News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by fao_ on Thursday July 05, 2018 @08:27AM (#17462672)
This.

100 times, this.

GEB is an alright book, but nobody I know has actually managed to finish it. I Am A Strange Loop discusses the exact same thing, but does so with the experience of years of writing in metaphor, and more importantly, entirely in metaphor. All of the metaphors are well-crafted in that they are both a pleasure to imagine, can be recalled rather easily, and accurately map to what the author is trying to express. IAASL also distills the main thesis of GEB, so it is not only more expressive but much more to-the-point (Which I, too think is the main problem with GEB as a book).

I do not hesitate to recommend -- for all those that struggled with GEB, or all those that wish to read GEB, pick up a copy of IAASL, and then if you still wish to read GEB, try it after reading IAASL.

Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by stuntkite on Thursday July 05, 2018 @08:39AM (#17462740)
Sometimes when my girlfriend and I are laying in bed after a long day and just aren't quite ready to unplug and sleep, we take turns reading randomly selected sections from IAASL. There's a couple other books in the rotation, but it's a fun one. The mini theater of it becomes kind of self referential as we try to mess up how the other person feels about the reality being thrown at them.

You really can't do that with GEB. It's still valuable, but I think Hofstadter covers the issues with GEB himself just fine so I won't pick it apart.

But yeah, we just pick a section at random and try to sell it to each other with a read. Sometimes we do kind of a theatrical Exquisite Corpse paragraph to paragraph. It's silly, but something about not only the content, but the context of trying to mess up each other's consciousness with the read is not only fun but after 5 minutes you're having a laugh and forget about whatever you cared about all day. Turtles all the way down. Lol.

I know it's dumb, but I just wanted to share. Works ok with Garfield comics too.

Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by core-questions on Thursday July 05, 2018 @12:39PM (#17464677)
You're a lucky person to have a partner who appreciates this!
Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by gordo4 on Saturday July 07, 2018 @01:20PM (#17479433)
Yeah I'm jealous too
Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by kej on Thursday July 05, 2018 @11:50AM (#17464204)
I'm curious what the other books in the rotation are, if you don't mind sharing.
Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by nabla9 on Thursday July 05, 2018 @09:44AM (#17463192)
I read the whole book in almost one go over a weekend when I was 20. I think I took 3 hour break to sleep. I was very hungry and tired but I was unable to stop.

I read it again in next six months in small pieces afterwards.

Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by interfixus on Thursday July 05, 2018 @12:35PM (#17464626)
Same same. And have reread any number of times over the years.
Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by mchahn on Friday July 06, 2018 @12:21AM (#17468802)
So now I have to get it out and read it a fourth (fifth?) time. I don't really have the time but I have to.
Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by commandlinefan on Thursday July 05, 2018 @09:44AM (#17463189)
> nobody I know has actually managed to finish it

Well, I guess that depends on what you mean by "finish it". Like the blog post guy says, he "looked at every page", but he's not sure he actually absorbed everything about it there was to absorb.

Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by BadThink6655321 on Thursday July 05, 2018 @09:58AM (#17463272)
“... but nobody I know has actually managed to finish it.“

I’ve read it cover to cover, twice. It’s not a bad book, but it would have helped if he had used the Lambda calculus. YMMV.

Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by core-questions on Thursday July 05, 2018 @12:40PM (#17464685)
Would that have helped the non-mathematicians that read it? I'm in that camp and never quite grasped the whole Lambda thing.

(Maybe you know of something I could read that would fix that?)

Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by westoncb on Thursday July 05, 2018 @10:55PM (#17468528)
Best resource I've found is a book called "Introduction to Functional Programming through Lambda Calculus": https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Functional-Programming-C...
Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by dnautics on Thursday July 05, 2018 @11:34AM (#17464060)
You're not supposed to finish GEB, there's even a section in the book about that.
Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by AlphaGeekZulu on Friday July 06, 2018 @03:46AM (#17469710)
"[...]but nobody I know has actually managed to finish it."

I read the book entirely from first to last page, including bibliography, five times in five years. I was at the age of appr. 19-24 and I did not read many other books in that time. Everytime I read it again, it felt like a new book. I keep casually reading random parts of it until today.

I like Getty's review, although I do not share it at all. I learned many years ago, from a very wise friend, that when I struggle - for example with certain habits of my partner - that the root of my struggling is most likely not within the other, but myself. It points to some personal deficit. This friend taught me to explore myself, before I demand any change from the other. Why is it bothering me, what would I have to change in myself to get over it?

Applying this rule, in Getty's place, I would ask myself: "how comes, that so many people are appealed by this book in a way that I am not? What makes those readers, that share my criticism and those that don't, different?". This sort of introspection is very difficult and sometimes impossible. But in the case of Getty's cognition of GEB I might give some clues:

The parts of the book that receive most criticism in Getty's review are those parts, that I would consider the entertaining sections. For example: never did I perceive the dialogs in the book as didactic. I always perceived the dialogs as a rest period, an intake of breath. After long didactic and sometimes hard to swallow scientific passages, the dialogs in their playful and sometimes childish style would allow my brain to settle down, relax and get ready, very softly, for the next topic. Like you would shake your arms and legs between sportive excercises. The dialogs were always welcome intermissions for me, but I did not take them very seriously and I did not, at all, expect them to be an essential part of the didactic mission of the book.

The second major element of criticism in Getty's review are topics in the book that do not belong to the core themes (Gödels proof, logic, formal systems), but are brought in by the author in a way that does not properly embrace them for one and which he should't refer to in the first place, as he has no sufficient proficiency in those topics (according to Getty).

The expection of Getty obviously is, that GEB is supposed to be a very serious scholarly and didactic work, that must not deviate from its core topic. And I believe that is a mis-expectation: Getty expected a textbook, but got a novel. In MY perception GEB is the novel of Gödels proof and as such it can play and entertain and experiment to any degree that the author desires. Of course the author can make fun of Cage and completely miss Zen buddhism. For me, it was absolutely clear and obvious in every paragraph of the book, whether the author was didactic or playful or personal at any point. The mixture is the essence of the book that makes it so appealing to me. Textbooks are often too dry and hard to swallow, novels on scientific topics almost never go deep enough for me. GEB is an experimental format that hit the sweet point for me.

I want to make clear, that Getty is not "wrong" in his perception - it is his view and it is absolutely legit as such. I believe, though, it is a very big error to blame the author for not fulfilling one's own exepctations or try to convince others, to adapt their perception to one's own - there is no point in this. If Getty is really interested what makes him tick differently than others, he should introspect his indisposition with the "soft", playful, not so scientific, didactic aspects of the book. Why is he upset with those parts, where the author deviates from his views? Why is he unable to distinguish between the serious and the playful parts of the book? It might point him to some revealing aspects of his personality. There is no outcome in the sense of right or wrong!

I liked Getty's review - not for what it was proposedly written for: revealing to me weaknesses of the book I haven't discovered yet, or convincing me, that the book that I so much love, is actually not loveable - but for taking the courage and providing me with an insight in another type of brain and perception, and therefore another aspect of personhood, that I found very interesting and entertaining to learn about! This comes with absolutely no assessment from my side!

Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by stareatgoats on Friday July 06, 2018 @09:24AM (#17471174)
> the root of my struggling is most likely not within the other, but myself.

If only more people would think like that! (Not thinking of me here ... ;-) )

Re:Why I Don't Love Gödel, Escher, Bach by Legogris on Saturday July 07, 2018 @08:54AM (#17478294)
As someone who enjoyed GEB, I can see where Getty is coming from when I think of how movies with interesting ideas or topics can put me off with their theatrical acting and trite writing. After that it's just a matter of tolerance level and pickiness.