Mind-expanding books
github.com
github.com
As one of the issues in the GitHub repository suggest, it seems all that is needed for a book to be considered “mind expanding” here is for it to have a Goodreads and/or Amazon rating higher than 4.
But what does that prove? There are people who rate Netflix’s Red Notice 10/10. Relative to those people, I think I’ve seen more intelligent forms of life swimming in the milk in my breakfast cereal.
I read half of The Compound Effect — one of the books in this list. It was trash. I’ve also read Sapiens from this list, and I certainly would characterise it as mind expanding.
Even from these two titles alone, I’d say the quality in the selection is far too variable. I think reviews are near enough useless unless you’re intimately familiar with the reviewer, and trying to curate the works in a collection like this by writing unit tests is probably futile.
I agree with your sentiment about the importance of knowing the reviewer. I think using general popularity as a gauge is a good way to get the worst recommendations.
Do you know a better way to get good recommendations? I am genuinely interested.
To find recommendations for yourself: Think of a person that you respect. Then google "{name} book recommendations" That should get you some hits.
It's quite possible that if the person you respect is not too famous and busy, you could email them and ask for a recommendation.
# Regarding popularity
I can't speak with any actual authority on the matter of general popularity being a poor gauge other than my own observations that I've never been a fan of what is popular. I suspect that there are several people like me in that regard on this forum.
The other nice thing about this approach is that some textbooks are commonly recommended by different universities for the same courses -- and they're more likely to be good. For some random examples, Horrowitz and Hill, the art of electronics (for electronics!); Riley Hobson and Bence: mathematical methods for the physical sciences (for vector calculus); or David Mackay's book on information theory (legally freely available online, published by CUP and contains lots of Bayesian stuff the average HN reader would probably love).
I feel bad for giving useless advice so as someone who read several times the whole foundation series as a teen may I suggest: A deepness in the sky, a fire upon the deep, the forever war, gateway (Frederick Pohl). If you like fantasy, or even if not: the blade itself. If you have an enemy recommend him/her "the name of the wind". It's a great book but it's the first of an unfinished trilogy.
Edit: how could I forget the cryptonomicon?
Whatever that means.
Aside from Goodreads reviews, you could do similar through tracing a path of sources from the book (if you can find the sources for it.) Maybe do both.
I take the same approach with any of the "Awesome" lists. They're meant to be used for overview and familiarization, not rote adoption.
But even for the >4.0-rated books, I find the collection bizarre.
E.g. "Metaphors We Live By" is here somewhere in the middle (at least got 4.08), while for me, it is the single most insightful book about human language as a way of thinking. "Realms of the Human Unconscious: Observations from LSD Research" by Stanislav Grof (4.34), a book that unifies & classifies psychedelic experiences (going beyond "good vs bad trip"), religious experiences, and CPTSD - is not even on the list. But sure - this book is not that popular. Yet, "Consciousness Explained" by Daniel Dennett (3.88) is not even on the list - just to name a few.
So instead of pretending that it is some collection of "mind-expanding books", let's make it "Favourite books of hackerkid", assuming they read them. If not, then "a random collection of vaguely mind-expanding books".
>Awaken the Giant Within: How to Take Immediate Control of Your Mental, Emotional, Physical and Financial Destiny!
I'm not overly conservative or classically leaning when it comes to education but I think people who really want to expand their minds would benefit from trying some of the classics first.
Mill, On Liberty. Accessible and incredibly important book for people who live in liberal democracies and want to understand where a lot of their own ideas come from. Plato's Republic. Not as accessible, but very important. Girard has become popular again and has some very unique ideas, so people will probably get a lot out of it. Same for Chesterton.
Kafka's Metamorphosis deserves to be in the Lit section. Octavia Butler's Xenogenesis series is a must read for science fiction fans, the sci-fi section has some genuinely horrible recommendations in it. Also given that it's supposed to be a mind-expanding list, throw in Blindsight by Peter Watts. The fantasy section needs Mervyn Peake's Gormenghast. (and throw Harry Potter out)
Sexual Personae by Paglia deserves to be named in the Gender/sexuality section.
And an off-beat recommendation. Understanding Comics by Scott McCloud is a truly smart book on comics, in the form of a graphic novel.
See for instance: https://twitter.com/bot_mccloud/status/1474575631778258950 -- I've used this image in slides for countless talks when I go into anything about abstraction in programming, by the way.
My approach is to just understand principles, and skip these kinds of books
If I had made a similar (probably much shorter) list about programming languages it would include Go and Pascal as mind-expanding languages.
As it stands it looks like a list of the sort of worthy books that folk will think well of you for having read.
Also, arguably, all books (or at least should be) are mind-expanding as they provide you with new information. As for the quantitative aspect, it is a very individual thing: what is a huge trove of new information for me might be old news for you. With time, what was once new becomes more or less common knowledge.
Personally, I find the books on the limits of science to fall in this category - especially our grasp of micro- and macrocosm, but also biology and neuroscience. Chemistry is extremely interesting but my feeling is that there aren't that many breakthrough developments these days; nevertheless, it's fascinating to observe, say, the influence of various alkaloids on living organisms - there is so much to discover here. I love books by specialists in the field, preparing a meta-analysis of various phenomena, and then proposing a novel explanation for them.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Read_a_Book#Reading_lis...
To address the other comments about this being "yet another list" etc, it's useful for someone like me who is quite busy and has to be opportunistic about finding good reads. Lists help.
I would prefer to read a list curated by a single "expert" person. Such a list would be shorter, more biased, but hopefully not so bland. For example, Eli Bendersky puts every now and then a nice summary of his impressive reading adventures.
* The Dice Man by George Cockroft.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dice_Man?wprov=sfla1
* The Teachings of Don Juan by Carlos Castaneda.
* Looking Backward by Edward Bellamy
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/624
* Poverty and Progress by Henry George
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/55308
* The Goal by Eliyahu Goldratt
I am sorry but to me this is completely useless. Someone whom I don't know can claim they recommend whatever. They have no authority, and lists like these don't say why they recommend some. I am far more interested in the why than the who or what. In other words, the most interesting piece (a well written albeit short review) is missing. Without that, title and aithor is pointless as they are rarely descriptive enough about content.
Especially if one have read some books from authors like Leonid Andreyev or (not directly related to those authors) you know some Gnostic concepts.