Leonardo Da Vinci by Walter Isaacson

A lot of research went into this book. Isaacson became famous as the biographer of Steve Jobs. I am a bit of a Steve Jobs detractor. He had his good points, but seemed like an all around a**hole.

Leonardo Da Vinci, on the other hand, seems a less greedy for attention genius.

The book describes his various interests including his detailed study of vision which related strongly to his painting; one thing among many for which he is famous. A very intuitive person and yet he performed experiments to try to better prove his theories. He wrote a fair amount of notes, but published little.

He's a very interesting character, and the book provides a very worthwhile investigation of his talents and interesting personality.

David vs Goliath by Malcolm Gladwell, rating: 7/10

You will find detractors for Malcolm Gladwell, but I find that he does write well and on interesting topics.

In this particular book, I learned a few things.
 
Being disagreeable can be an indicator of success. But you don't tend to be disagreeable unless you've had some hardships in life. (You could be disagreeable because you are a spoiled brat though.)

The other thing is roughly about police state and the legitimacy of authority. When the police state has no legitimacy, you would get rioting and resistance. Gladwell spends a couple chapters on this related to Northern Ireland.

There were a few other more points made, which though I had never really thought about them, they do seem rather more obvious:

Imagine: How Creativity Works by Jonah Lehrer, rating: 7/10

The most valuable part of the book is the description of elements of improving creativity.

Having a more dominant right hemisphere of the brain is one thing that might not be altered (does a lefty automatically have an advantage here?). Being in a good mood could also be difficult to contrive.

But working in a blue room is condition which could be effected. So is having an environment encouraging lack of inhibition, yet allowing criticism of others, and featuring interaction with experts in various other fields. Just pretending oneself not to be an expert in a field is an interesting trick (prevents rejecting ideas out of hand).

Meanwhile the reader is treated to the secrets of the creative successes of Pixar, 3M and even Shakespeare.

###
August 2012: It appears Lehrer made up Bob Dylan quotes in the book.  I wonder why he would do that.  To spice it up, I guess.  How did he think it would get away with it?

Making Sense of People by Samuel Barondes, rating: 9/10

The subtitle is Decoding the Mysteries of Personality.  It is actually a fairly technical modern psychology book, but puts it all in layman's terms.  It talks about some ten of the troublesome personality patterns, including types like: histrionic, dependent or compulsive.  These were terms I'd heard about before, but never until now got a full understanding of.  The book isn't very long, a significant plus.

And now for a surprise...

How to Be a Man by Glenn O'Brian, rating: 7/10

Who's Glenn O'Brien? The Style Guy at GQ magazine. O'Brien writes with the voice of certainty about a topic on which you might rightly question the authority of any author. But he's one of those evolved types who live in NYC and prefers being a gentleman rather than anything akin to a macho man.

I was simultaneously entertained and confused by the thought I was reading something by a British gentleman rather than an American. Somehow being a gentleman seems rather un-American at least according to me. But I appreciate O'Brien 's efforts to bring sanity to the American male.

One of the fascinating parts is straight O'Brien expounding on how he thinks straights would get more action if they acted more gay. (He also complains that you can no longer tell gays from straights -- there's less drag and camp these days. But here I think he goes astray because of lack of a more highly developed gaydar.) He discusses his experience as a straight man in gay parts of Manhattan. I enjoyed the anecdote about how he and a friend were refused entry into gay bar because they were dressed in jackets and ties (it was obvious they weren't gay: not showing enough skin).

A Billion Wicked Thoughts by Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam, rating: 7/10

These guys studied online searches for porn and combined this with recent psychology findings to delve in detail about what people like about their preferred partners, straight or gay. They discuss all kinds of stuff, but...

I skipped to the section about gay males and was kind of surprised about one part. They claim that most gay males are 'bottoms'. But I wonder if this is somehow self selection. I would think that most bottoms are more willing to be out, and so thus skew the numbers. Maybe I'm not right about this though.

Other findings in the very short gay chapter are unsurprising to me, but might be stunning for others: most gay males like male acting/appearing guys, and not the effeminate types. The authors here refer to the preferred type as just straight guys, but I think that's essentially wrong. Gays don't specifically go after straight guys, but to the point that gaydar cannot distinguish between them, gays like typically male acting/appearing guys -- gay or straight. (By terming it straight, I think they're latching onto something which might, perhaps purposely, alarm straight men, like they have a target on their back or something, which is not true at all. Heh, yeah, one doth protest too much.)

Stonewall: The Riots That Sparked the Gay Revolution by David Carter, rating: 8/10

What's interesting is that the police never shot anyone. At one point, the police barricaded themselves inside the mob run Stonewall Inn nightclub and improvised firebombs were being thrown inside by the incensed crowd outside that 'finally had enough'.

Lord of the White Hell (Part One) by Ginn Hale, rating: 8/10

A review of fiction? I was lured into reading this fantasy tale of swords (heh), poison, curses and special powers by the underlying gay romance. And well, it works! I liked it.

Willful Blindness by Margaret Heffernan, rating: 9/10

The topic is not seeing what you don't want to see. It has something to do with confirmation bias, but as Heffernan describes, there's a lot more to it than that. I found this book fascinating.

A Right to Discriminate? How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association by Andrew Koppelman, rating: 8/10

Up until a couple years ago, I thought of libertarians as socially liberal, but anti-tax conservatives. Then I realized they are closeted racists. Now I find it was my idiot mistake to leave off homophobes and bigots from the description. This book goes into the flawed reasoning behind the Supreme Courts decision to allow Boy Scouts of America (BSA) to discriminate against gays (and atheists) based on a right of free association. It shows that in an extreme interpretation of the ruling: it means all anti-discrimination law are unconstitutional, or we are allowed to disobey laws whenever doing so is perceived to endorse a message (conforming to a non-discrimination statute counters the BSA message against gays). What has it to do with libertarians? The ruling is one which endorses a libertarian viewpoint that the state should not regulate the private sector. A viewpoint which the book points out came about many years ago as a way to justify discrimination against blacks post-abolition. Even today racist libertarians like Rand Paul want to repeal the Civil Rights Act!

Reading this book today (it was published in 2009), I was struck by the fact that actually the US military is more advanced than the BSA with it's repeal of don't ask don't tell. BSA is headquartered in Texas and is fairly overtly religious with the Scout oath starting off: "On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country". These two facts lead me to believe the BSA is pretty much a lost cause, and probably would not change their rules, unless the costs of being homophobic increase. I hope they do.

It would be nice to think that the Boy Scouts are a truly inconsequential private institution, but in fact, quite a number of boys go into the Scouts. The fact that it gets preferential treatment in many places as a de-facto socializing agent for children actually says that plays a not small role in society and should not be allowed to discriminate.

the upside of irrationality by dan ariely, rating: 8/10

Another in an almost series by Ariely on the topic of irrationality. It's strange how people act so differently from what you might logically reason they would act. Ariely investigates more or less subtle issues in this field. My short term memory fails me, but certainly if I were to encounter an applicable situation, I would say, "hey, that's just like what that guy said in that book."

Gay, Straight, and the Reason Why: The Science of Sexual Orientation by Simon LeVay; rating: 8/10

Taking a systematic approach of a scientist, LeVay captures all the latest findings in the area of how human (and animal) sexual orientation comes to be. In the process there are a lot of interesting lines of reasoning covered, many discounted and a few very suggestive. LeVay himself jumped into the controversy many years ago with his study of the size of INAH3 in brains of gay males being the same size as women (smaller than straight males) [Of course leading to the question of how/why?].

I believe it can be said that much remains a mystery. But if I might try to write my own summary of the current state, it might be something like this: (1) genetic studies of identical and dizygotic ("fraternal") twins show that homosexuality might be around 30-50% genetically determined, and (2) a lot of studies point to hormones in the womb contributing possibly to homosexuality. LeVay also tries to uncover possible reasons for the genetics and why it may not be selected out of the genome.

There are some interesting little tidbits in the book, such as some studies have found that the torsos of gay men are longer relative to their legs. (Someone could do a larger, more definitive online survey of jean inseams versus height.)

I guess overall, I found the information interesting and useful. I do think that all the science is just background for the political questions which may mainly not hinge on the biological mechanism behind homosexuality and its existence. Many people do not believe in science and so whether or not it occurs as a byproduct of an evolutionary purpose has no bearing on their opposition to it.

David Sedaris Live at Carnegie Hall (Audiobook)

Sedaris has written what seems to be an impossible amount of memoirs. But they are undeniably hilarious, and no other form beats hearing the author speak the words himself.

From The Closet To The Courtroom by Carlos Ball

Probably what makes it interesting to me is the logical process which has been used to win cases for the cause. Five cases and rationales are highlighted, discussing the plaintiffs, the defendants, lawyers, and judges of each case.

It was surprising to me how recent the cases with positive outcomes for the LGBT community have been. Not long before them were the nearly apocalyptic ones, especially: Hardwick where the Supreme Court seemed to codify discrimination.

The book seems especially timely given the on-going case going through the courts challenging California's Prop 8.

Strengths Finder 2.0 by Tom Rath

Didn't take the assessment since the code from the book was already used (from that perspective not a very environmentally friendly print book -- the print version cannot be fully used by more than one person), but I was able to somewhat guess what strengths I thought fit me. I guess it's useful in framing/categorizing what your strengths are in a more formal way and separating out similar, but actually disparate strengths. All this in a spirit of know thyself/to thyself be true.

I was at first surprised at the existence of strength categories like: context, input or significance. But these are actually: always seeing things in context, thirst for input (or curiosity), and wanting to be of significance. (My guess was none of these areas are my strengths.)

One insight perhaps of the book is that: people tend to focus on their weaknesses to improve, but then it goes on: why not improve on a strength, build on something you're already good at or have a talent for. (Somehow role playing game specialization and character points jumps to mind.) Being well rounded might just be overrated. Instead team up with someone else with similar or different strengths.

Two is Enough: A Couple's Guide To Living Childless By Choice by Laura Scott

I think one would only pick up this book if one had a hesitation about the question of whether to have kids. Since I did, and even though I'm not in a couple so the question is largely a theoretical one for me, I thought it might be an interesting read. And in fact it was. First of all, there is some relief in a misery loves company way in its discussion about how every (straight) couple of child-bearing age seems to receive pressure to have kids. I'm not sure it's the case in liberal metropolitan areas, but it appears to be true in 'family oriented' suburbia.

The main focus of the book is a non-statistical interview based survey by the author of childless (or the more positive: childfree) by choice couples. It presents their most common reasons for not having kids. (And no, "We are selfish jerks" is not one of them. In fact, sometimes it's very nearly the reverse, something like: we've thought it through and kids would not benefit having us as parents.) The basic idea being helping couples new to the decision process decide by looking at the satisfaction of other couples who decided one way or another and on what basis.

The Art of Happiness In a Troubled World by the Dalai Lama and Howard Cutler

I liked the first book in this series so much because it was such a new concept: the idea of a religion which did not look down upon other religions or even on not believing. It look a secular approach to showing how compassion and empathy could improve your life, rather than being instructed to do so as a moral and religious imperative. This book attempts to update and improve on the first. Cutler does a reasonable job with informing on the latest in happiness psychology and research. He is able to extract some nuggets from the Dalai Lama over his several interview visits. But I couldn't help but think that I might have gotten more out of a reread of the original book.

Intelligence and How to Get It by Richard Nisbett

Most interesting are the chapters on Asians and Jews. Nisbett goes out of his way to say that Asians don't have higher IQs than Europeans/European Americans. (Thanks, dude!) But Asians just work harder and the importance of family rather than individual results in increased motivation to success. Nisbett then tries to explain how Jews disproportionately obtain Nobel prizes.

What the Dog Saw by Malcolm Gladwell

I had low expectations for this anthology of New Yorker pieces by Gladwell. Well, I mean because usually such a conglomeration of stuff seems not very timely and jumbled. A surprising number of the chapters were quite interesting. And in fact, I felt the same way afterwards as when I normally read a Gladwell book: which is like I'm not sure what I've learned after reading it, except for some random interesting facts. A book of this style is uniquely suited for reading piecemeal.

Fateful Choices by Ian Kershaw

I heard about this book while in Paris on CNN Int'l. It's a 2007 book which basically goes back to WWII and reviews ten choices made which altered the course of the war dramatically. They are all fascinating. A couple which I had no idea about were the choices of Japan at that time to continue its aggression against China and the rest of Asia -- it was at the time highly dependent on American oil -- and Germany to go back on its agreement with Russia and actually attack Russia, the two front war decision. But besides these there is also the decision by Great Britain to continue to fight Germany despite expectations of a near destruction of its army (expeditionary force, it was called) in France near Dunkirk and the imminent surrender of close allies Belgium and France. A really thick tome, but exceptionally well written as it considers the thinking at the time and the egos of the personalities involved in making the decisions.