Tag: philosophy

Posted on

#BookReview: The Great Math War by Jason Socrates Bardi

Math And History Nerds Will Love This. Solid History For Everyone Else Too. Ok, so I’m a dude that got a Computer Science degree 20 yrs ago and came within literally half a dozen classes of getting degrees in Mathematics and Secondary Mathematics Education at the same time… who also took HIST classes as electives just because they sounded interesting. In other words, this book may as well have been titled “Jeff Sexton Will Beg To Read This Book”, because I damn near did. But clearly, I *am* the very math and history nerd that my title of this review above explicitly said would love this book.

Clocking in at 19% bibliography, it has a healthy enough backing so that it doesn’t drop a star on that account, and really the only even quibble I have here is that in choosing to end in 1938, Bardi doesn’t even attempt to show how the war he describes here played out in the Post Second World War world where the rise of computers and computer science changed pretty well everything in mathematics.

Still, for what it is and what it actually covers, this is an utterly fascinating book that gives enough of the backstories of everyone involved to show how they arrived at the moments they did and why they mattered when they got there without going too deep into unnecessary detail too often. Yes, even when it looks like Bardi is going off on some wild tangent that can’t possibly be related to The Great Math War (such as the Boer War), he ultimately manages to bring it right back around and show how that tangent actually played a role in shaping the thinking of one of his principle targets or at minimum someone closely linked to them who also shaped their thinking.

For me, this was an utterly fascinating look at a period of math history I hadn’t previously really considered, featuring several names I had known of from other exploits and adventures, but had never really dived into from this angle. And yes, at least some of the most famous of their era make appearances here, up to and including one Albert Einstein.

I do think that one of the more fascinating tidbits that I had not known, particularly as someone who learned the basics of Set Theory in 2004-2005, was just how new that particular branch of mathematics was – and how controversial it had been even a century before I learned it, at which time it was (clearly) being routinely taught to Senior level college students. (And I still hold that we can actually teach it even in elementary school, as one key feature of it ultimately revolves around remainder division.)

Truly an excellent book written without the dryness that can accompany such texts in the hands of less skilled storytellers, this is absolutely one of those kinds of books that many will enjoy and a few will absolutely love.

Very much recommended.

This review of The Great Math War by Jason Socrates Bardi was originally written on November 12, 2025.

Posted on

#BookReview: Fewer Rules, Better People by Barry Lam

The Practical Case For A More ‘Libertarian’ Ethic In All Walks Of Life. First off, let’s acknowledge that the Libertarian Party in the US is a joke of its former self that has squandered in these last few years all the hard-won gains it had achieved in its first 40 years – including the first so-called “third” Party candidate with over a million votes in any US election *ever* (John Monds, Governor of Georgia, 2010, followed by the LP’s Presidential nominee, Gary Johnson, in 2012 and again in 2016).

But seriously, forget about the LP and every instance you’ve ever heard of “libertarianism” in the media, particularly over the last 15 yrs or so.

What Lam does here, instead, is build a far more practical case for largely the same ideals. No, he never specifies “remove this government agency” or “that mandate is unconstitutional” or some such, his arguments are far more practical and every day – why must a mandate exist to buy coffee from a coffeeshop that doesn’t even open (at least on certain days) until 10am exist? Why shouldn’t I be able to buy coffee for my 8a meeting from a different vendor who is open at that time? As but one example Lam actively cites.

Time after time after time, case after case after case, Lam builds his argument chiefly around the insanity of the proliferation of laws, mandates, and rules across the US in particular. Even mandates with lofty ideals often wind up *harming* those ideals in their specificity and implementation, according to Lam, in a common theme throughout this text.

While entirely a philosophical, if practical philosophy, text, the writing style is far from a Mill or a Thoreau – this is far more approachable and conversational, easy for basically anyone with the reading skills to actually read the text to follow through logically and understand Lam’s points.

No, the singular flaw I found here was dearth of its bibliography, clocking in at a paltry 9% in the Advance Review Copy of the book I read just a couple of months before publication. Had this had double (or even triple, if I’m being hopeful here :D) the documentation it does, it would be a truly flawlessly executed book that strongly and persuasively makes its case quite well indeed.

Overall a compelling book written in an easily approachable style, this is one of those books that anyone committed to “Liberty in our lifetime” (as the LP once proclaimed) should read, take to heart, and begin beating the drums for. It makes the case for its points truly better than most libertarians of any era have, including the oft-cited (in LP circles) Harry Browne.

Very much recommended.

This review of Fewer Rules, Better People by Barry Lam was originally written on December 12, 2024.

Posted on

#BookReview: The Light Eaters by Zoe Schlanger

Rare Blend Of Science And Mysticism Marred By Racism And Misandry. Quite honestly, I read the Audible version of this book, where Schlanger’s wonder of her topic comes through in her breathy, reverent reading of her text – and kudos to her, as not many authors can pull off reading their own text for the Audible version. (Though yes, this *is* far more common in nonfiction.) But *because* I read the Audible, I actually had to borrow this book from the Jacksonville Public Library, where I live, to check the length of its bibliography – which does in fact clock in at a relatively healthy 25%. So despite the extraordinary claims made throughout this text, at least it is reasonably well documented.

All of the above noted, however… Schlanger makes some *remarkable* claims throughout this text, and while I don’t agree with at least one 1* review on Goodreads that she was nearly dogmatic – my summary of that review’s arguments – about her insistence on her so-broad-as-to-be-nearly-useless definitions of concepts such as “intelligence” and “communication” and “consciousness”, I *do* agree that Schlanger stretches these words so as to be nearly incomprehensible to anyone.

While Schlanger does a remarkable job as a journalist covering all aspects of her chosen topic, she also crosses the boundary lines of science and mysticism so early, often, and frequently that to read this book is very nearly to watch a Dr. Strange MCU movie and accept that the conceits of its mystic “sciences” are real in the reality in which you are reading this review. Her skills as a writer make the text flow beautifully and, again, reverently… but the grasp on objective reality one would normally expect in a popular science book… isn’t always as “there” as it should be in such a book. Instead, Schlanger’s embrace of the (at least near) mystic is more readily apparent, particularly through certain sections of the text.

And while this is bad enough, and let’s call it a half star deduction, these are almost style issues – few would bat an eye if this were labeled more a philosophy or ethics book than a science book.

No, the real problem with the text, at least for me, was the frequent excusing of mystics claiming to be scientists by claiming that their mysticism is no worse than far more accomplished actual scientists such as Alexander Graham Bell and Thomas Edison, pointing to their own mystic beliefs (common in their era over 100 yrs ago) and proclaiming “but those were white men” (an exact quote) and so their mystic beliefs were excused. No ma’am. Their mystic beliefs were excused because they achieved great scientific accomplishments. The people you excuse have not reinvented the way humans live or communicate many times over, and if they ever manage to achieve a similar accomplishment, you won’t be the only one excusing their mysticisms. It is the blatant and pervasive racist misandry of these types of comments throughout the text that results in the other half star deduction, as they are not *so* pervasive as to necessitate a full star deduction of their own.

Overall this is absolutely an interesting read on many fronts, one that one can learn a great deal from and on that is documented enough that its claims should be taken seriously – but as we all know, sources *can* be cherry picked, so a great deal of discernment and further reading is also very much in order after reading this text.

Recommended.

This review of The Light Eaters by Zoe Schlanger was originally written on December 11, 2024.

Posted on

#BookReview: The Understory By Lore Ferguson Wilbert

Better Sipped Than Shot, Intense Political “Flavor” Means Taste Will Vary With Reader. There are times when you’re drinking (even non-alcoholic beverages) where you just plow through them. Maybe it is your first coffee of the day and you need that caffeine NOW! Maybe it is a hot summer day and that glass of lemonade disappeared *real* quick. Or maybe you just broke up with your significant other, and yeah, that tequila hit the spot.

A lot of books are like this. Action thrillers where reading at a frenetic pace to match the action being shown is part of the fun, for example.

This… is not that book.

This, instead, is one of those fine bourbons where you’re going to lose a lot of the nuance if you shoot it down too fast. One of those women’s fiction tales that feels like it is taking forever to have any real plot at all, but feels so *immersive* in the tale even still. One of those quasi-memoir/ quasi-religious pondering books (exactly what this is) where you really need to, as Wilbert did in taking inspiration for the overall narrative here, sit at your window and ponder the forest outside.

Read in such a manner, Wilbert’s struggles are more understandable and even relatable, as you consider your own similar struggles – and here, the things Wilbert struggles with really are things most all of us do at some level. The overarching forest narrative is a genuinely good guide for such contemplation, at least as Wilbert has written it here.

But what could ruin the taste – or make it truly exquisite – is the intense politics that are never far from the narrative, to the point that if there isn’t a political comment on *every* page, it certainly feels like at least some comment is made on at least the *majority* of pages. And yes, Wilbert’s politics are, to put it mildly, “left of center”. So know that going in.

This noted, where Wilbert eventually arrives… is a place we all probably need to, even if, again depending on your own political tastes, perhaps she arrives there a bit condesceningly.

Overall an intriguing read that truly urges us to slow down in this hectic world, it is one that we should all likely ponder – though I suppose few enough actually will.

Very much recommended.

This review of The Understory by Lore Ferguson Wilbert was originally written on May 25, 2024.

Posted on

#BookReview: How To Be A Citizen by C.L. Skach

Making The Case For Practical Anarchy While Proclaiming Non-State Democracy. As an avowed and open Anarchist, any time I find a book proclaiming in its title to be about how to live effectively in community without the State… I tend to pick it up.

Here, Skach makes quite clear that she is terrified of a particular “A” word (that I’ve already used twice in the preceding paragraph) and instead proclaims her arguments to be in favor of State-less democracy… while failing to realize that Anarchy literally means only “no government” – ie, “no State”, ie, “Without the State” (to use the exact phrasing from the subtitle). As Lysander Spooner and other thinkers over the Millenia have espoused, there can be numerous forms of order under Anarchy – Anarchy has never meant “without order”, only “without government”. Thus, Skach’s preference for community-based democracy falls right in line with the very idea.

But regardless of Skach’s fear of the “A” word or your own (the reader of my review) preference for any other form of community organization, Skach actually does a truly remarkable job of showing just how a Stateless – ie, Anarchic – society could practically work *even in the current environment*. Yes, there are numerous issues she doesn’t touch, and yes, there is plenty of room for the usual “what if” game that proponents of State and its slaughter of literally hundreds of millions of people in the last 150 yrs alone routinely bring up.

But for those who don’t think it can work even at a very basic level, that survival would be impossible because the world would be “without order”, Skach makes clear that both spontaneous and coordinated order can be had – and can be had in a far better manner than at present – *without* the State.

There will be many who won’t read this book at all or won’t truly consider its ideas, but for those who are willing to at least consider the possibility that perhaps the West (and East, insofar as their systems of government go) could do better, that perhaps the US in particular *has* to have some better way of doing things… maybe pick this book up. Read it slowly. Truly ponder its ideas and trul ruminate over them, asking yourself the hard questions about why you may think the State is the best answer, even in the face of so much evidence to the contrary.

Oh, and the fact that this book is releasing in the US going into its biggest State holiday weekend, when the entire country – and, due to the US’s prominence since 1944 or so, even large parts of the entire world – will be celebrating a few hundred thousand people declaring their independence from the *then* global superpower… well, that’s just icing on this particular cake.

I will note, as really more of an aside, that the bibliography clocks in at just 17% of the Advance Review Copy edition of the book I read, which is perhaps a touch low – but I’ve also been openly stating for a bit now that perhaps my 20-30% standard should be lowered a touch given so many more recent books have been a touch lower than this, and 17% seems like it would fit within the true current average, if maybe still a touch on the lower end of the range.

Overall a truly excellent book so far as it goes, I personally just really wish it had more openly embraced the very concepts even its title openly yet not brazenly proclaims. Very much recommended.

This review of How To Be A Citizen by C.L. Skach was originally written on April 11, 2024.

Posted on

#BookReview: The Pragmatic Programmer by David Thomas and Andrew Hunt

Solid Advice For Programmers Of Any Experience Level. This book, originally released just months before I started college and updated 5 yrs ago from the time I read it as this 20th Anniversary Edition, really does have solid advice for programmers of any level and within any organization. Some/ much of it is stuff that I was trained as simply being “good practice”, but there are aspects to the discussion here that we *all* fail in at some point or another, and thus are good reminders of what the ideal *should* be. For those mid career coders trying to figure out where to go next, this is one of those books that can truly reignite your love of sitting down and writing code, free of all the corporate bullshit that exists any time you’re writing code for someone else. For those early career coders, this can serve as a guide book for some of the pitfalls to watch out for and what the ideal should be in most situations you’ll encounter. And for those truly “seasoned” veterans looking to end their career on a high note with style and grace, this can serve as a solid retrospective of all that you’ve seen and done and how much you’ve seen this industry grow, change… and do neither of those things. 😉

Truly a great text on the art of programming, and should be on every coder’s shelf right beside The Mythical Man Month. (Which, for those outside the industry/ who may have never heard of it, is basically the highest praise one can possibly give a book about programming.) Very much recommended.

This review of The Practical Programmer by David Thomas and Andrew Hunt was originally written on March 2, 2024.

Posted on

#BookReview: For Roger by Laura Drake

If You Only Read One 2023 Release, Make It This One. Wow. Phenomenal. I’m writing this review roughly 12 hrs after finishing the book, and I am still in awe of what Drake was able to do here. When I first encountered her books, Drake was writing cowboy romances. She’s extended into women’s fiction more recently and done a great job with it, and this one I would assume would mostly classify within that space as well.

But let me be clear: This book has a LOT going on, a lot that places Drake writing about very serious issues and very different spaces. We get medical discussions and specifically discussions around terminal illness, suicide, assisted suicide, and related issues. We get a legal courtroom thriller that dives deep into questions of justice vs mercy vs the letter of the law and even into what are laws and why do we have them. We get open discussions of how to make different spaces better and more responsive, and in these areas Drake shows several practical ideas that could genuinely work – even though this is a fictional tale. Throughout all of this. Drake proves herself capable of at minimum holding her own with even the masters of these spaces who only write explicitly within them, such as John Grisham’s legal thrillers.

And then there are the more traditional women’s fiction aspects, the relationships that make this book truly sing throughout all the heaviness of the above discussions. The loving wife who is barely older than her stepdaughter, despite being in absolute love with her husband. The stepdaughter who resents the stepmother being so very close to her own age. The brilliant husband who dearly loves his wife *and* daughter. The best friend who happens to be the Governor of Texas, with all the behind the scenes politicking that entails. The mother who loves her daughter no matter what. The misunderstood older sister. And yes, in a nod to Drake’s real life (as anyone who follows her socials will know), a mischievous and nearly scene-stealing cat named Boomer.

In telling such a moving story, Drake truly masters bringing in such difficult discussions that *need* to be held at every level and in every corner of this great land.

Issues of how to handle terminal illness within a marriage – how far is each willing to go? What is the loving thing to do? Do the local statutes matter when it comes to trying to make the right decision? What *is* the right decision?

Issues of criminal justice as it relates to terminal illness, echoing at a societal level the same types of questions every relationship needs to answer within itself.

Issues of what we expect from our penal system – can people be rehabilitated, or should they be exclusively punished? Is there a difference between someone committing suicide, their spouse helping them, their doctor helping them, another person outside of a legally protected relationship helping them? Does the situation itself matter, and if it does, what do we condemn and what do we excuse?

All of this and so much more, Drake crafts into a moving and poignant tale of one particular family struggling to navigate these very complicated and delicate issues.

Read this book. Think about how *you* would handle these things. Think about how *we* should handle these things…

Or not. Maybe you jus need to cry, or even bawl your eyes out. Maybe these issues aren’t theoretical for you – maybe they’re as real for you as they are for the characters in this book. Maybe you’re just trying to find answers yourself.

Read this book too. And may you find comfort within its words even in the midst of your own storm.

But read this book, regardless. Very much recommended.

This review of For Roger by Laura Drake was originally written on November 20, 2023.

Posted on

#BookReview: The Soul Of Civility by Alexandra Hudson

Exceptional Bordering On Transcendental, With A Few Flaws. If you, like me, read David French’s 2020 book Divided We Fall and were utterly *terrified* of just how real its scenarios sounded (particularly given that one of them later began to become true)… you need to read this book. If you, like me, read James A. Morone’s 2020 book (indeed, published just days before French’s) Republic of Wrath and saw that despite the paranoia and fearmongering of today’s media, punditry, and even citizenry, the US has always had a great deal of heat and vitriol in its civil discourse (and in fact was far worse in earlier periods of our shared history) – but that doesn’t mean our particular era isn’t pretty damn bad itself… you need to read this book. If you, like me, simply observe and even discuss politics with a “pox on all your houses” attitude as an independent thinker aligned with no particular group… you need to read this book. And if you, like me, genuinely wish for a return to a more civil era – if there ever actually was one, in fact rather than in nostalgia – … you need to read this book.

Quite simply, Hudson here does for the topic of civility what Morone did for overall vitriol in American politics or Radley Balko did for the rise of the Police State in America in his 2012 book Rise of the Warrior Cop – and that is, bring a relatively full historical examination of the topic, beginning with the most ancient of texts known to humanity and bringing it all the way to the exact context we see as this book is released to the public in the next few days after I write this review. She even manages to look at the topic *globally*, incorporating thoughts on civility from several different major and influential civilizations over the course of history – and not just Western, but also at least some Eastern thinking as well. Along the way, we do in fact see some of the “usual suspects” such as perhaps Erasmus, St. Augustine, Voltaire, CS Lewis, MLK Jr, and Gandhi. But we even see other thinkers such as Thoreau, Emerson, and many others – including cutting edge thinkers such as Scott Alexander of SlateStarCodex.com. It is within this particular examination of the entire breadth of history, along with (mostly) strong applications of each, that this particular text truly stands out from the pack.

And yet, there are in fact a couple of issues, which may or may not be particularly *big* issues, but one of which was at minimum enough to deduct a star, at least based on my own “subtractive method” / “objective-ish” reasoning I strive to maintain within my own reviews. The star deduction coming from the overall dearth of a bibliography, despite such deep and wide examinations and despite having so many references it almost seemed as though there were a popup with some relevant quote on nearly every page! While Hudson has already disagreed with me on this on Twitter/X at the time I write this review, I maintain that for nonfiction works, particularly works such as this that reference oh so much, I expect to see a much larger bibliography. Even with the discussion in other recent reviews of perhaps revising my target down closer to 20% rather than 25-30%, the fact that this book contains less than 10% bibliography is still rather disappointing.

The other issue is nearly one more of style, but also raises a potential allegation of bigotry: Hudson’s emphasis that civility requires looking people in the eyes. Despite Autistics in particular being well known for not really being able to do this due to our particular neurodivergence. But perhaps Hudson, despite her clear knowledge in other subjects, was not aware of this. It is possible, and I’ll not clearly condemn her as a bigot due to Hanlon’s Razor.

But again, the overall biggest point here, and the reason you *need* to read this book despite its specks of flaws: This truly is an exceptional, bordering on transcendental, examination of the history and nature of civility, with plenty of real-world applications that are sorely needed – and truly challenging for even the most committed of us. This is one of those books that is going to challenge you to be better in ways that few outside the overtly religious texts manage to do, and it is one that is largely going to leave you with a smile even as it calls you out. Very much recommended.

This review of The Soul Of Civility by Alexandra Hudson was originally written on October 7, 2023.

Posted on

#BookReview: Burning Down The House by Andrew Koppelman

Severely Flawed Overall Reasoning Yet Good Introduction To Left Libertarianism. This is a book whose goal, as the author states near the end of Chapter 1, “is not only a critical description of libertarianism. It aims to marry what is best about libertarianism with the agenda of the left.” Thus, the author makes such radical-to-anyone-who-actually-studies-American-history-and-politics claims as that Rothbardian libertarianism has come to dominate the Republican Party, and the usual and at this point banal attacks on Charles Koch as a standard boogeyman. And yet, despite the rampant strawmen and cherry picked history and analyses, this book truly does serve as a reasonably well argued and written look into the general forms of “left libertarian” philosophy. At 36% documentation, it is actually on the strong side of well-documented (though still not the *best* I’ve ever encountered), so even with its cherry picking, at least it does in fact cite most of its arguments quite well. (Despite several of its more plebian-according-to-leftist-standards comments being undocumented.) Thus, while there is nothing of the structure of the book to hang a star deduction on, it is still one whose arguments should be considered critically and indeed, one should actively study the same philosophers and economists Koppelman often cites – from Hayek, Mises, and Friedman to Locke, Rothbard, Rand, and even Lysander Spooner. Still, for what it is and for the education it could bring (as even reading Mein Kampf is quite educational, in seeing how even the worst thinkers known to man think), this book is very much recommended.

Note exclusive to blog form of this review: While I kept this out of the Goodreads/ Amazon review above, I should probably note that I actually have quite a bit of experience with libertarian philosophy myself, having been a Libertarian Party of Georgia official at both the Statewide and local levels, as well as a former small town City Council candidate and running a libertarian political blog during the days of the Tea Party uprising circa 2009-2010. During that time, I actually had the opportunity to speak directly with at least a couple of Founding Members of the Libertarian Party, including one who happened to be from my own home County. We were never close, mere acquaintances who each knew common friends much more than we ever knew each other, but even that loose association allowed me to participate in some at times deep philosophical discussions with these truly legendary people. Despite all of this, however, I never came to libertarianism (or even volunarism, which is what I really subscribe to – what Koppelman would describe as “Rothbardian libertarianism”, though as you’ll see momentarily, I never even really knew Rothbard or his thinking) from a secular philosophical background. Instead, I came to libertarianism/ voluntarism through my studying of the Bible and Christian ethics/ thinking, ultimately arriving at voluntarism along the lines of the Anabaptist tradition within Christian history. Even here, while I’ve subsequently read *some* writings both historical and modern from such thinkers, much of my own thinking is precisely that- my own, and not necessarily tied to any one philosopher or tradition. Thus, while I intuitively *know* there are many flaws with Koppelman’s reasoning here, I also openly admit that Koppleman has quite a substantial amount of scholarly training and experience that I do not, and thus there are certainly better people to explain more fully what, exactly, Koppelman’s flaws are and offer a more complete rebuttal to them. But still, read his book, no matter your thinking on libertarianism. For what it is and what it does, it actually is quite well written and is a solid exposition from that side of thinking.

This review of Burning Down the House by Andrew Koppelman was originally written on October 13, 2022.

Posted on

#BookReview: From Parchment To Dust by Louis Michael Seidman

Progressive/ Liberal Polemic That Moves The Conversation Yet Doesn’t Go Through To The Logical Conclusion. Lysander Spooner once said, during the early Reconstruction period, that “Nevertheless, the writer thinks it proper to say that, in his opinion, the Constitution is no such instrument as it has generally been assumed to be; but that by false interpretations, and naked usurpations, the government has been made in practice a very widely, and almost wholly, different thing from what the Constitution itself purports to authorize” (Spooner; No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority, Appendix; 1870), and this is the same essential point that Seidman makes in proclaiming what he terms “Constitutional Skepticism”. Argued from a progressive/ leftist perspective of current American politics, Seidman’s text here uses at least one hyperbolic source (the oft-cited and yet demonstrably inaccurate and misleading GunViolenceArchive), stretches certain terms to implausible yet popular within his political allies lengths (claiming the events of Jan 6, 2020 in Washington DC to be an “insurrection”), and generally parrots progressive/ leftist talking points about at least two Supreme Court justices, the “problem of gun violence”, etc. All of this noted, within this particular sphere, Seidman actually makes his case reasonably well that the Constitution of the United States of America is, as Spooner proclaims, “of no authority”. And *to that point* and from the given perspective, Siedman is truly solid. Where he needs to expand his thinking a bit further is that he ultimately concludes that a more current Constitution, written by and binding on the “current generation” (which he fails to define, and fails to acknowledge that in any average human’s lifetime are three separate generations alive at any one time nor determine which of those generations should be allowed to bind the others according to his thinking) would be actually better than the one written so long ago and claiming to be binding forevermore. No, this is where he would actually do well to examine the writings of Spooner and other *anarchic* Constitutional Skeptics of American history and discuss his thoughts on their ideas as well. For, as Spooner then concluded his discussion quoted above, “But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or bas been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist” – taking his own Constitutional Skepticism to its actual logical conclusion, which Seidman refuses to do. Still, this is very much a book that could actually help the overall political discussion both in the US and elsewhere, and it is one that many indeed need to read. Very much recommended.

This review of From Parchment To Dust by Louis Michael Seidman was originally written on October 1, 2021.