This book is a follow-up to Wolf’s previous book, Proust and the Squid, which explored how the brain learns to read and how reading changes the way weThis book is a follow-up to Wolf’s previous book, Proust and the Squid, which explored how the brain learns to read and how reading changes the way we think and feel. In this book, Wolf writes a series of letters to her readers to share her concerns and hopes about what is happening to the reading brain as it adapts to digital mediums.
Wolf raises some difficult questions, such as:
1. Will children learn to incorporate the full range of “deep reading” processes that are at the core of the expert reading brain? 2. Will the mix of a seemingly infinite set of distractions for children’s attention and their quick access to immediate, voluminous information alter their ability to think for themselves? 3. With information at their fingertips, will the next generation learn to build their own storehouse of knowledge, which could impede the ability to make analogies and draw inferences from what they know? 4. Will all these influences change the formation in children and the use in adults of “slower” cognitive processes like critical thinking, personal reflection, imagination, and empathy that comprise deep reading and that influence both how we think and how we live our lives? 5. How can we preserve deep reading processes in future iterations of the reading brain?...more
Sorry, but I can't take seriously someone who can read the entire Twilight saga four times.Sorry, but I can't take seriously someone who can read the entire Twilight saga four times....more
"Noise" is positioned as another ground-breaking dual lens to look at the world, fresh from Kahneman's desk. However, it is not as radical as TFAS sin"Noise" is positioned as another ground-breaking dual lens to look at the world, fresh from Kahneman's desk. However, it is not as radical as TFAS since it only extends the central argument and is not half as well written. This one could have been an additional chapter in an updated edition.
The central thesis is that while we worry about bias a lot (the basis of which was explored in TFAS), noise is the silent enemy - affecting our ability to think clearly and make sound decisions. Historically we have been blind to bias of various sorts, and we need to continue our pursuit of eliminating bias, but noise can be just as iniquitous and needs to be addressed as well. Noise can be insidious, sneaking into our decision-making processes in subtle and often unconscious ways.
The book ultimately extends the central thesis of TFAS - our decisions are flawed: We make wrong decisions, yes, but even more so, we make random decisions. If asked to replay our decisions in a DBRCT of some sort, we'll most likely create a spread of decisions that'll make us question our identity. That's the reality.
Kahneman leaves us worse off than where we were at the end of TFAS. However, he does offer some techniques for improving our focus and concentration, as well as ways to reduce the number of distractions and interruptions that can cause noise in our decisions. But in the end, the two books together show us up as even more flawed beings than ever. ...more
1. People act from their experiences. Don't judge from yours.
[image]
2. Luck & Risk is all around you. They
Pithy book. Here's some for you:
1. People act from their experiences. Don't judge from yours.
[image]
2. Luck & Risk is all around you. They don't fit the stories you want to tell.
[image]
3. If you can't recognize when you have enough, you will soon have nothing.
[image]
4. Warren Buffet could have been an ordinary investor if not for his longevity. Investing - if done well - is utterly boring. It’s because the chief ingredient in the growth of a portfolio is time.
[image]
5. More than big returns, be financially unbreakable. If you are unbreakable you actually will get the biggest returns, because will be able to stick around long enough for compounding to work wonders.
[image]
6. The tail wags the dog in Finance and Business. Long tails—the farthest ends of a distribution of outcomes—have tremendous influence, where a small number of events can account for the majority of outcomes.
[image]
7. People want to become wealthier to make them happier. Happiness is a complicated subject because everyone’s different. But if there’s a common denominator in happiness—a universal fuel of joy—it’s that people want to control their lives. It is the highest dividend money pays.
[image]
8. The Man in the Fancy Car is irrelevant, because the observers are busy imagining themselves in it.
[image]
9. There is no faster way to feel rich than to spend lots of money on really nice things. There's no faster way to not be rich as well. That's the paradox of wealth.
[image]
10. One of the most powerful ways to increase your savings isn’t to raise your income. It’s to raise your humility. Dont spend money to show you have money. Savings = Income - Ego
[image]
11. Adopt a reasonable strategy, not an ultra rational one. The plan that you are able to stick to is better than the one that looks good on a spreadsheet.
[image]
12. "Things that have never happened before happen all the time.” History is mostly the study of surprising events. 2020 should have taught us this, of course.
[image]
13. Margin of Safety—you can also call it room for error—is the only effective way to safely navigate a world that is governed by odds, not certainties.
[image]
14. An underpinning of psychology is that people are poor forecasters of their future selves. Imagining a goal is easy and fun. Imagining a goal in the context of the realistic life stresses that grow with competitive pursuits is something entirely different.
[image]
15. Don't think of market losses from fluctuations as a fine, but as an admission fee. It'll help you stay in longer.
[image]
16. The financial game has one fundamental parameter - the time horizon. Never copy someone working with a different time horizon than you.
[image]
17. Optimism is the best bet for most people because the world tends to get better for most people most of the time. Progress happens too slowly to notice, but setbacks happen too quickly to ignore. Pessimism sounds smarter, but optimism is the long game.
[image]
18. Trying to make sense of the world is the cause of most mistakes. Psychologist Philip Tetlock once wrote: “We need to believe we live in a predictable, controllable world, so we turn to authoritative-sounding people who promise to satisfy that need.” Respect the mess.
A simple algorithm to conceive of literary plots could be to slot them as belonging to one of these categories: Man vs. Nature, Man vs. Self, Man vs. A simple algorithm to conceive of literary plots could be to slot them as belonging to one of these categories: Man vs. Nature, Man vs. Self, Man vs. Man & Man vs. Society.
Brian & Tom enlists findings from computer science to guide us through these. Algorithms here are the shortcuts or even the intuitions that guide us through problems that are intractable at first glance. We, apparently, use them everyday. Brian & Tom are here to document this and to show how exactly we can make them more efficient, by exploring the idea of human algorithm design—searching for better solutions to the challenges people encounter every day. The central thesis is that it’s best to use shortcuts to improve your probability of success and remember that “perfection is the enemy of the good.” The book’s algorithms are intended to reduce time spent puzzling, conserve energy for the things that matter.
When it comes to the first two categories, computer science is shown to be a good guide to problems created by the fundamental structure of the world, and by our limited capacities for processing information. As with all the sciences before it, computer science and data science are pretty effective in dealing with these issues. And the computational approach seems to be a remarkably useful improvement in dealing with areas like self-control or complex everyday decisions.
In this part of the book, when we deal with Man vs. Nature & Man vs. Self, we mostly encounter well-defined problems and potential algorithms to deal with them.
We have a nice variety of approaches here: First, we are given a taste of the “Optimal stopping problems” which spring from the irreversibility and irrevocability of time - How do you decide when to stop searching, be it for a the perfect mate, the perfect employee, the perfect job or the perfect weekend movie? The answer seems to be simple: 37% - you stop once 37% of your options have been checked out. Much more useful than it sounds, this number is the output of an algorithm. Whether it’s an apartment, a parking space, or a spouse, the right moment to stop searching and start choosing falls under the umbrella of problems called “optimal stopping.” The general solution to optimal stopping problems reveals that you should spend 37 percent of your time gaining an impression of what’s out there and the rest of the time selecting anything better than the average of what you observed thus far. Need to rent an apartment in three weeks? Simply take one week to observe and two weeks to pounce on the next best thing. This means that you have a good sample of the options you have so you don’t jump to early decision and miss out on the good choices that were just around the corner, and at the same time, you don’t waste all your time only searching!
Then we are introduced to “the explore/exploit dilemma”, springing from time’s limited supply - should we revisit favourite restaurants and places and ensure a good time (exploit) or should we explore bravely out to new experiences and places (explore) in the hope that we might stumble on something incredible? If we don’t explore, we might miss out on a lot of YOLO stuff , but if we only explore and do not exploit the good stuff we have already discovered (a favourite dish, a cared-for home, spouse, close friends, etc.) then we might me missing out on even more. SO how do we figure out an optimal ration between Explore/Exploit? Turns out computer scientists have been working on finding this balance for more than fifty years. They even have a name for it: the explore/exploit tradeoff. The explore/exploit tradeoff tells us how to find the balance between trying new things and enjoying our favourites. The answer is to think about the time you have left - the more time you have the more your strategy should shift. So the young should explore more and the elderly should exploit more and wherever you are in that continuum, you should ration the Es accordingly. YOLO, after all.
There are more: Relaxation and randomization emerge as vital and necessary strategies for dealing with the ineluctable complexity of challenges like trip planning and vaccinations, Sorting theory tells us how (and whether) to arrange our offices, Caching theory tells us how to fill our closets, Scheduling theory tells us how to fill the unforgiving minute well, etc.
Then comes the next two categories: Man vs. Man and Man vs. Society problems - these are, in effect, the problems that we pose and cause each other. Here the authors move away from computer science and enlists mathematics as well, specifically and predictably, game theory, to help us out. And the cross-pollination between game theory and computer science gives us algorithmic game theory for tackling issues like investing, bubble and even plain arguments. The solutions are much less rigorous here, with 1) the advice to “change the game” if the game threatens to go into less than optimal equilibriums and 2) an exhortation to be “computationally kind” to reduce the cognitive load of the participants, emerging as the main “algorithms to live by” when it comes to living in society.
So as always, the book would seem to be teaching us again that no matter how computationally adept we are, dealing with each other is something that just can’t be fitted into any algorithm, formula or thumb-rule. We gotta wing it....more
Does not succeed in representing Jung’s notoriously disorganized work in a coherent fashion. Instead this VSI is content with being a maximally shorteDoes not succeed in representing Jung’s notoriously disorganized work in a coherent fashion. Instead this VSI is content with being a maximally shortened summary of Jung’s autobiography (Memories, Dreams, Reflections). The later chapters dedicated to the character types are cursory and, to be honest, wikipedia does a better job. Read Jung's Map of the Soul by Murray Stein instead for a better concise introduction. ...more
`Ultimately,' wrote Jung, `every individual life is at the same time the eternal life of the species.'
This is a readable (almost) introduction to the `Ultimately,' wrote Jung, `every individual life is at the same time the eternal life of the species.'
This is a readable (almost) introduction to the whole of Jung’s cosmology. Partly defensive in its arguments, the book proves useful when it sticks to just presenting Jung’s thoughts and not trying to show how it is still in sync with latest research (esp when it tries to link psychology to modern physics!). Jung and Freud are best read as imaginative writers and it would probably be even more fun to read them while viewing them as collaborators or co-myth-makers. Stein tries his best to hold back from attacking Freud and explaining Jung, but the proverbial slips are a few too many.
The good part is that Stein is a good cartographer. Stein constructs the cosmology slowly with a lot of care and precision. He starts with the Ego and slowly introduces us to its Shadow. Then the Persona and the Animus are introduced. Finally the Self is brought in, the most delicate and easy to misunderstand concept kept for the last. Then we move out of the mind and into the realm of the outer world via Synchronicity and start exploring ESP and such phenomena. In the end, we conclude with the awesome picture of the Collective Unconscious that stretches from inside our psyche to encompass and create/effect the whole universe. It is myth-making at its magnificent best, who wouldn’t be impressed? I was....more
Thread #00000001: Started by ARIADNE at xxx p.m. xxx xxx BC GMT
‘No one realised that the book and the labyrinth were one and the s The Hungry Labyrinth
Thread #00000001: Started by ARIADNE at xxx p.m. xxx xxx BC GMT
‘No one realised that the book and the labyrinth were one and the same …’ – who said thIs and about what?
:-)
Sarpedontosaurus: What’s going on? Where am I?
Sarpedontosaurus: Hi? Is there anyone else here …? Pls reply ...
Sarpedontosaurus: I see that I have been "liked". What does that mean? This is weird. Hello?
Borgesausaurus: I'm here - can't you hear my voice echoing down the labyrinth of years..
Sarpedontosaurus: Are you being cryptic? Do you know where we are? Where are you typing this from? Why do we seem to have names that suggest we are lizards?
Leto-of-the-Light: Well, I don't have a lizard name, at least ... But other than that, I don't understand a word of what you are saying. I am just not bright enough I guess. Why do I seem to be trapped in this "review" of a book that I cannot see the title or cover of? Is this just a chat room?
Meletē-thinker: Umm.. what the xxx is all this? This is just plain weird! And how is this xxx clamor a review? I happen to know what those are!
Sarpedontosaurus: So much for my lizard-theory. Does anyone remember how they ended up here?? I remember sleeping in xxx yesterday and when I woke up I am trapped in this room with a terminal that can load only this web address! I am xxx and xxx is waiting for me ... How do I get out? Where is this Ariadne who started this "thread" or "review" or whatever?
PeisinoeFatale: Hi everyone. I have been silent till now, but I happen to know a bit about what is going on. xxx, and an intricate garden of xxx paths. A labyrinth of symbols and time. And then, after reading this "chat room" review, I got curious. Interesting book that is going to my TBR shelf. Thank you, by the way, for making me think about xxx. again, xxx. A very original review.
Sarpedontosaurus: @PeisinoeFatale, you mean to say you are here voluntarily? How did you enter here? You seem to talk as if you are able to see the author of the review and other things ... censored out by our moderators/moderator? Are you in a garden? I seem to be in a school room with an elaborate door and only this terminal around.
NotHerakles: Well, hi everyone. I seem o be caught in here too now. Seems like commenting on the comment thread is what does it. Maybe we are here to learn something? By the way, I would be careful of what PeisinoeFatale says. Her name suggests that she is one of those beautiful, dangerous and misleading Sirens, She seems to suggest we are in a review of a xxx novel, but I am pretty sure we are not. I am xxx, and I am the author of all reviews on this profile on xxx.com. But I DID NOT start this thread. And I really want to get out of this xxx box now.
Sarpedontosaurus: @NotHerakles, what comment thread? Are you telling em there is some parallel thread which you can see? Can anybody else see this? Is there life outside of this review box? How do you guys direct your words to that place? Do you think my xxx will be able to see what I am writing if I can get a message out on that comment "thread" instead of on this "review" "thread"?
NotHerakles: I think my xxx profile has been hacked. xxx! How can they censor me in my own review! xxx! There!
Sarpedontosaurus: 10 "likes". What is that? Are all of you here as well? Pls reply.
PIXELATEDMONSTER: Ok, if we are in a labyrinth and if we are also having these ancient names, is it possible that Theseus and Minotaur are here as well? Perhaps silently liking? And why is Theseus wearing a minotaur's head for a helmet? And what is so horrifying about that? Funny review, @NotHerakles! :) Calm down @Sarpedontosaurus :)
A-ta-no-dju-wa-ja: Love this! Woo!
Sarpedontosaurus: What helmet? What labyrinth? @PIXELATEDMONSTER how do you know this? Any theories on where we are? @A-ta-no-dju-wa-ja, symbolically?
CraftyDaedalus: Is Ariadne the militant feminist hacker? I demand an audience! Oh! My name suggests I must have helped Ariadne with the "thread"!
NotHerakles: @CraftyDaedalus, A militant feminist hacker? Why militant? Why feminist? Is this labyrinth/book post-modern? Strange to be so lost i one's own review ...
Sarpedontosaurus: Everyone seems to be ignoring me ... I am off to try and open this door in my room. BRB.
Sarpedontosaurus: What do you know, it does open onto a labyrinth! But it seems to be made of papyrus scrolls instead of trimmed hedges. I think that is what Ariadne was trying to say ... we are caught inside a book ... or just inside the review of one, as some of you have already said. I think the way out would be to figure out what is the connection between a review and a helmet. How does a review mask the reviewer? Ariadne? You there? Could really use your inputs here ...
+++ MODERATOR NOTE: IF THE THREAD HITS ITS WORD LIMIT BEFORE ANY CONCLUSION HAS BEEN REACHED, ALL PARTICIPANTS WILL BE SACRIFICED TO THE MINOTAUR. SOLVE THE LABYRINTH. GOOD LUCK. +++
Sarpedontosaurus: This xxx just got real! Guys, what is the connection between a review and a labyrinth. What could be the Minotaur who hides inside a review? How do we "solve" it? I am just not cut out for this sort of stuff ... we need a scholar. Any here among the silent "likers"?
ARIADNE: Sorry I had slept off. THen it took me some time to go through all your comments ... sorry.
I had a dream. A dwarf appeared in my dream, led me through a few turns of this strange looking labyrinth and told me this:
"Some have argued that as language IS the medium of knowledge, that which comes in the form of language constitutes a text; since language is interpreted by the indivIdual, the readIng by the IndIvIdual gives meaning to the text; therefore each time a text IS read by a different Individual it acquires a fresh meaning.
Taken to Its logIcal conclusion, this denies any generally accepted meaning of a text and is implicitly a denial of attempts at hIstorical representatIon or claims to relative obJectivIty, since the meanIng would change with each reading."
What could this mean? Should we be talking of the the meaning of words? Or is the search for this meaning that traps us? Is that why Review = Labyrinth?
I am so glad to see so many have joined my thread! The room given to me is a bedroom with the softest bed ever (along with the Terminal, of course). When I lie down on it, it is like flying ... I am just carried away.
I must be meant to sleep and dream ... and wait for one of you to make sense of my thread.
I will keep dreaming. Zzzzz.
NotHerakles: @ARIADNE, Readings of Myths can often be quite hegemonic … or there can be attempts to ignore alternative readings. But readings with little or no structures of how to read a text can be self-defeating in terms of acquiring knowledge. Which is why readers often can make no sense of complicated myths.
NotHerakles: BTW, am I the only one here who has read the book under review? I must be Theseus then? NOT Herakles = IS another Hero? Possible, right?
WhiteEuropa: I'll surely return to this review again to see how many new members have joined the chat room. Myths can be both complicated and fun. Bit too much sometimes. Dangerous too, then. Right now, I don't think any of you are close to figuring this one out. Toodles.
Artemis:The-Bear-of-Wallstreet: I feel we have all been thrown into xxx's Quran review which is labyrinthine and mysterious! I'll check back in like WhiteEuropa to see how many more people with weird usernames are trapped in this 'chatroom'.
Sarpedontosaurus: I step out for a minute and now we are in a religious discussion. Just what was needed to introduce the "LIMBO" ambience here!
EvergreenHebe: Please tell the minotaur he cannot eat me. He wouldn't like me anyway, i have very high cholesterol. My plan is to wait this out and avoid the Big M. You don't have to be faster than the bear, you only have to be faster than your buddy, eh?
NotHerakles: @EvergreenHebe, I think the idea is that one of us is the Minotaur... I am pretty sure you cannot avoid it. According to legend, Minotaur is meant to restore balance by taking sacrifices. Minotaur is the Great Volcano... the Great Rumbling Hunger... our Quest for Meaning? How can you avoid that? The moment you used language here, you enter the labyrinth... because language is the labyrinth. Welcome.
NotHerakles: In short, the Minotaur cannot be communicated with... he can only be communicated through.
PeisinoeFatale: LOL. "Peisinoe". This review is a weird labyrinth made out of comments, with a possible massacre... nice. A labyrinth of language and time has many paths. Each bifurcation of time can take us to a new place. Anyway, I fear you all, even the moderator. Now he imparts orders, in any time, he could be our Minotaur, just like the silent likers. Everything is possible due to the numerous branches of time. But, since my mythological nature is deception, no one will care about what I say anyway. Hope somebody do something. See you.
ARIADNE: @PeisinoeFatale, I had another dream and I was told that "The Siren shall be the Kassandra". So we should probably be paying more attention to you. You seem to know your way around labyrinths! I also dreamt of the great Temple for Apollo towering over the Labyrinth, as if that was a guiding post - the guiding light of Reason to set our compasses to? That is why I do worry for you, PeisinoeFatale... Apollo might be among the Moderators here and in that case...
NotHerakles: I think PeisinoeFatale has done us a great favor by expanding our conception of Minotaur. The "likers" scare me too. And for those of you who can see the parallel universe of the "comments thread", you can see how much the moderators are guiding this conversation. It is almost as if we have no free will and are being guided through the labyrinth, being shown glimpses of meaning, lambs to the slaughter! @PeisinoeFatale, what about Theseus? Who/What do you think is going to save us? And how? What should we be doing meanwhile?
+++ MODERATOR NOTE: APPROXIMATELY 9500 CHARACTERS LEFT, BEFORE NONE ARE LEFT. BE AWARE. +++
CraftyDaedalus: Everybody worries about the Minotaur, no one seems to be worried about Theseus. I flag Theseus as the villain.
Earth-Shaker: Well ... an interesting review and comment "thread" to be sure! I must say that the Minotaur is nothing to be afraid of. if anything, Minotaur is our savior. Minotaur is the sacrificial Christ!
CraftyDaedalus: @Earth-Shaker, Yes, but Theseus should remember to pull down the black flag or sail ..... otherwise his father Aegeus... Or his father who-art-in-heaven... might destroy the earth?
Sarpedontosaurus: @CraftyDaedalus, Should we, who are on the brink of being massacred, worry about what happens after our demise? @Earth-Shaker, are you Poseidon? I think the first full-god on this thread! Now this feels Homeric!
Paganus: Time for me to pitch in: @Earth-Shaker - Papa, If you desire to exit the labyrinth, seek after Hereyes, not Herankles. See what I did there? Windows to the soul? Love is the answer! Anyway, back to the myth, though I have my grudges with Perseus, I will take even him over T... Theseus is going to be our downfall, I agree. Decapitation is the best way to free us from our reason, no?
PeisinoeFatale: Flags! C/Kassandra. Which is the same since no one can believe her. We know. The Minotaur isn't evil, according to my God of Language. He, Asterion, was a victim liberated by the hand of Theseus. In light of previous statements, Theseus is not a villain either, not for the Minotaur, at least; and certainly, not for generations to come. But that's one way of looking at this, one path. Anyway, he might be hungry, so I'm not taking any chances. I think the little flags that will lead us out of here are red, not black nor white, so no one should die. Now, I haven't seen a true seeker in a while. Go figure.
ARIADNE: @PeisinoeFatale, you are definitely a seer! Once again you have anticipated my dreams/revelations. I was taken through the labyrinth by the dwarf again and told that the only God is Asterion, the only consciousness, the only voice, the only book, the only review in the universe. Minotaur is just one aspect of his. I happened to get a glance at a partially opened room which seemed to be set with video game stuff... with virtual reality helmets and controls, etc. Could it be possible that we are all wearing the helmets? And once we do, we find Asterisk to be Minotaur? I think Theseus would be the one who believes the most in the Helmet, in free will.
Sarpedontosaurus: You mean to say Theseus is whoever among is the most deluded and follows the virtual reality flags/Ariadne's "thread" to escape the Labyrinth? Escaping is what makes us sacrificial victims? @PeisinoeFatale, in that case, should we even want to be "liberated"? I feel we are trapped inside the Helmet... and that is why it feels like the "Helmet of Horror" - to the wearer who wants to escape the illusions... but that is a Life of Reason? Escaping language/reason... is that what we pray for? Pray for a Savior - a Theseus, a Christ?
The-Long-Porpoise: This is all too much for me I'm afraid xxx. My brain is not working properly. Apologies... I will tag along if any of you find a way. But we will probably have to vote on it. HA!
Leto-of-the-Light: Welcome to the club, @The-Long-Porpoise. We are the backbenchers, but boy will we make a dash for it when we get the chance. Or it could even be that by refusing to get lost in the labyrinth we are the real front-benchers in this class!
NotHerakles: @Leto-of-the-Light, @The-Long-Porpoise - Hey, that is the whole point! TO get lost in meaning. That is the labyrinth, that is the review, that is the One Book! ;-)
Mythcellaneous: Hi, I have been among the silent looming "likers" here. @Sarpedontosaurus, it is said that:
A long time ago xxx wrote that there are only four stories that are told and re-told: the siege of the city, the return home, the quest, and the (self-) sacrifice of God.
It is notable that the same story could be placed into different categories by different viewers: what is a quest/return home for Theseus is a brutal God’s sacrifice for Minotaur. Maybe there are more than just ‘four cycles’, as xxx called them, but their number is definitely finite and they are all known. We will invent nothing new. Why?
This is where we come to the third possible definition of a myth. If a mind is like a computer, perhaps myths are its shell programs: sets of rules that we follow in our world processing, mental matrices we project onto complex events to endow them with meaning. People who work in computer programming say that to write code you have to be young. It seems that the same rule applies to the cultural code. Our programs were written when the human race was young – at a stage so remote and obscure that we don’t understand the programming language any more.
Why does the Minotaur have a bull’s head? What does he think and how? Is his mind a function of his body or is his body an image in his mind? Is Theseus inside the Labyrinth? Or is the Labyrinth inside Theseus? Both? Neither?
Each answer means that you turn down a different corridor. There were many people who claimed they knew the truth. But so far nobody has returned from the Labyrinth. Have a nice walk.
Sarpedontosaurus: "But so far nobody has returned from the Labyrinth. Have a nice walk."?? WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT! XXX you! XXX! XXX!
Leto-of-the-Light: I am growing old here. :(
KingMinos: Ok, I am not with the Minotaur-as-savior gang here. Because the reader is a blind bull intent on imposing his own creativity. Bring it on, Theseus.
TheGreatLizard-of-Knossos: I like this review. I just wonder if I'll still like it after a new Person is introduced. It may be so, maybe not. Maybe I have to withdraw the like. Will the Person then disappear too? Is it still the same review. Something is happening here, but you don't know what it is. Do you Mr. Jones?
KingMinos: The reader should (only) see what is shown. And not talking of interpretations here. Recall how, in certain novels, you imagine a house in a certain way and then the author goes into describing that house. And then there is dissonance because you vision is at odds with the writer's. As a reader, you are jumping the gun... The writer has made the mistake of allowing that.
Sarpedontosaurus: @KingMenos, so the mask is forced on the reader? After which no free will is left? You are taken through the labyrinth and led to the Minotaur? At the end of which the mask is allowed to be taken off, and the "reader" ceases to exist? Metaphor for life? I think this only applies to reading Myths... but according to @Mythcellaneous above, all readings/novels/stories are one of the Four Myths!
Mythcellaneous: Yes, if it is not a myth, it can have no meaning. The only things you can read outside of myth is gibberish. Now look back at this review. LOL ;-)
Mythcellaneous: Ref: List of Characters in Comments "thread" parallel --- --- some of the participants (including me) are coming in from other comment threads outside of the goodreads universe... such as facebook and twitter. just to add to the element of mystery. Yeah!
A-ta-no-dju-wa-ja: Still loving it! My participation in this review (Labyrinth) is only to Love something. Now I love my Username! It's so nice. Thank you! And I want to be clear on this -- I don't mind where I am being led (lambs to the slaughter?) in all this as long as my character is so lovely. That is the only way to live!
Paganus: Those who name themselves are the special children of God/Theseus/Christ. @A-ta-no-dju-wa-ja, Ah-din-even-no-hu-dju-wa-til-now. LOL. Couldn't resist! This is what I do. Soon I will Haiku, before this road is over.
VICTORPELEVIN-The-Finger-of-Zeus: Here is a labyrinthine examination of epistemological uncertainty that radically reinvents this myth for an age where information is abundant but knowledge ultimately unattainable. Get a grip!
ARIADNE: @Paganus, you are very funny. But one must laugh quietly or Asterius/M will take offence. He does not know that in reality he does not exist, but sometimes he begins to suspect it and this scares and angers him greatly. M should not be feared. If you fear him, it means that you are wearing the helmet of horror and he is master of your world. But once you have removed the helmet, then M disappears, and nothing remains at which to laugh. It is a grave error either to wear the helmet or to remove it. One should do absolutely nothing with it, if only because in reality it does not exist.
+++
MODERATOR NOTE:
NO ONE REMOVED THE HELMET> THESEUS NEVER CAME>
YOU HAVE EXCEEDED THE WORLD/WORD LIMIT
THE FIRST ITERATION IS OVER> THIS THREAD HAS BEEN TERMINATED> ALL OF YOU ARE NOW FREE = NOT ALIVE = MINOTAUR MEALS>
THE NEXT THREAD MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT START> YOU MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT BE INVITED>