10 Books That Screwed Up The World?

[BurtWorm]

PZ Myers, on two lists of the 10 worst books. (I agree with him that these are both really idiotic lists.):


http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/scienceblogs/pharyngula/~3/293555976/two_book_lists.php


I've been sent two lists of "10 Books That Screwed Up the World", and I'm not very impressed with either of them. The first is from a new book by Benjamin Wiker of the same title, published by Regnery Press, the imprint of right-wing wackaloons everywhere. Here's Wiker's list:

* The Prince, Machiavelli
* Discourse on Method, Descartes
* Leviathan, Hobbes
* Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels
* The Descent of Man, Darwin
* Beyond Good and Evil, Nietzsche
* Mein Kampf, Hitler
* Coming of Age in Samoa, Mead
* Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, Kinsey

Here's another list, which seems to be inspired by Wiker's, but with a few substitutions.

* Malleus Maleficarum, Kramer and Sprenger
* Coming of Age in Samoa, Mead
* The Prince, Machiavelli
* Mein Kampf, Hitler
* The Pivot of Civilization, Sanger
* Democracy and Education, Dewey
* Baby and Child Care, Spock
* The Protocols of the Elders of Zion
* Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels
* Darwin's Black Box, Behe

Bleh. A list of books that screwed up the world ought to include books that have actually had some major impact for the worse on the lives of large numbers of people: I can definitely see that for The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Mein Kampf, and the Malleus Maleficarum. Others, not so much. Coming of Age in Samoa may have confused the discipline of anthropology for a while, but putting it on the same list as Mein Kampf is simply ridiculous. The work of Marx has been potent and maybe deserves to be on these lists because we're still living with the ideological struggle that it was part of…but really, it ought to include both sides, and Adam Smith's work doesn't seem to be here.

Darwin's book is a science text that describes an empirical reality. To claim that it screwed up the world is like declaring that Newton's Principia, because it described difficult facts, hurt us. It's only on the list because Wiker is a Discovery Institute cretin.

Kinsey is on the list because he makes homophobic wingnuts feel uncomfortably icky. I don't think that making the likes of Benjamin Wiker feel all squirmy in his pants qualifies as screwing up the world.

And Behe? You've got to be kidding. His book is inconsequential noise, error after error larded with silly egotism. It's the work of a popular crackpot; if you're going to include that, then we need to include the works of Velikovsky and Chopra and every astrologer, acupuncturist, homeopathist, quack, and faith healer ever written.

And most damning of all, it is impossible to take these lists seriously when they've left off the works that have been overwhelmingly influential, incredibly widely read, and have led billions of people into delusion and stupidity: the Christian bible and the Koran. Toss in the Book of Mormon and Dianetics and any holy book you can imagine as equally fit for condemnation. Isn't it glaringly obvious that both lists omit any work that is explicitly religious? It's another example of unthinking privilege handed to theological gobbledygook.

[GodlessBiker]

1. No book has ever screwed up the world. The concept is meaningless.

All books, those we like and dislike, should be cherished because they allow us to grow.

[Jim__]

9. That was my first reaction.

Even bad books teach us something.

[blondeatlast]

17. This ex-librarian thanks you. nt

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. No Ayn Rand or Ann Coulter??

[bkcc]

7. I was thinking Rand as well.

Reagan was a huge fan and seems to have based his policy on "Atlas Shrugged" and other Rand books.
If that doesn't qualify as screwing up the world, I don't know what does.

[GreenPartyVoter]

8. Any books that fostered Reaganomics have to be on the list.

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. Coulter - same objection as Behe

Her books are for a lunatic minority that really don't affect the world at all. Rand has sort of the same objection - while she may be well known in the US, the rest of the world hasn't paid much attention to her. Though her influence on Alan Greenspan could arguably have given her some effect outside the US.

[Freddie Stubbs]

11. 100 years from now no one will remember who Ann Coulter was

[Tesha]

14. Wasn't she that shrew in "Northern Lights"/"The Golden Compass"??? (NT)

[Neshanic]

35. Really. Where is Ayn Rand's little ditty?

[YOY]

3. Goosh Shtepping Moronsh like Wikersh should try reading those booksh inshtead of burning them!

Love how the put Mein Kampf in the same list as Kinsey and Darwin... and yes, not one mention of a one of those holy books that people keep killing each other over...

Asshats....

[Tesha]

15. Well shaid! (NT)

[YOY]

18. Thanksh

n/t

[Virginia Dare]

4. My Pet Goat didn't make the list?...n/t

[Mrs. Overall]

13. ah, you beat me to it!

[Pab Sungenis]

5. 10 books that screwed up the world?

10. The Fountainhead, Ayn Rand
9. Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand
8. Dianetics, L. Ron Hubbard
7. The Art of War, Sun Tzu
6. The Federalist Papers, Various Authors
5. Quotations of Chairman Mao, Mao Zedong
4. The Koran, Allah
3. The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith
2. The Way Things Ought To Be, Rush Limbaugh
1. The Bible, God

(ed. to correct one omission.)

[avenger64]

21. Good list.

n/t

[alfredo]

26. Anything from Milton Friedman.

[newmajority]

32. God's worse than Mush Limpdick?

That's harsh, dude! :wtf:

[XemaSab]

52. I don't agree with "The Art of War"

Half of the book is about observing of the reality of the situation and knowing when not to fight . Apparently that's the half they don't teach at West Point. :shrug:

[dkofos]

6. My list would be

1. The Old Testament
2. The New Testament
3. The Koran

[Terran]

16. That was my first thought too

The only books ever with any real power to screw things up, and my how they have done so.

[Gman]

12. Baby and Child Care, Spock screwed up an entire generation

Spock's methods were proven wrong many times over. THe problem was that this was really the first "owner's manual" for having kids and people read it and applied it without second guessing it. It screwed up a lot of kids back then.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

19. LOL, yeah right. You don't really believe that, do you?

Satire, right?

Spock spoke out against Vietnam, and nuclear proliferation.

So a bunch of right wing nuts tried to blacklist him by attacking his book on child care. Apparently a bunch of suckers believed it.

[RaleighNCDUer]

20. Yeah. Imagine the arrant nonsense he spouted, like

'when the baby cries, pick it up'.

Fucking commie!

[blondeatlast]

34. CLOTH DIAPERS!!! Effing tree-hugging librul!

I used Dr. Spock to raise my son; he's more well-mannered at 11 than most adults I know.

[Iris]

40. yes. I was ruined because my mother held me for HOURS when I cried for no good reason.

She held Spock open to the page that said, "Sometimes babies cry for no good reason" and held me through the night so I wouldn't cry alone.

I'm ruined, I tell you, RUINED!

[blondeatlast]

22. How? Nearly everyone I know my age was raised on it and we're all good, responsible citizens

and neighbors.

[devilgrrl]

24. I have a feeling that my parents neglected to read it

:-(

[fishwax]

25. not at all

[XOKCowboy]

30. Hey I agree with you...

IMHO that book spawned a generation of spoiled children who thought the world revolved around them. The teaching of manners and respect were replaced by indulging the child's every whim. I'm thankful my Mom never read it.

[Iris]

36. My mom did, and she was often complimented on how well-mannered and respectful her children were.

and still are! O8)

[XOKCowboy]

41. My mom was too busy washing those cloth diapers..

to read about child raising. :)

It could be that some took Dr. Spock as an excuse not to discipline their children. I think that good parents are just good parents no matter what they read. Some could read till they die and still never make good parents.

[Iris]

43. exactly. However, I'm thankful Dr. Spock was in vogue at the time, and not Babywise

btw - my mom used cloth diapers, too! And had 2 of us in diapers when my dad was in an accident that put him in a body cast!

[Iris]

37. self-delete - dupe!

[Iris]

33. Actually, it is far from an owner's manual.

In fact, the first page in the book says, "trust yourself" - still good advice, I would say.

[alarimer]

23. I saw that book in the bookstore yesterday.

What a crock. For one thing, (as others have stated) it is the Bible and the Koran that have screwed up the world more than any other books. Darwin merely pointed out the truth and I know Freud is out of favor with psychologists lately but I wouldn't say he screwed up the world.

It sounds like this guy would like to ban anything that upsets his world view. Books should not ever be banned, not even Mein Kampf.

[JCMach1]

27. xactly... books screwing up the world is Fahrenheit 451 thinking

:(

[EFerrari]

28. I wouldn't put the Bible on that list because when first printed

in the vernacular, people could read for themselves and so not rely on corrupt prelates for the first time. It was a step out of delusion, not the other way around. That's why the Church fought tooth and claw not to have the translation printed. :)

[Iris]

29. Agree about Holy Books. Didn't see the Bible on there.

but I think it's contributed its fair share to screwing up the world. Same for the Koran.

[T Monk]

31. Art of War, Mein Kampf, Where's the Rest of Me?

[dysfunctional press]

38. the bible is the book that screwed up the world more than any other BY FAR.

and it continues to do so today, because of the vast number of morans who still take it as gospel.

[Neshanic]

39. "Johnathan Livingston Seagull" had to been a tough call.

[XOKCowboy]

42. Boy you talk about seditious and traitorous literature....

Such a violent and brutal book. :sarcasm:

[leftofthedial]

44. The Bible

The Koran

The Talmud

Definitely, unequivocally, the worst three ever.

[Junkdrawer]

45. Adam Smith: The Wealth of Nations....

Gotta love that "Unseen Hand" of greed.

[left is right]

46. the turner diaries (diary?)

although, it seems to have fallen out of vogue

[kineneb]

47. re first list, all but one are good reads- (w/comments)

I admit to not having read all of them, but here are my thoughts on those I have:

* The Prince, Machiavelli- no one actually reads the book in the context of early 16th century Florence. Out of context, as it most often read, it gets interpreted completely backwards from Machiavelli's intent. He has excellent observations on the use of mercenary forces, which apply across time.
* Discourse on Method, Descartes
* Leviathan, Hobbes
* Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels- This needs to be revisited, in light of the possible approaching collapse of "capitalism".
* The Descent of Man, Darwin- it is actually a quite conservative work; but it opened the doors to the later theories (laws) of evolution.
* Beyond Good and Evil, Nietzsche- So much negative has been said about Nietzsche's works, but his observations are dead on (much to my regret). This is the work from which comes the quote about fighting monsters and becoming what you fight. I want to get the full text in German and read it. I have already read Also Sprach Zarathustra in the original.
* Mein Kampf, Hitler- this is the "nasty" on the list, Hitler was nuts. Period.
* Coming of Age in Samoa, Mead
* Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, Kinsey

[hokies4ever]

48. The list is dumb

Mein Kampf, for example, didn't screw up the world. I think one could argue that if more people had read it, they would have been aware of the true nature of Hitler. You don't read Mein Kampf and then appease Hitler with Czechoslovakia.

[kwassa]

49. Harry Potter

Turned a generation into wizards, it did.

[Javaman]

50. Odd that the bible, the koran and the torah aren't on the list.

I don't know about you, but those three books alone have done more, in my opinion, to screw up the world than any others.

[bean fidhleir]

51. Some people apparently don't mind embarrassing themselves by

commenting unfavorably on books they've never read. Or maybe they're too thick-skinned to be embarrassed. That certainly seems the case with the rightwingers.

For example, Smith's "Wealth of Nations" isn't anything like what the rightwing says it is. Smith was a humane man who despised the exploitative proto-capitalists of his day. He thought it was disgusting that people hoarded their money or spent it only on themselves when instead they could have used it to do good in the world. He tended to be slyly low-key and restrained ("pawky" in Scots) in his criticisms, which made his "vile maxim" comment come across like a punch in the face. He *really* did not like the "masters of mankind"!

[hootinholler]

53. I think "The Dummies Guide to the Internet" was far more nefarious than any of these.

:evilgrin:

-Hoot