Top products from r/DepthHub

We found 22 product mentions on r/DepthHub. We ranked the 74 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top comments that mention products on r/DepthHub:

u/happybadger · 8 pointsr/DepthHub

Perfect! You'll never look back once you go down this path.

Here's my favourite text of the year. It rambles near the end, but especially going through how we envisioned perspective before modern art it's just a fantastic little guide. You also get some basic background in theoretical physics from it, just as fascinating.

This one is more limited, but puts artistic developments of the early 20th century in perspective by drawing parallels between those and those of science. This and the above are very good if you still see art as painting pretty scenes.

Another by the same author, less involved with the parallels and more with the history.

This is a collection of essays, but they're brilliant. Nature of creativity and the creative process mostly.

These are the ones I know of offhand. Most of my library is a few hours away by car, but I'll be passing through there in a couple of weeks and can pick through titles if you'd like.

u/[deleted] · 1 pointr/DepthHub

This is a pretty decent, simple treatment of the idea of comparative advantage, that countries are best off making the things they are most efficient at and trading for things they're less efficient at.

If you are looking for more clear explanations of basic economic theory for the layman, I recommend Naked Economics.

u/kloverr · 5 pointsr/DepthHub

I don't know of any great online sources that directly answer "did Jesus exist?", but if you are interested check out The New Testament by Ehrman. It is a great introduction to "historical Jesus" studies and the origins of the New Testament documents. Also check out this Open Yale course. They both explain the historical tools used to answer these kinds of questions.

u/ocient · 3 pointsr/DepthHub

thats a good subreddit in general. I agree that some good documentary suggestions would be useful. i picked up up The Wisdom Books awhile back, which is interesting because of how well it's annotated. but its still dense reading. I could totally go for some documentaries

u/contents · 7 pointsr/DepthHub

I don't think that the US war planners were really too interested in democracy in any real sense. They wanted democracy only insofar as they equated "democracy" with a government which would act as an "ally" to the United States--or rather one that would completely and utterly subordinate its political and economic interests to the US. The ultimate symbol of this was the absurdly immense US embassy complex planned for the "Emerald City." US interests were always primary during the entire process. They were so bent on making the liberated/conquered Iraq into a business bonanza for the United States, for example, that they opened the doors to legions of corrupt swindlers--criminals who emptied out the Iraqi treasury, leaving very little to show for it, all under US "supervision." Some of the "errors" made by the US--born of imperial hubris, and having little to do with the ability of Iraqis to govern themselves democratically--were detailed in this documentary:

u/cogitoergosam · 2 pointsr/DepthHub

Here's a good book on the subject: "The Checklist Manifesto" by surgeon Atul Gawande (M.D., M.P.H., FACS). He's written a lot on the subject of process and environment and the role they play in medicine and elsewhere.

The long and short of it is that checklists and repetition have huge positive influences on outcomes.

u/trimbach · 6 pointsr/DepthHub

Pretty good little book I read a couple of years ago on the topic: Temperament: How Music Became a Battleground for the Great Minds of Western Civilization by Stuart Isacoff.

An accessible read, not overly technical, which describes the progression of music "science" within social and scientific historical contexts.

u/makmanalp · 2 pointsr/DepthHub

If you liked this, you might like Ways Of Seeing by Berger, a classic art criticism text:

Pretty eye opening to people like me who had never been exposed to the thought processes that go into making art and the formation of different movements in art.

u/chilts · 6 pointsr/DepthHub

This is an intriguing idea, and is a great example of the main thesis of Thaler and Sunstein's Nudge. Of course, that book takes a wide societal look at what designers have known about for a long time - the concepts of affordances and cultural constraints.

Essentially, the possibilities we perceive a situation to offer, and our perception of the degree of effort required to achieve each possibility can impact our decisions. Therefore, situations (such as removing a cigarette from its packaging or choosing lunch from a display) can be designed so that the socially desirable possibility is that which is perceived to require the least amount of effort to achieve.

u/party_boy · 1 pointr/DepthHub

Ok. I don't have a lot of time. I especially do not have enough time to cover every instance over the decades, so I'm going to go with the most recent event - the current Iran-Israel-US issue. I will use reposts.

Typing it now....


>US strategy in the Middle East (and indeed all over the world) is predicated on establishing security so that other nations do not have to, the idea being that it is better if there is one powerful military guaranteeing everyone's interests rather than several powerful militaries looking to individual state interests. The US plays the role of security guarantor in the Middle East (ensuring the flow of the oil supply, protecting sea lanes, etc.) to prevent European, Indian, and Chinese (areas which all rely heavily on the Middle East for oil, whereas the vast majority of oil used by the US comes from the Western Hemisphere which we can easily secure from others) from having to do so. Preventing Arab nations from uniting (which would not happen regardless of any foreign power's involvement in the region today) is absolutely not on the agenda.

>It's not a narrative; it's established US strategy. That strategy is currently in flux because the transition in the international environment away from unipolarity, but that's what it has been since the Cold War.

To start this informal reply, there is going to be a serious inherent flaw when trying to look at one narrative as a monolithic strategy that spans decades. Theres considerable push and pull within the US government that needs to me accounted for. As promised, this will only focus on the current Iranian issue. I'm low on time, so..

Basically, you have a large fight that occurs between the oil interests you mention and people with ideological leanings with Israel. You simply cannot view even our current issues with Iran simply through your lens as it omits a massive portion of US foreign policy. There are clear breaks with oil interests and changes in US foreign policy. Sanctions are a key point during the change in policy in the mid 1990's to now. American companies were pushed out of Iran from the AIPAC sanctions when they were the biggest customers by far. Cheney, in the 1990's was against the neoconservative plan for invasion in the 1990's, he was fighting to drop the Iranian sanctions, as much of the companies were. Cheney changed his position later. Repost. look for links and a bunch of expanded points. Luckily, I have some important excerpts of Parsis book here that should help start you off. This is another short PDF you should read, as it also covers how oil interests came to dominate US policy, and then lost out to Israeli interests in the mid 1990's. During Clintons second term, Clinton shifted back to oil interests to an extent.

Then (repost)

>“Indecision 2000”had deprived the Bush administration ofmore than six badly needed weeks to organize the administration and fill key posts in the State Department and elsewhere.More than three months into his presidency,Bush still had not found many ofthe people who would head his government agencies, including those who would be responsible for policies on Iran.AIPAC’s machinery, however,was in great shape.The pro-Israel lobby began laying the groundwork for ILSA’s renewal on Capitol Hill,and by mid-March—before Bush had even formulated a position on ILSA—AIPAC had gathered more than three hundred cosponsors in the House (the bill needed only 218 votes to pass).Though the sanctions had failed to change Iran’s foreign policy,AIPAC still hailed ILSA as a great success.AIPAC Executive Director Howard Kohr urged the House International Relations Committee to renew ILSA because it had “met the test and proven its effectiveness over time”and because “Iranian behavior demands it.” The pro-Israeli Washington Institute for Near East Policy argued that ILSA’s renewal would help Iran’s “real moderates”and hurt the “so-called moderates”around President Mohammad Khatami,who shared the “anti-Israel policies set by Iran’s hard-line clerical leadership.” The Bush administration was quickly outmaneuvered; through its preemptive work on Capitol Hill,AIPAC checkmated Bush and saw the sanctions bill pass with overwhelming numbers in both chambers.Still,cautious optimism characterized Iran’s approach to the United States during the first months of the Bush administration,and a lull reigned in the war ofwords between Tehran and Tel Aviv. All that was to change on the morning of September 11,2001

View the parsi link above for an expansion of what occurred between 2001 and now. If people forget whey the sanctions are relevant today, Remember that the Obama administration just recently, expended a chunk of political capital on releasing oil from the strategic oil reserves to drive down prices to help boost the economy. In come the AIPAC sanctions, and Obama pleads to ease the impact of the penalties to avoid driving up oil prices. He loses. Oil prices go up over the nonsense that occurs afterwards, negatively affecting the US economy. Bonus? China gets cheaper Iranian Oil as the U.S. Pays for the expensive Hormuz patrols. A varied group of other people, with the run up to the Iraq war fresh on their minds, arent too happy with this and with the televison media coverage. For example, check out Robert Baer and Richard Engel on Hardball talking openly about how Israel is escalating hostilities with Iran to provoke an attack that will justify a military response. Baer is figure with some gravitas on this subject, and covering this on Hardball is very significant. Heres more.

More links

The delay and the sensitive negotiations over language may presage tensions with Democrats as AIPAC leads the drive among pro-Israel groups to ratchet up pressure on Iran this year.

As U.S. and Israeli officials talk publicly about the prospect of a military strike against Iran's nuclear program, one fact is often overlooked: U.S. intelligence agencies don't believe Iran is actively trying to build an atomic bomb.

AIPAC and the Push Toward War

Bibi or Barak: Who will plunge us into Mideast war?

I have to wrap this up. Even looking at just the most recent US issue in the middle east highlights how this perspective you bring does not cover decades of US foreign policy because it simply is not monolithic. People could have made this argument during the cold war, but even this was starting to erode by the Early 1990's.

So they're looking for a new explanation in the form of a new common enemy. And so they've invented one, which we're going to hear a great deal more about in the future, and that is Islamic fundamentalism, which they say is the great wave that's threatening the West.

-George Ball 1993

We needed some new glue for the alliance [with America].
And the new glue . . . was radical Islam.And Iran was radical Islam.

-Efraim Inbar, Begin-Sadat Center

u/elerner · 4 pointsr/DepthHub

If you haven't seen the mini documentary about the making of Aja, it's available on Prime and is absolutely fascinating. Worth it for Bernard Purdie explaining the Purdie Shuffle at 38 mins in.

u/brigantus · 5 pointsr/DepthHub

No rules broken, as far as I know, but Sex at Dawn is a rather dubious work of popular science. I wouldn't recommend it, and I'm guessing the people downvoting you agree.

By the way, you don't need RES to make links:

Sex at Dawn


Sex at Dawn

u/S282 · 4 pointsr/DepthHub

I highly recommend you read The Rational Optimist by Matt Ridley. It won't answer all your questions, and it is speculation, but it appears to me to present a fairly solid case for why all the doomsday scenarios (rise in global poverty, catastrophic climate change, resource shortages) are defeatable.

It's much easier to sell a paper and win a vote by spouting pessimism, but the truth is the future is looking increasingly bright.

u/erondites · 41 pointsr/DepthHub

If anyone is interested in more on this subject, I highly recommend Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil by Hannah Arendt. Framed as an account of Adolph Eichmann's 1961 trial for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Jerusalem, the book really digs into how great evil is often brought about by banal motives like careerism and stupidity.

u/maggiesguy · 19 pointsr/DepthHub

When my son was born, I read a book called "Raising Cain" by Dan Kindlon and Michael Thompson. It was shocking to read because it so succinctly covers everything that, as a boy, you think you're the only one to feel. It's helped my parenting a lot, and I would recommend it to anyone who has a son.

u/craneomotor · 3 pointsr/DepthHub

I also had the same question, I just couldn't resist the temptation to catch you on your example. I want to take this chance to recommend Language Myths. It's accessible, easy to read, introduces the reader to a lot of basic sociolinguistic concepts, and also explains why you shouldn't be a prescriptivist asshole who thinks AAVE speakers are inherently less educated. I'm pretty sure the 'Southerners speak slow because it's hot' example is specifically addressed there.

Regarding the genesis of the gay accent, I also would like to know but I don't personally know of any such studies. Fortunately, questions of linguistics and sexuality have been recognized as important ones, and we'll probably start seeing a lot more material regarding this theme in the coming decades. Unfortunately, as an oppressed population, we may be hard-pressed to discover definite roots, since the older the speaker is, the more homophobic and repressive of a culture they lived in.

u/kleinbl00 · 6 pointsr/DepthHub

Differentiation and self-policing.

  1. Create a unified CSS and scheme for all DepthHub subreddits that is distinct from but unified in presentation. This visual cue will remind people that when they are browsing a DepthHub-associated subreddit, they are participating in a higher standard of discussion.

  2. Determine a simple character or glyph^2 that all DepthHub-related posts within DepthHub-related subreddits shall be marked with. Rather than requiring this glyph by the poster, work with honestbleeps of Reddit Enhancement Suite to pre-tag Depth Hub subreddits with this glyph as an optional setting within RES.

  3. Create and codify a Uniform Code of Conduct for all DepthHub discussion beyond reddiquette (which is largely ignored these days). Turn it into a pledge^1 post that, if a Redditor posts their name within the comments of that pledge, the uniform DepthHub CSS will place a distinguishing mark (such as the glyph) next to their name.

  4. Encourage heavy moderation. While there are sentiments that Reddit should be utterly and totally without censorship, the idea that individual subreddits should be is markedly ludicrous. the FAQ explicitly encourages reporting content that does not fit within the parameters of a community, and states that "The report button, shown on all links and comments, is a way for the reddit community to send feedback to the moderators that something is spam or otherwise violates the rules -- for example, pornographic content submitted to a non-adult reddit, or a .PDF posted to /r/videos." If any DepthHub subreddit envisions itself as providing higher-quality content than Reddit at large, the moderators of that subreddit are entirely within their rights to delete any link which does not meet their standards, just as any subscriber of that subreddit is welcome to leave that subreddit if they find the moderation objectionable.

    If DepthHub wishes to be above and beyond, it must look above and beyond, act above and beyond, and require its participants to behave above and beyond While it is counterintuitive to expect that a fresh coat of paint and a meaningless pledge will have a profound effect on the users of any given site, scientific evidence suggests otherwise.

  1. Dan Ariely in Predictably Irrational describes an experiment in which students were given small sums of money for answering questions. The control group was not given the opportunity to cheat; the test group was, without consequence. A third experimental group was then asked to write down as much as they remembered of The Ten Commandments - and rather than cheating less, statistical evidence showed that they didn't cheat at all. In a further experiment, the students were made to promise in writing to abide to the "MIT Code of Conduct" (which doesn't actually exist) and they didn't statistically cheat at all either. Although oaths and promises to abide by a set of rules are rationally meaningless, they are nonetheless highly impactful in manipulating behavior.

  2. EDIT: Δ? It does mean "change", after all...
u/zeldornious · 3 pointsr/DepthHub

I just want to point out a few things :

u/millertime3227790 · -1 pointsr/DepthHub

Interesting discussion. I remember readinging Thomas Gilovich's How We Know What Isn't So: The Infallibility of Human Reasoning and one of the points he made was that in sports, the away team almost always receive harsher punishments from referees and are viewed as aggressors and penalized more.

He stated that the reasoning for this was that the darker colors away teams wear are associated with violence and aggression in western society so it is easier for referees to inadvertently reach biased conclusions so that a 50/50 call might actually be 45/55 or whatever.

Perhaps this viewpoint on color carries on to race and 'colors' our perceptions of others subconsciously.