这个好象已经是前生的事了.原来我老人家可是什么有字的都读.
我老人家那一辈子还以为自己离了书就不能活呢. 
近期读书报告(修订, 完结!)
-
helenClaire
- Posts: 3159
- Joined: 2003-11-22 20:12
我也诧异，诧异的是象这句：
所以他固然诚实了，她也是严肃当真的，不能原凉自有她的本能直觉在背后支撑。
极象第一次接触这类理论的反应。所以我前面也问了，JUN是不是第一次读到腰臀比例等说法？其实女性杂志里充斥了这些东西。乍看之下, 第一反应是"呸!" 第二反应是"1? 好象真有这回事." 第三反应是"TNND, 那我还有什么希望?!"
这个说法应该是很常见了吧？我一直认为it misses the point.按照作者本人的观点，太太在意的应该不是丈夫的诚实，而应该是他的commitment. 丈夫在外面fooling around是不是有损他的commitment？太太认为是。太太的本能还说了：诚实有什么用？诚实能当饭吃喂饱孩子？当一个有外遇的丈夫对太太说: The other woman doesn't mean anything to me. I love YOU. 他未必是在撒谎.
所以他固然诚实了，她也是严肃当真的，不能原凉自有她的本能直觉在背后支撑。
Helen, apparently I wasn't as familiar with these theories as others. I don't read enough women's megazines, obviously. I had been quite ignorant about these theories before I read the book.
What impressed me about this book, I guess, is the objective, cold, unemotional, and amoral observations on a subject that I had not been able to think about systematically in a scientific manner without moral judgment. I grew up on a diet of mostly feminist opinions. My preexisting thoughts that were consistent with the book's hypotheses were almost exclusively from my own deduction and observation.
What impressed me about this book, I guess, is the objective, cold, unemotional, and amoral observations on a subject that I had not been able to think about systematically in a scientific manner without moral judgment. I grew up on a diet of mostly feminist opinions. My preexisting thoughts that were consistent with the book's hypotheses were almost exclusively from my own deduction and observation.
此喵已死，有事烧纸
-
helenClaire
- Posts: 3159
- Joined: 2003-11-22 20:12
What men and women get is also a dynamic situation. What a person gets today may sour tomorrow.
I have my own skepticism about psychology, actually a whole lot of it. The tools to accurately measure phenomena and deduce principles are extremely primitive and limited. The current state of psychology is sort of like pre-Darwin biology. Everything is limited to observation with no prediction. I bellieve only neurobiology can eventually solve the problem.
One can still make relatively universal observations about human behavior, however, even if these observations may not be pleasant. For example, prostitution (with men as the buyer) is a historically persistent and geographically universal social phenomenon. It is impossible to extinguish. So is pornography (again, for men). The moral judgment attached to these phenomena is relative and dependent on the time and social value system, but the phenomena themselves are clearly universal and clearly related to elements of human (or men's) nature.
I do not mean to call men pigs or blame them for having the natural tendency to favor young, beautiful, multiple partners. I am just interested in the natural phenomena. We don't judge praying mantis for their habit of eating their partners after intercourse. In my mind this is no different.
I have my own skepticism about psychology, actually a whole lot of it. The tools to accurately measure phenomena and deduce principles are extremely primitive and limited. The current state of psychology is sort of like pre-Darwin biology. Everything is limited to observation with no prediction. I bellieve only neurobiology can eventually solve the problem.
One can still make relatively universal observations about human behavior, however, even if these observations may not be pleasant. For example, prostitution (with men as the buyer) is a historically persistent and geographically universal social phenomenon. It is impossible to extinguish. So is pornography (again, for men). The moral judgment attached to these phenomena is relative and dependent on the time and social value system, but the phenomena themselves are clearly universal and clearly related to elements of human (or men's) nature.
I do not mean to call men pigs or blame them for having the natural tendency to favor young, beautiful, multiple partners. I am just interested in the natural phenomena. We don't judge praying mantis for their habit of eating their partners after intercourse. In my mind this is no different.
此喵已死，有事烧纸
猫咪, Kinsey the movie是什么? 我没听说过, 或者听过忘记了.
小涵, 我很喜欢No. 1 Lady's Detective Agency, 全套都喜欢 (1-5). 是那种返朴归真的好, 很对我的胃口. 我尤其佩服作者的语言风格. 最近没看什么侦探小说, 除了我前阵子已经大力推荐的David Pirie的柯南道尔/贝尔教授系列中的第三本.
看了一本Dave Barry's Complete Guide to Guys, 正在读一本叫Descartes' Baby的书, 是非小说类, 关于developmental psychology的, 讨论人的本性等等. 内容听上去很深, 但是写得很易懂.
小涵, 我很喜欢No. 1 Lady's Detective Agency, 全套都喜欢 (1-5). 是那种返朴归真的好, 很对我的胃口. 我尤其佩服作者的语言风格. 最近没看什么侦探小说, 除了我前阵子已经大力推荐的David Pirie的柯南道尔/贝尔教授系列中的第三本.
看了一本Dave Barry's Complete Guide to Guys, 正在读一本叫Descartes' Baby的书, 是非小说类, 关于developmental psychology的, 讨论人的本性等等. 内容听上去很深, 但是写得很易懂.
此喵已死，有事烧纸
Dear Jun, Dr. Kinsey (of Indiana University) is famous of his two books, "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male" published in 1948, and "Sexual Behavior in the Human Female" published in 1953. These are landmark publications at the time. It's the 1st time that statistical data on this tender topic from a scientific survey were marketed to the American public.
In some way, this fathered many more books on men and women in the name of science.
A movie titled "Kinsey" is coming out soon, perhaps a tribute to the 50th anniversary of Kinsey reports.
"The America we know only exists after the reports and the pills"--quoated from a famous source I forgot. Since you reviewed books based on population survey here, I wonder whether you've read the reports that start it all. With your scientific mindset, you probably can write a reference-correct review if I persuade you to see the movie.
In some way, this fathered many more books on men and women in the name of science.
A movie titled "Kinsey" is coming out soon, perhaps a tribute to the 50th anniversary of Kinsey reports.
"The America we know only exists after the reports and the pills"--quoated from a famous source I forgot. Since you reviewed books based on population survey here, I wonder whether you've read the reports that start it all. With your scientific mindset, you probably can write a reference-correct review if I persuade you to see the movie.
MMT
Hehe. You think too highly of me. I am wholy ignorant on sexual psychology (which I regret).
I don't recognize the name Kinsey, but the book titles sound familiar. Did he go around the country and interview thousands and thousands of people on their sexual beliefs and practice? I think I read about him before. He did not want to rely on statistical sampling and population extrapolation, so he surveyed many many many people in person to collect data. When the reports came out the society and politicians were outraged and shocked. It was the McCarthy era as well and something something... Can't remember. Am I thinking about the right person?
I will certainly check out the movie when it comes out. I haven't heard anything about it so far.
I don't recognize the name Kinsey, but the book titles sound familiar. Did he go around the country and interview thousands and thousands of people on their sexual beliefs and practice? I think I read about him before. He did not want to rely on statistical sampling and population extrapolation, so he surveyed many many many people in person to collect data. When the reports came out the society and politicians were outraged and shocked. It was the McCarthy era as well and something something... Can't remember. Am I thinking about the right person?
I will certainly check out the movie when it comes out. I haven't heard anything about it so far.