea letargiei si a fricii noastre de zi cu zi. Vezi un seaman care tipa/care sufera, dute si intreaba-l ce a patit, nu il ignora crezand ca nu e treaba ta, caci facand aceasta doar te minti singur ca nu e problema ta, te retragi in cosmelia ta si raul castiga teren, empatia dispare,raul mai castiga un pic teren in ziua aceea
Am stat destul de mult sa deliberez ce nota sa dau acestei opere. Daca la 50% voiam sa ii ofer un maxim 2/5 dupa 90% pot spune ca am vazut in sfarsit imaginea de ansamblu , de ce a stat atata sa construiasca acest univers , aceasta fabula. Totusi cred ca m-as fi putut lipsi de mult din ce a scris. Daca ar fi fost doar partea de argumentare presarata cu argumentele istorice invocate ar fi fost un 5/5 fara doar si poate.
P.S daca va apucati sa o cititi, mergeti pana la capat chiar daca vi-se va parea ca consumati refularile, spasmele mentale ale unui nebun cu scte in regula, ale unui schizofrenic !...more
**spoiler alert** Dezamagitor ! Am pornit inflacarat , crezand ca voi asista la un adevarat spectacol contrarian, ca toate cutumele si valorile traditi**spoiler alert** Dezamagitor ! Am pornit inflacarat , crezand ca voi asista la un adevarat spectacol contrarian, ca toate cutumele si valorile traditionale insuflate de-a lungul vietii imi vor fi spulberate.
Cartea a inceput binisor , desfiintand curentele filozofice anterioare cu precadere stoicismul , explicand ca omul ar trebui lasat condus de impulsuri de simturi , caci asta este tot ceea ce este autentic in el , sa nu incerce sa isi infraneze nimic si ca filozoful stoic indeamna catre solitudine , modestie si cumpatare , tocmai fiindca asta este viata la care a fost el obligat, faptul ca a fost privat de tocmai resursele catre care isi exprima inversunarea
Foarte interesant faptul ca in viziunea lui Nietsche un filosof stoic precum Epicur indeamna catre o viata solitara si modesta , cumpatata tocmai fiindca el nu a prins publicului , nu a stiut sa se vanda , astfel el s-a lasat prada vanitatii si singur s-a indepartatat de toti si toate , scriind inversunat din orgoliu fata de filozofii vremii lui care nu au dus astfel de lipsuri.
Dupa aceasta introducere relativ buna a urmat un calvar de cel putin 120-150 pagini in care a batut campii , a adus in discutie curente moderne si trecute , conditia filozofului, dar nu am sesizat nimic concret , nici o idee tangibila ... Nu am reusit sa inteleg care este filozofia sa , si ce anume profeseaza in aceasta carte.
Cartea a mai avut cateva idei interesante cu privire la conditia femeii. Faptul ca aceasta a cautat sa capete drepturi si sa ajunga sa se "bata" de la egal la egal cu barbatul, a ajuns in societatea moderna sa se degradeze , tocmai pentru ca daruri precum viclenia , cochetaria , feminitatea , imaginatia nu au fost niciodata vazute cu dispret de barbat , ba dimpotriva.
La final a s-a vorbit destul de mult despre spiritul german si cum se compara acesta cu cel francez sau englez.
Per total nu am simtit ca am reusit sa il asociez cu o idee , cu o viziune a lumii unificata. Am citit foarte multe vorbe aruncate in vant care nu au ajuns la o coerenta.
Marturisesc ca Herman Hesse a facut o treaba infinit mai buna schitand aceasta viziune a valorilor contrariana in romanul sau Lupul de stepa.
**spoiler alert** Mi-a pus neuronii serios la treaba aceasta carte. Cateva idei: - O democratie adevarata este cea in care vointa tuturor cetatenilor se**spoiler alert** Mi-a pus neuronii serios la treaba aceasta carte. Cateva idei: - O democratie adevarata este cea in care vointa tuturor cetatenilor se rasfrange direct in guvernare si legislatie , acest lucru fiind imposibil pentru orice formatiune statala mai mare decat un oras-stat antic din motive logistice. - Rousseau considera impartirea puterilor in stat este o prostie si provoaca numai probleme , caci cele trei puteri sunt parti ale intregului si nu pot lucra in izolare fara sa se incurce una pe alta. - Atunci cand vorbim despre un stat de drept, suveranul reprezinta insasi vointa poporului materializata; cele doua nu pot avea nici un altfel de relatie ; atunci cand suvernaul o ia pe alta cale sau asculta mai mult de interesul privat (formatiuni minoritare) si practic promulga legi sau guverneaza pentru interesul particular el nu mai reprezinta vointa generala , nu mai putem vorbi de exstenta unui stat ci de poporul devenind doar o gloata fara drepturi. - Aparatul de stat trebuie sa fie proportional cu marimea teritoriului ocupat si al populatiei si trebuie continuu calibrat pentru a reprezenta poporul. Rousseau sugereaza ca reprezentatii puterii legislative sa reprezinta radacina patrata a populatiei respectivului stat. (Aici ma intreb daca oare in cazul Romaniei se respecta √20mil =~4500) - Cu cat statul cucereste teritorii si isi mareste suprafata, parghiile puterii devin mai puternice iar locuitorii din ce in ce mai izolati de luarea deciziilor si deci implicit in timp se ajunge la acumularea puterii in mainile catorva. - Legile trebuie sa evolueze o data cu realitatile zilnice, sa fie reimprospatate , modificate de se cere sau chiar eliminate de nu mai corespund. - Odata ce functionarul public este platit , cetateanul isi pierde din putere. El cedeaza responsabilitatea si ofera bani pentru a isi folosi timpul sau pentru interesul personal si nu pentru interesul general. Pentru cel platit , aceasta devine doar o slujba, si deseori actioneaza in interesul particular.In timpul republicii romane cetatenii de vaza considerau o mandrie sa faca parte din senat .
Foarte buna , destul de grea , totusi cartea aceasta mi-a creat un intreg model mental al relatiei dintre stat, suveran , reprezentanti si cetateni si bineinteles legi....more
**spoiler alert** Steinbeck ne poarta dintr-un capat al Americii (New York) pana la Pacific (California) intr-o calatorie cu dubita impreuna cu cainel**spoiler alert** Steinbeck ne poarta dintr-un capat al Americii (New York) pana la Pacific (California) intr-o calatorie cu dubita impreuna cu cainele sau batran. E ca si cum as fi citit un roman al lui Tolkien in care Pamantul de Mijloc este SUA anilor 1960 iar orcii , elfii , si diferitele semintii de oameni sunt tacutii din Maine, pasnicii din Nebraska , ardentii Texani , rasistii din Louisiana.
Cartea are deosebit de multe momente de contemplare asupra vietii, a modului de trai american , a existentei si foarte multe dialoguri amuzante dar pline de povete cu cainele insotitor Charlie.
Cel mai mult m-au impresionat momentele de oprire la marginea drumului si contemplare asupra unui naturii si a vietii , asupra directiei in care se indreapta lumea.
Steinbeck asta chiar a reusit sa prevada in anii 1960 crizele si chestiunile ce provoaca tensiuni din zilele noastre.
Am apreciat ca in roman a intrat si drumul inapoi catre New York , drum identic dar in sens invers, parcurs de eroii din romanul sau Fructele Maniei in goana lor catre bogatiile Californiei mergand din Oklahoma prin coada de castron a Texasului , New Mexico , Arizona.
Am apreciat si faptul ca a aruncat lumina asupra inceputurilor tensiunilor rasiale , din statele sudiste din anii 60 atunci cand miscarea lui MLK era inca in pruncie.
As fi dat 4 stele dar au fost momente cand m-am plictisit , cum ar fi descrierea copacilor de tip Sequoia.
Per total o lectura foarte buna de aventura si viata , ce ar fi putut fi si mai buna daca ar fi fost oleaca mai scurta....more
**spoiler alert** Julian was what i would call a genius, an enlightened monarch,so way ahead of his time, like a Nikola Tesla of our time.
Its painful **spoiler alert** Julian was what i would call a genius, an enlightened monarch,so way ahead of his time, like a Nikola Tesla of our time.
Its painful almost to see such an intelligent , compassionate , resourceful young man dealing with the stupidity, gore and lack of interest for himan life of that era, with his intelligence He tried unsuccesfully to convince proto christians with facts and philosophy that its not ok to enforce their religion upon everyone by force christians-which were such a unyieldly,troublesome,murderous lot in the IV century AD.
Even though by birth i am a christian , the hypocrisy of christians is enormous in this text and i must confess it has shaken my view on centralized religion.
I am totally ok with democracy and reaching consensus in everything from relationships , state affairs , law ...etc but i find it damn hard to respect what a bunch of people congregated and decided what the customs and traditions are for centuries to come , and enforcing these customs by force (many scriptures which were better suited burned and their writers deemed blasphemous)
Christianity basically didnt bring anything new to the table , its just a mix of local religions continously changed so that it was able to convert all the populations of the empire.
For example even the ritual of drinking wine and eating bread of the saviour was stolen from The Cult of Mithras.
The term of fathers stolen from Zarathustra.
I find it pretty damn disconcerting to follow the customs of a religion that came to be only by using sheer force and dominance over the others and to believe in something that came to be through murder and opportunism not through the sheer truth.
The best parts of the book were Julian's debates with the episcopes over christandom vs hellenistic gods where you can actually see the christians have no spine , no truth , changing everything in order to suit them.
For example publicly rejecting Plato,Homer and other great authors and deeming them the devil , while using their operas in their monasteries and schools in order to educate young people and to make the religion more atteactive.
I can't stand double standards !
The book is great , Julian is a terrific writer , with an outstanding clarity of thoughts.
I got to see the roman society of the IV century AD in its entirety as well as Rome's traiditonal enemies like Germans or Sassanians.
**spoiler alert** Dezastru, foarte greu am terminat cartea asta. As spune ca 80% sunt cugetari fara sens , se porneste de la o idee apoi se trece la u**spoiler alert** Dezastru, foarte greu am terminat cartea asta. As spune ca 80% sunt cugetari fara sens , se porneste de la o idee apoi se trece la un eveniment istoric care nu are nici o legatura cu ce s-a spus , nici macar ca fabula. Inteleg ca e fluxul liber al gandirii si as intelege daca ar fi cum insusi spune autorul "parerile mele se mai si bat in cap"... Ei bine nu se bat cap in cap ci pur si simplu nu au legatura una cu alta.
Mult prea mult gunoi intelectual in 230 pagini.
Din cand in cand citind pe diagonala (caci la un moment dat nu am mai rezistat - dupa 80% din carte) mai dai de cate o idee superba , filozofica care chiar te loveste in moalele capului.
Cel mai fain capitol a fost cel despre relatii amoroase. Mi-a placut cum stilul de viata boem si libertin este apreciat, ba mai mul, sprijinit cu o intreaga suita de dovezi , demonstratii si exemple din societatea inalta.
Per total o carte greu de parcurs cu mici scantei pe ici pe colo....more
**spoiler alert** Este drept ca am fost informat cu privire la tematica cartii , cu toate acestea , mi-a cam iesit pe nas citind primele o suta dr de **spoiler alert** Este drept ca am fost informat cu privire la tematica cartii , cu toate acestea , mi-a cam iesit pe nas citind primele o suta dr de pagini in care se vorbeste aproape exclusiv despre moarte , chimioterapie , tratamente paliative , sinucidere asistata , boli ale batranetii care aduc moartea , infarcturi , cancer , precum si prieteni , colegi , rude moarte.
As putea spune , ca , continutul acestei carti se prezinta asemenea pulsului unui muribund...plat , si rar , cate o pulsatie.
Acestea fiind spuse , odata ce trecem de jumatate (nevasta se prapadeste)cartea incepe sa devina deosebit de interesanta.
Asistam la toate starile tranzitorii , angoasele si bineinteles durerea prin care trece Irvin Yalom in varsta de 88 ani , somitate in psihologie , odata cu moartea sotiei dupa o casnicie 50 de ani ; mai mult decat atat , suntem martori si la procesul sau de ... ameliorare , caci , de vindecare nu ar putea fi vorba !...more
Mika Waltari describes the last months before the fall and the Ottoman siege of Constatinople of 1453 so vivdly that you might think he lived in that Mika Waltari describes the last months before the fall and the Ottoman siege of Constatinople of 1453 so vivdly that you might think he lived in that period and interviewed the survivors.
A story of true love ending in tragedy between an outcast emperor that returns from the west to his beloved city right before its fall and the daughter of the highest noble.
I am still amazed by the amount of hate between orthodoxy and catholicism at that point in time. Despite the desperate calls for help of the greeks towards the pope ,only two mercenary companies totalling ~1000 men ,one genovese the other venetian , heed the call and defend the city. The fact that most greeks view the 'damn latins' worse then the turks and would rather open the gates (which they do) to the latter is also compelling.
Though i refuse to believe it to be true , Transilvanian John Hunyadi is depicted as giving the turks advice on how to storm the city.
Another amzing fact is that there are large numbers of christians in the turkish army including serbian sappers.
The siege is described in a journal-like manner , for me , with an unprecedented level of detail including : Cannons , their operators , the damage inflicted upon stone infrastructure and inhabitants , repair and molding processes , assaults on the castle walls, underground sapper warfare , hand to hand combat and also naval battles.
The author does not sugarcoat the events even one bit - we are also shown the grim fate of the defenders and also non combatants after the fall of the city.
For a history lover (or a romance fan) this book is pure gold. Looking forward to read more of Waltari's books !...more
Maybe i am shallower than i thought but this book was a real pain to read. The first half is all about expressing some general truths wrapped in reallyMaybe i am shallower than i thought but this book was a real pain to read. The first half is all about expressing some general truths wrapped in really hard to get sentences just for the sake of fkin rhetorics.
I felt like i was banging my head against a wall at each page. The second part of the book gets better , the author focusing more on virtues.
The final 10% of the book is another hard nut to crack.
Might be to the fact that i have read a translation of this book , but the general impression for the most part of it was that it was way out of my leMight be to the fact that i have read a translation of this book , but the general impression for the most part of it was that it was way out of my league.
The author dives deep into philosopic formalism in his endeavour to explain that our way of communication is just an image of the world , and for the most part ,our language is not enough to explain one's thought.
And if we are not able to explain through language our thought , than , it means , that, we shouldn't even try , it boils down to the idea that : what can't be said MUST not be said.
Along the pages you will get bombarded with mathematical /logistic demonstrations of different hypothesis. I was pretty fascinated that by reading his tractatus there's quite a lot of linear allgebra and group theory involved.
Even if for the most part i couldn't keep up with the pace and complexity of this writing, the last 15 pages were something like a distillation of his take on the world , on communication and on life.
A good book (even if you don't understand much of it except for the last pages-in my case)...more
**spoiler alert** A not so consistent read with lots of ups and downs.
The story behind the story : a father that grieves over the death of his son tri**spoiler alert** A not so consistent read with lots of ups and downs.
The story behind the story : a father that grieves over the death of his son tries to understand what his son was : An idea , a pattern , was it only in his imagination and where did he go after death. He then takes his motor bike and goes in a circuit of the USA reminiscing the time spent with his son.
Throughout the book we are told what quality is and how it affects the modern man . We also get a glimpse of Phaedrus the alter ego of the author , the insane version that is interested in philosophy , dialectic and rhetoric.
The book is lots of fun when describing how one man searching for qualiity and the truth gets in university and basicallly demolishes his professors.
The book draws parallels between the art of motorcycle maintainance and quality. Basically that every thing that you set your mind upon can become art and be the vessel of quality if you do it systematically, you preeplan it and give attentiion to all.the details.More so when you do something of quality you influence the people around you , you "infect" them , and it spreads for the greater good.
There are times when its mind blowing , like the whole approach to definiing what makes something real. Is it our senses that define that something , or do we have an apriori image of that thing that changes in time.
There are also times when i find it boring or really too hard to follow.The first 55% of the book is great , you caan follow along with ease. Then you hit a rut up until 82% , when the book starts climbing and becomes exceptional . (I am referrinng to.the university chapters).
The ending wraps it all up quite nicely and its the place where your accumulated questions are answered quite consistently.
If this book was a shorter somewhere in the 300-350 pages it wouldve been a solid 5/5....more
"Merge cu zeii cel ce neincetat are sufletul impacat cu cele ce i-au fost harazite de catre soarta"
"Moartea reprezinta sfarsitul repercusiunilor simtu"Merge cu zeii cel ce neincetat are sufletul impacat cu cele ce i-au fost harazite de catre soarta"
"Moartea reprezinta sfarsitul repercusiunilor simturilor , al conditiei de marioneta purtata de impulsuri , al ratacirii gandurilor , al serviciului adus carnii"
"Este rusinos ca intr-o viata in care corpul nu se lasa cuprins de slabiciune , sufletul sa o faca primul"
"Adapteaza-te evenimentelor pe care soarta ti le-a harazit.Iubeste , dar cu adevarat oamenii cu care destinul te-a unit"
Este fara doar si poate cea mai buna carte pe care am citit-o in acest an. Similar cu Seneca , Marcus Aurelius insa duce stoicismul la un cu totul alt nivel de spiritualitate .
Am fost placut impresionat de pledoaria autorului despre acceptarea oamenilor si mai ales a celor care ne fac rau , a accepta faptul ca fiecare lucru care ni se intampla are scopul sau , iar cei ce fac rau au si eu rostul lor in societate , ca toti suntem precum un roi de albine cu diverse atributii de-a lungul vietii.
Cel mai important este sa ramanem fideli daimon-ului nostru , sa parcurgem viata impreuna cu el , sa nu ne abatem de la adevar si dreptate , sa ne folosim darurile pentru a ajuta societatea si ,sa ne detasam atat de intamplarile fericire cat si de suparari caci toate acestea fac parte din ordinea fireasca a lucrurilor.Ce conteaza in cele din urma este ca intelectul sa nu cada prada lumescului.
Pentru cel ce citeste acest zid de text : Cred ca fie doar si meditand din cand in cand asupra ideilor expuse in acest manuscris iti vei usura viata , iti vei crea anumite ancore de care te poti agata atunci cand soarta iti e potrivnica iar in final te vei bucura mai mult de viata.
Some ideas that have stuck with me from tthis great book: -always hear out all opinions , do not try to suppress different views because in that momentSome ideas that have stuck with me from tthis great book: -always hear out all opinions , do not try to suppress different views because in that moment you assume that you hold the ultimate truth and besides doing wrong to yout fellow you rob yourself of a possible truth -when you plan to take a side do not assume it is the right one since only yours is studied /checked.Only when you have heard the most dedicated supporter of the opposing view and you have rebuked all their arguments can you really say you hold the truth. - whenever society tries to suppress the "deviants" the nonconformists ,the geniuses in favor of the masses it does itself a great disservice since the progress , the reformation usually comes exactly from these people that see the world in other ways.And even if these people are not to be put in power (similar to the aristocracy of middle ages) , they can act as eye-openers to the ones that are in power and can change society.
The last part of the book covers the relation between the state and the individual and when and in what circumstances should the former interfere with the liberty of the latter.
Definetly something worth reading , at least as a mental exercise....more
SawThough i'm not into self helping books and motivational bullshit , i chose this one since not everyone passes through 1 extermination camp and variSawThough i'm not into self helping books and motivational bullshit , i chose this one since not everyone passes through 1 extermination camp and various other concentration camps during ww2 , survives , not only remaining sane but starts a new approach to psychotherapy (logotherapy) which focuses not on the past of the sufferer but on his future , on the reason to live. The author explains how even extreme suffering is a reason on its own to keep your will to live to not abandon the fight.
As he puts it , every moment past of our life should not be seen as another sheet of the calendar that gets thrown in the trash can , but as a sheet that gets folded and placed to a special place , a sheet that enriches human existence,the old being in this case the happy ones who can bask in the potential that has been fullfilled ....more
Loading...
