Comments on Best Books to Become an Informed Voter - page 2

Joel wrote: "Laurentk wrote: "I'm quite sure The bell curve is horrendous racism posing as science. Glad to see you've deleted your account. "

argumentum ad consequentiam"

Nope, not an assertion of hypothetical conclusion/consequence based off a previous statement, just good old bias.

Laurentk wrote: "Joel wrote: "Laurentk wrote: "I'm quite sure The bell curve is horrendous racism posing as science. Glad to see you've deleted your account. "

argumentum ad consequentiam"

Nope, not an assertion ..."

I've seen many people attack The Bell Curve and the gist of their arguments is usually "this book is just racist propaganda". I've never seen anyone actually refute any of the science in the book (to the extent you can call the social sciences and psychology "science").

Argumentum ad consequentiam means argument based on consequences. In this context, I mean that people argue against The Bell Curve on the basis that the consequences of accepting the book's thesis is that it would justify prosecuting against certain races. That is not all all the case. The book's main thesis is that a primary determinant of a person's success is intelligence, and that there are vast differences in intelligence between various classes. That conclusion should in no way imply that any given class should be given fewer liberties than any other.

And besides, whether of not people extend the conclusion of the book to justify racism in no way reflects on the truth of that conclusion.

Informed voter?! A plurality of these books are rhetoric at best, propaganda at worst. This is a pile of shrink-wrapped confirmation bias. And I mean this from both sides of our peculiar American aisle.

Well, at least it can inform one to where the horseshit is. That is valuable.

c wrote: "Should be renamed "Best Books to Become an Informed Voter in America". Very little of this applies to the rest of the world."

True...

Originally the description puzzled me a little "What does a citizen need to read to be an informed voter in 2008 or 2012, or just to be an informed citizen?" I'm guessing, as the creator of the list lives the USA and the two years given are years of presidential elections in the USA, 'an informed voter' applies to the US only.

@Donna
From my point of view, it might be best to follow the suggestion and rename the list "Best Books to Become an Informed Voter in America", as there are lots and lots of non-American Goodreads members, of which I'm one....

If you people really think this makes you informed, good luck failing in all your endeavors

Why are there random fiction books in this list? As much as they are good entertainers, I somehow doubt that Louis Sachar, Rick Riordan, Michael Crichton, or JK Rowling will help me 'become an informed voter.'

Checked for duplicates - 6 books removed.

Removed one book that had clearly been spammed in: 5 votes, all 100 points, all 5 voters had voted only for that book, Goodreads Author. I wish people wouldn't do this. These lists are not promotional tools for individuals.

This list would be much more useful if it were properly curated and reduced in size.

I am concerned and horrified that a book by White Supremacist David Duke has a book on this list.

Jan wrote: "I am concerned and horrified that a book by White Supremacist David Duke has a book on this list."

There are quite a few books on this list by people with some pretty deplorable ideologies (Ehrenreich, Klien, Marx...).

Joel wrote: "Laurentk wrote: "I'm quite sure The bell curve is horrendous racism posing as science. Glad to see you've deleted your account. "

argumentum ad consequentiam"

Oooh look at me I can use the latin version of logical fallacies and apply them incorrectly, that means I win the argument oooh.

Laurentk wrote: "Joel wrote: "Laurentk wrote: "I'm quite sure The bell curve is horrendous racism posing as science. Glad to see you've deleted your account. "

argumentum ad consequentiam"

Oooh look at me I can u..."

I've very sorry you didn't understand the Latin term, but in my follow-up comment, I explain what it means and how it applies to this book. Apparently you didn't read it.

Joel wrote: "Laurentk wrote: "Joel wrote: "Laurentk wrote: "I'm quite sure The bell curve is horrendous racism posing as science. Glad to see you've deleted your account. "

argumentum ad consequentiam"

Oooh l..."

You arrogant presumptuous twat. People who make your type of argument think they're the epitome of logic and ration ad nauseum. OOoh look I used Latin, does that make me right now? Get your head out of your ass for once in your fucking life

Laurentk wrote: "Joel wrote: "Laurentk wrote: "Joel wrote: "Laurentk wrote: "I'm quite sure The bell curve is horrendous racism posing as science. Glad to see you've deleted your account. "

argumentum ad consequen..."

Sounds like you have other issues you need to work out. Have you tried speaking to a therapist?

You're condescension isn't a moral trait. Your thin veneer of politeness to pathologize me-when you're literally writing apologia for scientific racism-a subject you inadvertently imply as mutually exclusive from class, is. And I love being snarky, especially to people who deserve it.

Laurentk wrote: "You're condescension isn't a moral trait. Your thin veneer of politeness to pathologize me-when you're literally writing apologia for scientific racism-a subject you inadvertently imply as mutually..."

Thank you for your feedback. I'll be sure to consider it with the worth it deserves.

Joel wrote: "Laurentk wrote: "You're condescension isn't a moral trait. Your thin veneer of politeness to pathologize me-when you're literally writing apologia for scientific racism-a subject you inadvertently ..."

(self edit)

I really wish you did, but I doubt it. You seem to severely lack any sort of capacity for being self-reflexive.

Laurentk wrote: "Joel wrote: "Laurentk wrote: "You're condescension isn't a moral trait. Your thin veneer of politeness to pathologize me-when you're literally writing apologia for scientific racism-a subject you i..."

Coming from you, I'll take that as a compliment.

Joel wrote: "Laurentk wrote: "Joel wrote: "Laurentk wrote: "You're condescension isn't a moral trait. Your thin veneer of politeness to pathologize me-when you're literally writing apologia for scientific racis..."

fwiw, a moral trait can be good or bad concerning existence or lack of. Hope you can read contextually, because you seem to lack it.