January 29, 2013 · 10:31 am
Cover via Goodreads.
Rating: 4/5 stars.
From a psychological standpoint, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion earns five stars. The book loses some of its appeal when Jonathan Haidt veers into political philosophy, however – especially when he raises the biased question “why are religious people better neighbors and citizens?”
Let me backtrack. The Righteous Mind is split into three sections. The first focuses on how intuitions come first and are followed by strategic reasoning, the second shows that there are six moral foundations (Care/Harm, Fairness/Cheating, Liberty/Oppression, Loyalty/Betrayal, Authority/Subversion, and Sanctity/Degradation), and the third hones in on the belief that morality binds and blinds. By the end each part made sense in relation to one another and came together to pack a strong moral philosophy punch. Though the book had some dense sections – like the history and biology of moral philosophy – Haidt included interesting scenarios, research, and anecdotes to alleviate the doldrums. Continue reading →
December 14, 2012 · 5:09 pm
The shooting made me think of this quote.
I’ll preface this by saying that I’m sorry. I don’t think any written word can convey how horrible the shooting that took place in Connecticut is. Any attempt at eloquence, at some emotional connection, just won’t do. I’m sorry. Take this post with a grain of salt – I know nothing can make up for what’s happened.
As humans, we react to tragedy. We rally around the flag, we post and share our sorrow and sympathy on social networks, we try to help if we can.
The next day, this feeling of altruism starts to fade. Days later, we begin to forget.
I get it. Continue reading →
August 17, 2012 · 9:11 am
Sometimes I think the media makes us stupid.
Can someone give me a logical definition of the “traditional family”? Or “traditional family values”? When politicians and people in general use this phrase, are they referring to the average middle-class Caucasian family of the fifties? Are they referring to the outdated and preconceived motion that men are the head of the household? I wonder if there even is a traditional family. What cultural biases and predispositions form the mold of what should be seen as “traditional”, and should the traditional family even be considered a quality representation of America today?
Let me give you my thoughts on what a traditional family should be like. Continue reading →
January 21, 2012 · 6:07 pm
Cover via Goodreads.
Feed fractured my heart, and then broke it – so, of course, it deserves to be my first five-star book of 2012. It is definitely not your typical zombie story with sleazy action sequences and creepy cliches, but a wonderful mix of zombies, blogging, and politics.
The book takes place after the Rising of 2014, in which the cure to the common cold and the cure to cancer combined to form a virus that raised the dead. Several people were immediately infected and many more lost their lives during that initial outbreak. Now, twenty years later, Georgia and Shaun Mason are internet journalists devoted to seeking the truth at whatever the cost. When they are selected to follow the campaign of popular presidential candidate Peter Ryman, they may have their chance to do so as a twisted conspiracy threatens to take them under.
Continue reading →
Filed under 5 stars, Book Reviews, Books
Tagged as blogging, charlotte perkins gilman, feed, feminism, kate chopin, mira grant, politics, the story of an hour, the yellow wallpaper, zombies