1
   

10 Most Harmful Books of the 19th, 20th C.

 
 
Sanctuary
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 04:16 pm
Has anyone been up to date with controversy over one specific book: "King and King"? Local libraries are going on strike, civilians are rioting in the streets, there's been pillaging; Queer Eye For the Straight Guy Season 1 & 2 DVDs are being tossed into bon fires amid alley ways. Dear!

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/1582460612.01._PIdp-schmooS,TopRight,7,-26_PE32_SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg
(Sorry, Amazon)
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 07:32 am
Setanta -- The reports (some of them trial transcripts; others, diary entries) never specified, "griffin," but rather that a black thing with the head of a rooster and the body of dog. The program presented a great deal of evidence, including the autopsy of a bog body in which rye ergot was present, and films of people from a town in France that experienced a rye contamination in the 1950s. These modern people writhed in the same way Salem's bewitched did. Chemical analysis of their bread confirmed the presence of the ergot.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 07:53 am
Re: 10 Most Harmful Books of the 19th, 20th C.
plainoldme wrote:
This belongs under the aegis of politics, although the subject matter is the written word. This past Sunday, while running several small errands, I caught part of a program on WBUR. The male speaker (whose name I never caught) spoke of nominating Rachel Carson's Silent Spring to this list as he thinks DDT is a boon to mankind. Because I sensed the imminent danger here, I went the the WBUR web site today and found this:

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591

How do you feel about this list?

Right-wingers: I ask that you keep your rhetoric respectful.



Charles Darwin's "Origin of the Species" should clearly be number one on any such list. Much if not all of the other social pathology derives largely from that one book and theory.

Mein Kampf should not be on the list. I simply cannot believe that more than a half dozen people were ever converted to naziism from reading Mein Kampf. Not that Mein Kampf is not an evil book, it simply does not rate anything like top ten status.

Likewise I would not put any of Nietzsche's books on the list. Nietzsche's logic was never less than flawless; where he failed or ended up in wrong positions, it was due to starting assumptions being wrong, and a number of his insights are valuable enough that I'd want the entire body of his works kept around for study, one way or another.

Simple logic and the last couple of thousand years worth of history demand that we accept either the idea that God is dead as Nietzsche claimed, or that the human race has been substantially out of communication with the spirit world for a very long time. I subscribe to the later theory, but the basis for believing that this breakdown in communications does not mean that such communications NEVER existed is fairly recent and was not available to Nietzsche.

Silent Spring and Population Bomb should be in the top five for obvious reasons.
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 07:53 am
Apparently (from what I remember), somewhat correlated the years of witch trials and (in Europe) werewolf trials/burnings/whatever (not a history nut, I) with seasons in which meteorological conditions would have been highly conducive to ergot contamination. Scapegoats are wunnerful things...


Was surprised (given #1 on the list) that I had to go all the way down to honorable mention to find Darwin. Clearly someone didn't get the memo. (Unsafe At Any Speed? Really?)
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 08:00 am
Setanta wrote:


When books are outlawed, the literate become outlaws--


You might want to mention that to John McCain and Diane Feinstein...
0 Replies
 
Atkins
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 08:08 am
gungasnake wrote:
Setanta wrote:


When books are outlawed, the literate become outlaws--


You might want to mention that to John McCain and Diane Feingold...


This is supposed to make sense?
0 Replies
 
Atkins
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 08:09 am
Re: 10 Most Harmful Books of the 19th, 20th C.
gungasnake wrote:



Charles Darwin's "Origin of the Species" should clearly be number one on any such list. Much if not all of the other social pathology derives largely from that one book and theory.

Silent Spring and Population Bomb should be in the top five for obvious reasons.


What do you have against science?
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 08:13 am
Lady Chatterly's Lover...I read it when I was very young and have been masturbating ever since.....
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 08:23 am
gungasnake wrote:
Setanta wrote:


When books are outlawed, the literate become outlaws--


You might want to mention that to John McCain and Diane Feingold...


Feinstein, not Feingold. Russ Feingold is the godless liberal senator from Wisconsin.

Reminds me of a joke, though.

A Chinese businessman sits down at a hotel bar.

The gentleman next to him, who's had a few, turns to him, sizes him up, stabs a finger at him, and says, "I don't like you."

The Chinese businessman says, "Excuse me?"

"Your people were allies of the NAZIs. My grandparents died in the Holocaust. I don't like you."

The Chinese businessman is taken aback. "Excuse me, sir, but that was the Japanese. I am Chinese, and my people were the enemies of the Japanese, and so of the NAZIs, as well."

The drunk shrugs. "Chinese, Japanese -- what's the difference?"

The businessman says to the drunk, "You said your grandparents died in the Holocaust. Are you Jewish?"

"Yes, I am."

"Well, I might reproach your people for sinking the Titanic," says the businessman.

The drunk is confused. "An iceberg sank the Titanic."

The businessman shrugs. "Goldberg, iceberg -- what's the difference?"






Thank you very much, I'll be here all week.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 08:45 am
Re: 10 Most Harmful Books of the 19th, 20th C.
Atkins wrote:
gungasnake wrote:



Charles Darwin's "Origin of the Species" should clearly be number one on any such list. Much if not all of the other social pathology derives largely from that one book and theory.

Silent Spring and Population Bomb should be in the top five for obvious reasons.


What do you have against science?



Nothing. Evolutionism, however, is not science. It's an ideological doctrine which masqerades as science.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 09:08 am
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Lady Chatterly's Lover...I read it when I was very young and have been masturbating ever since.....


I hate when you make me laugh.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 09:51 am
plainoldme wrote:
Setanta -- The reports (some of them trial transcripts; others, diary entries) never specified, "griffin," but rather that a black thing with the head of a rooster and the body of dog. The program presented a great deal of evidence, including the autopsy of a bog body in which rye ergot was present, and films of people from a town in France that experienced a rye contamination in the 1950s. These modern people writhed in the same way Salem's bewitched did. Chemical analysis of their bread confirmed the presence of the ergot.


You missed the point i was making altogether. In your previous post, you wrote: "What if all the mythologies of the world are the product of food poisoning?"--which is carrying a very dubious speculation to an absurd length. Without having established either that the Salem witch trials were the product of ergot poisoning, nor yet again that ergot poisoning and ergot poisoning alone would cause someone to see visions which might be described as representing griffins or sphinxes--you leap to a speculation that all the mythologies of the world result from food poisoning.

You haven't established that this incident arose from food poisoning, let alone that the image of a griffin or a sphinx is the product of food poisoning. You've just reached so far out into the realm of the silly, that it's hard to describe just how feeble the thought process is. I was pointing out that the visions of horror common to a 17th century European culture were creatures such as griffins and sphinxes--so that whether or not ergot poisoning can be said to be responsible, it is a rather banal thing that the monstrosities these children claimed to have seen are portrayed in terms of culturally iconic monsters with which they would have been familiar, and which they knew would be familiar to those to whom they reported the visions.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 10:08 am
Setanta -- The program did a good job of establishing that the ergot was responsible. while I did not write that as a sentence, I referred to the show's thoroughness. I am well aware of the imprint that cultural icons make on the human mind. However, since the same symptoms have been recorded throughout history -- and, yes, different diseases and different toxins can and do create the same symptoms -- and since there was a correlation between rye crops, bad weather and outbreaks of witch craft, I engaged in a bit of badinage, a little light-hearted speculation that perhaps, a good deal of the world's mythology is based on food poisoning. Jeez Louise.
------

BlueVeined or whatever -- I really doubt anyone would be turned on by Lady Chatterly's Lover. 'Fess up! you read the cliff notes, right?
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 10:09 am
Gungasnake -- Please give us some indication of your scientific education.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 10:14 am
I've been doing research on DDT and malaria. There seems to be a tempest in a teapot being created by a handful of individuals over these two things. The pro-DDT forces are using a one-sided argument that ignores many simple elements that even elementary aged children can understand. An argument framed in this manner may rally people, particularly when the arguers are as loud as this pro-insecticide group is, but, their fallacious argument is terrible.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 11:16 am
plainoldme wrote:
Gungasnake -- Please give us some indication of your scientific education.



Bachelors and masters in mathematics.

There have been several symposia at which leading mathematicians have tried to explain the nature of reality to evolutionites; you might want to read about it:

http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/20hist12.htm
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 11:19 am
plainoldme wrote:
I've been doing research on DDT and malaria. There seems to be a tempest in a teapot being created by a handful of individuals over these two things. The pro-DDT forces are using a one-sided argument that ignores many simple elements that even elementary aged children can understand. An argument framed in this manner may rally people, particularly when the arguers are as loud as this pro-insecticide group is, but, their fallacious argument is terrible.



There were guys who fell into vats of DDT in the 50s who are still walking around. ALL survivors of nazi concentration camps were sprayed with the stuff to kill lice; none of them died from DDT poisoning. Every single bit of the noise we used to hear about DDT being harmful to birds is pure BS.

And 90 million people have died needlessly as a result of DDT being banned.

Rachel Carson has a hell of a lot of blood on her hands.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 11:25 am
While it is true that DDT kills dangerous insects like mosquitoes and fleas, it also kills helpful ones like bees, ladybugs, butterflies and more. It is not selective. That part of reality is missing from the arguments posed by people who have nothing more in mind than the desire to sell chemicals. Frankly, song birds are disappearing still. There are no more wild swarms of bees. While DDT -- which is still in the soil and in houses -- is not the sole agent of destruction, it is part of the complex of destruction.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 11:52 am
plainoldme wrote:
While it is true that DDT kills dangerous insects like mosquitoes and fleas, it also kills helpful ones like bees, ladybugs, butterflies and more.


The idea is, that you spray it on places where mosquitos breed, and on places which humans inhabit. You don't need to spray the whole planet with it.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 12:39 pm
plainoldme wrote:
Setanta -- The program did a good job of establishing that the ergot was responsible. and since there was a correlation between rye crops, bad weather and outbreaks of witch craft, I engaged in a bit of badinage, a little light-hearted speculation that perhaps, a good deal of the world's mythology is based on food poisoning. Jeez Louise.


but i seem to remember that ergot is the base of the dreaded lysergic,sort of...

Quote:
The early 1930s brought a new era in ergot research, beginning with the determination of the chemical structure of the main chemically active agents, the ergot alkaloids. Finally, W. A. Jacobs and L.C. Craig of the Rockefeller Institute of New York succeeded in isolating and characterizing the nucleus common to all ergot alkaloids. They named it lysergic acid.


albert hoffman, a chemist who pioneered the development of l.s.d. reported the following in his journal;

Quote:
"Here the notes in my laboratory journal cease. I was able to write the last words only with great effort. By now it was already clear to me that LSD had been the cause of the remarkable experience of the previous Friday, for the altered perceptions were of the same type as before, only much more intense. I had to struggle to speak intelligibly. I asked my laboratory assistant, who was informed of the self-experiment, to escort me home. We went by bicycle, no automobile being available because of wartime restrictions on their use. On the way home, my condition began to assume threatening forms. Everything in my field of vision wavered and was distorted as if seen in a curved mirror. I also had the sensation of being unable to move from the spot. Nevertheless, my assistant later told me that we had traveled very rapidly. Finally, we arrived at home safe and sound, and I was just barely capable of asking my companion to summon our family doctor and request milk from the neighbors.

The dizziness and sensation of fainting became so strong at times that I could no longer hold myself erect, and had to lie down on a sofa. My surroundings had now transformed themselves in more terrifying ways. Everything in the room spun around, and the familiar objects and pieces of furniture assumed grotesque, threatening forms. They were in continuous motion, animated, as if driven by an inner restlessness. The lady next door, whom I scarcely recognized, brought me milk - in the course of the evening I drank more than two liters. She was no longer Mrs. R., but rather a malevolent, insidious witch with a colored mask."


so it's not that far fetched that the possibilty exists that the accusers at salem were simply ripped to the nines on a hallucinogenic.

though i tend to think that it's more likely that the accusations had more to do with religious fervor and a few folks that saw a way to get attention and to maybe get a little revenge on someone.

chm.bris.ac.uk
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/21/2024 at 10:10:52