The best
Essays books:
Reddit reviews
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
The best of Essays books by number of unique Reddit comments:
Top Reddit reviews mentioning Essays books:
Suggestions: Find yourself a map of Beleriand (Fonstad's "Atlas of Middle-Earth is the best thing ever), also consult the family tree of Finwë when needed.
https://www.amazon.com/Sopranos-Sessions-Matt-Zoller-Seitz/dp/1419734946
Essays on every episode, interviews with David Chase (1 per season), very insightful and added a lot of behind the scenes stuff.
For example, David Chase confirms that Ralphie did start the fire, and the shot of the goat was meant to symbolize Ralphie as the devil who caused it.
Show, don't tell.
Francine Prose put it better than I can in her analysis of Dulse, by Alice Munro.
>Finally, the passage contradicts a form of bad advice often given young writers—namely, that the job of the author is to show, not tell. Needless to say, many great novelists combine "dramatic" showing with long sections of the flat-out authorial narration that is, I guess, what is meant by telling. And the warning against telling leads to a confusion that causes novice writers to think that everything should be acted out—don't tell us a character is happy, show us how she screams "yay" and jumps up and down for joy—when in fact the responsibility of showing should be assumed by the energetic and specific use of language. There are many occasions in literature in which telling is far more effective than showing.
The John Ciardi one.
It keeps the original rhyming structure, which must have been really hard to do when translating from Italian to English. It isn't really rigid English like some of the other translations that can make your brain get tired after reading for a while. And most importantly it has notes for each chapter. Dante himself is the main character, and he writes in a bunch of actual people from in and around Italy during his lifetime, so reading the notes really helps understand a lot of the references to people/places/things in the book. I just read the notes before I read each chapter so I knew as I read it what was going on.
That's the big question, isn't it?
I find that the best response to the pointlessness so far has been reading The Myth of Sisyphus. The book by that name is worth reading, but that's a lot to ask of a stranger. The essay by that name, from the book is about a 10-15 minute read, and very poetic.
Camus makes a compelling argument that there is no point to life, that everything we do is ultimately meaningless once we die, and that this point of view liberates us to try and make the most of our lives anyway.
>The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.
Of course, feeling the way you do is also just part of being in your early 20's and in college.
Speaking of maps, you'll probably be a very happy camper if you reward your new achievement (and prep for the Silmarillion) by spending around $20 for this atlas. Helps with not just locations, but populations, battles, journeys, and even timelines. Indispensable and so readable you'll sit with it just turning the pages, not only for reference.
And congratulations on completing your first read of Hobbit and LOTR! Be sure to check in here as you go while reading the Silmarillion. First-time readers have a special honored place here :-)
OP, this is the correct answer right here.
And even if you aren't looking for a whole book, you should still get Fonstad's Atlas. It's a bargain and gives you way more info than a mere book of maps. I once read it nearly cover to cover.
Not exactly an Encyclopedia, but The Atlas of Middle Earth by Karen Wynn Fonstad is excellent.
Everything is incredibly well sourced (including showing you exactly where in the texts she gets her information) and I personally consider it the most accurate and "essential" book on Middle Earth not written by a Tolkien. It has a ton of information, and maps to accompany all of it. It is a lot more than just maps though.
Looks like you can snag it used on Amazon for less than $10 too. https://www.amazon.com/Atlas-Middle-Earth-Revised-Karen-Fonstad/dp/0618126996
The Practicing Stoic: A Philosophical User's Manual. Ward Farnsworth
Very readable and an excellent reference book.
The myth of Sisyphus, Albert Camus
I read this book after high school in a very strange part of my life. Pay particular attention to the absurd man. One part had a huge impact on me and how I view the world.
At this point of his effort man stands face to face with the irrational. He feels within him his longing for happiness and for reason. The absurd is born of this confrontation between the human need and the unreasonable silence of the world. This must not be forgotten. This must be clung to because the whole consequence of a life can depend on it. The irrational, the human nostalgia, and the absurd that is born of their encounter — these are the three characters in the drama that must necessarily end with all the logic of which an existence is capable.
Reading Like A Writer is a good place to start. If your goal is to improve your academic writing and you're in the US, look at English 1302 textbooks. These focus on composition and argumentation, which will be important in college essay writing.
Yeah, thankfully the version I have is full of annotations explaining the symbolism and references.
I think this is the one I have (from Amazon). ISBN 978-0-451-20863-7
I honestly think I enjoyed Purgatorio more than Inferno, probably mostly because I love the idea of redemption and purification and the imagery of angels.
This, OP. Buy it. It's cheap. It's indispensable. It's interesting enough to sit and read by itself.
I think there is something to be said for reading a book as a reader before you pick it apart as a writer.
Read the book once and if you enjoy it and think there's something to be learned from it, read it again (or read sections) and take notes or pay attention to the things you can use.
I tend to take notes in books using pencil. I underline and write directly on the pages. I also use sticky notes to flag pages for reference or when I have a lot I need to write. If I want to do an in-depth analysis of a section, I might photocopy or print out the passage.
I also recommend Reading Like a Writer by Francine Prose which I haven't actually read yet, but god damn it, I swear I am going to.
As others have said recommended I'd start with Silmarillion first, though I'd also recommend picking up The Atlas of Middle-Earth to have close by so you can reference as needed when reading.
/u/italia06823834 mentions it in that post, but I just want to reiterate, if you're interested in maps of Tolkien's works I highly recommend Karen Wynn Fonstad's The Atlas of Middle-Earth. It's only $16 and it's well worth it.
I listened to a few episodes and the bullshit/good content ratio was too high for it to be worth my time.
Do yourself a favor and read The Sopranos Sessions instead.
Seriously, just buy Fonstad's Atlas right now. Look how cheap it is! You won't have to do any printing and you'll get not just maps, but explanations of the maps. And SO MANY MAPS. All the maps. Maps of places, maps of populations, maps of battles! You will end up reading this thing on its own like a regular book. If you love Tolkien you need this book.
You should check out The Sopranos Sessions
https://www.amazon.com/Sopranos-Sessions-Matt-Zoller-Seitz/dp/1419734946
​
The author very much examines the show in the way you are referring, even doing an episode-by-episode breakdown.
Mere Christianity:
AMAZON USA:
AMAZON CANADA:
We're all obligated to chime in here because OP is a new reader and might not get the joke :-)
OP, avoid all the works of David Day like the plague, he will lead you astray. But do go ahead and buy the wonderful Atlas of Middle-earth by Karen Wynn Fonstad, you won't regret it!
I haven’t seen all editions of LOTR, obviously, but all of my copies have the same small maps. If you really want a good resource for tracking their travels, I’d recommend “The Atlas of Middle-earth” by Karen Wynn Fonstad.
The Atlas of Middle-Earth (Revised Edition) https://www.amazon.com/dp/0618126996/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_WV6A129ZBPV2JRDPXGEZ
>So MM encompasses both hard atheist skepticism and MN, but not soft atheism…
Yes. Materialism is the strongest (most extreme) claim (in that direction), because it leaves no theoretical space for anything supernatural (of any sort).
>And neither skepticism nor MN includes MM
They don't have to, no. You can be skeptical or a naturalist without being a materialist, and the distinction is quite important. Thomas Nagel, for example, has spent decades trying to explain to people why materialism is wrong, but he's a naturalist and he's a skeptic regarding God - he "just can't bring himself to believe in such a thing".
>but MN is a purely science perspective but doesn’t encompass atheists of either type
If you are a MN then you believe science can, in theory, explain everything that is going on in the universe. That is very hard to square with belief in the existence of anything worthy of the name "God".
>And the only difference between PS and NPS is that PS believes science and metaphysics are compatible, and NPS believes that supernatural is always the answer.
Not quite. Science is science and metaphysics is metaphysics. Whether or not they are compatible doesn't make sense as a question. The question is whether science is compatible with mysticism (which are both epistemic claims ie they are about what we can know and how we can know it). PS views the laws of physics as limits to what is possible - not even God can break the laws of physics. NPS claims that physically impossible things can happen if God or some other supernatural agent wills them to happen.
i really really recommend Ward Farnsworth: The Practicing Stoic
i’m 22 and have about 6 stoicism books- i wish i’d read this one first
>However, recent studies and tonnes of research are cohesively beginning
to align in the direction that most of the knowledge at hand indicates
that the greater current probability is that our consciousness is
(merely) a product of our brain and pretty much all of our life,
This is simply not true. Recent philosophical developments suggest the exact opposite. Materialist/functionalist theories of mind hit a high watermark between the 1950s and the 1980s, and are now under serious and sustained attack. Indeed, I'd say we are looking at the early stages of major paradigm shift which consigns metaphysical materialism to intellectual history.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mind-Cosmos-Materialist-Neo-Darwinian-Conception/dp/0199919755
This was made by Karen Wynn Fonstad, a geographer/cartographer and serious Tolkien student. It's from her Tolkien atlas, which is not infallible but is widely praised and seen as one of the best resources we have. She based her work on not just the published "canon" but also on the additional materials that came out in HoMe.
This isn't a formula. It isn't A + B +C = happiness.
Take food as an example. You think Michaela Peterson wouldn't want to chow down on a pepperoni pizza with double cheese? No - it is a choice you make. Choices have consequences. That is why we have memories..to stop us doing the same negative shit over and over.
I'd suggest getting into the bigger picture. Read some Seneca and Marcus Aurelius. Seriously. Buy this book : https://www.amazon.com.au/Practicing-Stoic-Philosophical-Users-Manual/dp/1567926118
​
As for being an autist - remember 95% of all people are assholes. Gender, race, creed, disability status are irrelevant. Being popular is overrated. Having friends is important - more important than acquaintances. "Avoid, I say, what ever is approved of by the mob" (Seneca). I have a couple of toes on the spectrum and my son is in it up to his knees... I prefer people on the spectrum - you know what you are getting, they are loyal, not encumbered by bullshit, honest, forthright, intelligent and just better people (gross oversimplification but there you have it).
Good luck.
>Consciousness cannot be fundamental. It developed through evolution and it’s main use is to survive reality. It simply cannot be fundamental to the universe, because the universe will still be with or without it. It belongs to things that need to survive reality, things without consciousness need not survive reality.
There's no necessary link between consciousness and the need to survive. Plants need to survive, but that doesn't mean they need to be conscious.
As for whether consciousness developed through evolution - that is very much an open question. I believe there is a logical problem with materialism, and if you accept that materialism is false then materialistic accounts of evolution also have to be rejected.
See: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mind-Cosmos-Materialist-Neo-Darwinian-Conception/dp/0199919755
I think the real question we need to ask is how to square what we do know about evolution with what we don't know about consciousness, and we will not end up at a position where we can safely conclude that consciousness isn't fundamental (or something along those lines).
I don't think you can rely at all on any game maps, except for in-game use. Those "fantastic details" aren't necessarily accurate, and if anything is "not covered in the books" then it is inaccurate by default, as in "made up." Not that that makes them bad per se - I'm sure in the game it's loads of fun - but the game is no more accurate in terms of maps than it is terms of story.
The only non-Tolkien-authored source that might be useful for out-of-game convos like this one would be Karen Wynn Fonstad's Atlas of Middle-earth. It's not flawless but it's the best thing out there and based on tons of indepth research. If you're into maps (which it seems like you might be) it's a page-turner, maybe you'd enjoy it!
I also actually don't know exactly. There are two book, the myth of sisyphus: and other essays and the myth of sisyphus
The ...other essays one I'm taking about is this: https://www.amazon.com/Myth-Sisyphus-Other-Essays/dp/0679733736