Uncategorized

4 Books That I Believe Increased My IQ By Ten Points

189 Comments

Intelligence is the extent to which we can abstract from particulars to create principles, and then apply these principles to new particulars. In other words, IQ measures pattern recognition and pattern application.

Though IQ is mostly determined by genetics, we can increase it with a concerted effort. Inadvertently, I concerted this effort. At least I think I did. Using corroborating evidence from the SATs, GREs, and the WAIS, I liberally estimate my IQ has increased by ten points over the past ten years.

Given the nature of intelligence, I think it’s the below books that contributed most to my encephalic enhancement. They don’t teach facts or theories as much as they teach the processes behind learning facts and forming theories. As a result, they offer the reader the ability to penetrate subjects that even smart people can only dance around through rote and repetition.

1. A History of Philosophy

In A History Of Philosophy, Windelband considers the main epistemological schools that shaped philosophy before he considers philosophers. These two schools, empiricism and rationalism—which manifest today as liberals and conservatives, respectively—are the gears behind every turn of philosophy and so politics. When we understand culture as thought process and its axioms, as Windelband instructs, we inevitably think abstractly and apply abstractions—that is, we become smarter.

Instead of criticizing the SJWs as ugly morons, we say they’re rehashing the strict materialism of the early 19th Century—which was a revolt against the growing idealism—in a tribal framework and carrying it to its natural conclusions. It’s not only more correct, it’s more helpful.

2. The Discovery Of The Unconscious

A History of Philosophy may present the philosophy of belief, but Ellenberger presents the psychology of belief. It hurt my brain to read this book because in addition to thinking of an idea in terms of its truth, I began to think of an idea in terms of what it’s true of. This shift made me question myself more than ever before. Communism makes sense from a certain perspective; drug addiction makes sense from a certain perspective; changing your gender identity to work through childhood trauma makes sense from a certain perspective. It isn’t subjectivism, rather perspectivism.

This book has been criticized for not offering an original viewpoint on psychology but the originality of this book is its excellence in unifying themes throughout psychology’s development. As intelligence is abstraction, this book is intelligence with a seamless application.

3. Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology

Most people only know Rand for her ethical defense of the free market. Though these are sometimes stellar points, her genius isn’t fully palpable until she delves into epistemology. In Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, Rand articulates the precise steps behind the crux of intelligence—the derivation of concepts from experience—thereby bridging the gap between the aforementioned rationalism and empiricism. It would be a big-deal idea if she’s correct, and she may not be, but every study about human vision and information processing since this book was written validates most of her points. Few know this because most of the people who study vision and processing have only read bits of Rand, and only with the intent to scoff.

Even though her solution to the problem of concepts may be lacking, it doesn’t matter. The intimate way in which she parses her intelligence invariably makes the reader more intelligent.

4. The Hero With A Thousand Faces

Intelligence is indeed pattern recognition and application, but to put this more practically, it’s the extent to which we can get what we want. This means understanding what it takes to navigate the basic challenges of the world, which requires we understand myths, the vehicles for this instruction.

Campbell’s book demonstrates that every myth—from every corner of the globe and from every era—is the same. They’re composed of a few, interchangeable parts. This is because our psychologies are the same, so how a man advances through the hierarchy of society is the same. Every man we would ever want to be is St. George slaying the dragon while protecting his fair maiden. Therefore, it’s good to know what the sword, dragon, and maiden represent. This blueprint makes us more intelligent by keeping us focused on what’s important when wading through the inevitable trivialities of life.

There are some honorable mentions. First is Beyond Good and Evil by Nietzsche, a distillation of the plight of 19th Century man, which inadvertently reveals a timeless plight. Second is The Undiscovered Self by Jung. Everyone is religious, so it’s important to question what our religion is and to what extent it’s useful. Last is Man’s Guide to Psychology, written by me. Writing it made me smarter, so maybe reading it will make you smarter too.

Read More: 5 Ground-Breaking Books Written Between 1918 and 1945.

189 thoughts on “4 Books That I Believe Increased My IQ By Ten Points”

      1. We have no oral traditions. All knowledge is passed along by interpretive dance.

    2. wow, it is not totally unheard of yet exceedingly rare that I am really jealous of a comment, but you sir have earned my admiration and envy. Well done.

  4. “1. A History of Philosophy”
    I read Story Of Philosophy by Will Durant – how would you rate this to “History Of Philosophy”?

  5. I’m a bit suspicious about Ayn Rand.
    But Campbell is one of my favorites.

      1. Well… “Be independant” (starting a cult-like fan base), “Be self reliable” (sponsored by big corporation and state), “Don’t cound on others” (ask for welfare at the end of her life)
        Sooooooo, yes, i’m a little suspicious.
        Plus there is Something about ‘rational selfishness’ wich is wrong: i won’t die for your IPod, but i MAY be convinced to fight to your right of (expression, property, safety). Because those are also MY rights.
        The only way to be safe and free on a larger scale is to support the community you belong. And/or the people who actually fight for it.
        I don’t like EVERY MRA, PUA or MEGTOW or Red Piller… but i WILL certainly support them against ANY feminist, Leftist…

        1. As to Rand being ‘on’ welfare. Rand did not need to be. She was rich. She considered social security, for instance, to be a partial restitution. A partial one. For all the money the government stole from her, and could never get back. Because she paid in way more, than she took out. That was her reason. Which one can understand, but did make her look bad.

        2. For an enthusiast of capitalism, Rand was a terrible money manager. She left behind 750,000 dollars- an impressive sum for most Americans, but not for a best selling author. Rand refused to participate in even the safest of investment opportunities. As a result, her potential fortune was eaten away by inflation.

        3. That is true. No one can be good at everything. Like Thomas Jefferson. He opposed banks, suggesting they’re ponzi schemes. He believed in human liberty, but owned slaves. He wanted America to be solvent and debt free, but was in debt himself. Thomas Paine was no great capitalist or businessman either. If those guys were around today, especially with the internet, no one would allow them a say in anything, and would be dismissed as hypocrites, or incompetent.
          Her reason’s for taking social security are what they are.

        1. Everyone needs a Dark Father. It sounds much cooler than Without Family.

        2. And I’m pretty sure “killer of many kids” sounds shitty in every language….

        3. That…was a misunderstanding brought on by something accusatory Obi-wan said.

    4. Nothing really to be suspicious wrt Ayn Rand. She is the same as every other mediocre academic bumbling through a career where publication is necessary, stealing the ideas of better men and publishing them pretending to be superior descendant on some and hoping the others are obscure enough for you not to notice they aren’t original. Remember, she lived in a world without the intertubes where if you spent enough time in a library reading obscure bullshit you could pass it off as your own to a non-specialist society and pretend it was your own.
      Only real difference is that Ryan was an early pussy pass holder which set her apart from the literally thousands of people doing the exact same shit at the exact same time and often much better (looking at you William Barret).
      In a nutshell, she is a hack like any others but was a novelty because vaginas. Nothing more and nothing less.

      1. Her work is a helpful as a life-saver to be tossed to a 20-something drowning in leftist, pop-culture twaddle. Certainly not an end unto itself, but an effective beacon or sign post to the Egress.

        1. I would say that the vast majority of those 20-somethings have only read quotes or, worse, just read what other people who only read quote wrote about on some message board. She is a derivative philosopher who capitalized on better men and the fact that rumor has it that she had a vagina (not 100% confirmed). That’s fine. She was stealing from the right people and sometimes even didn’t fuck it up too badly, but nevertheless, lets not make her out to be an original thinker.

      2. Ayn Rand wasn’t an academic, “mediocre” or otherwise. Her formal training is philosophy was slight to non existent. Rand spent her evening with acolytes several decades her junior. She rarely engaged with serious scholars, or those who might subject her ideas to criticism.

        1. You are 100% correct. I use academic merely as a professional courtesy. She was mediocre though

  6. Well, I have read two of those books. The Hero one, and the Objectivist Epistemology one.
    If anybody wants one that will really help explain why sooo many people seem sooo stupid, try:
    When Prophecy Fails, by Festinger.
    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

      5. Uh, a Girl Reporter??? A commenter??? (Or is it commentrix???) A book reader. Uh, a disturber of anally retentive people???
        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        1. well if you turn commentrix would that make you a commentart?
          look girl reporter, it isn’t rocket science, if you wanna comment sign up with a manly name like bloke reporter or something

        2. Sooo, is this like a males only website??? Because I really like some of the articles here, and I don’t bother with all the “How To Get Laid/Keep Getting Laid/Keep From Getting Kicked Out of Bed articles.
          Sooo, I doubt that I will ever be in any “whose little weeny is bigger” contests.
          But for the literary stuff, and the political stuff, I am just who I am.
          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

        4. Well, I am not going to pretend to be a male to post here, and if the Mods decide to boot me out, then so be it. It won’t be the first time, or the last. Life ain’t easy for a girl named:
          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter
          PS: I liked your commentart reply! Cute word play on “common tart.”!

  8. Is there knowledge in a book on philosophy if it is not read…..or only when it is read? Never mind, that is somewhat of a philosophical question.

    1. Is information, of itself, knowledge? Is knowledge defined as information that is both true and known?
      These are the questions…

  9. Confession, I suck at reading. Since graduating law school nearly 10 years ago, I think I have read maybe a book a year for fun. I read and write for work so I just don’t enjoy reading for fun. I love audio books because I can make something with my hands while getting the story. Glad I read a lot as a kid, but yeah, not anymore.

      1. I listen to Joe Rogan if he has good guests on. Any suggestions on good science or history podcasts?
        Finished Dune on audiobook this past winter which was 20+ hours of quality workshop time.

        1. Stefan Molyneux is quite good, but is not a history podcast. He describes it as a philosophy podcast.
          For history, try Daniele Bolelli’s History on Fire or Dan Carlin’s Hardcore History.

        3. Molyneux is shadow banning listeners on his YouTube channel. Also, he’s a Jew pretending that he’s not a Jew. Make of that what you will.

        4. The History of Rome by Mike Duncan
          The History of England
          I also like the “We’re Alive” series but it’s fiction. Very well produced though

        6. He made a video saying London is dying. Wow he is Sherlock Holmes. That city has been going third world just like Paris for two decades.
          White British have been fleeing for a while to other locales.
          Most sane Brits have been fleeing that city for years. It’s overdeveloped and overpriced.
          His pseudo intellectual babble is just there to get views.

    2. I agree. Audiobooks are great. I would be nice if you could purchase the book and pay a little extra for the audio version like they used to do. I like to have the printed book as well.

  10. – A confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole
    “When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.”
    This is American Literature at its best.

    1. I bought that book for my wife’s brother, who is basically an Ignatius-light. Not sure if he got the point.

    2. That was a great book, and another book in that vein is “The Redneck Bride” by John Fergus Ryan. He wrote two other books, and he died too young. If you have ever seen The White River Kid, that is based on one of his novels. Which is in my “To read” box with about 30 others I ordered.
      Plus, if you like A Confederacy of Dunces, check out Walker Percy’s “Love in the Ruins”, and others.
      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

  11. TL;DR Just use kratom instead of reading.

    1. Does Kratom really increase cognitive ability? Can you provide anecdotal specifics?

      1. LoLz! “Can you provide anecdotal specifics?”
        I love that. I’m stealing it for the next NAWALT “rebuttal” some feminist throws out.

  12. Objectivism is quite possibly the worst philosophy ever invented and is staunchly anti-nationalistic in every way. Shame on you for publishing something about it on a nationalistic site.
    The most successful states in the world economically (Germany, China, Poland, India, etc.) have mixed economies with heavy state intervention.
    Randroid capitalism is impossible as there has never, ever been an instance in capitalism’s history that there has been no state intervention. Collusion between state and industry is inevitable. If done properly (through a staunch policy of economic nationalism), it can be used to provide miracles.
    Austrian and Objectivist economics are pure garbage. Get used to it.

    1. It is worthwhile to study all philosophies, if only to identify how wrong they are.
      This said, there is truth to Austrian and Objectivist economic philosophy. The whole of the thing may be erroneous, but if some truth can be gleaned (even if only the knowledge of what is not so) the study was not wasted.

      1. Philosophy: the art of using circular logic to arrive at any conclusion you want about anything. Totally pointless and lame. A psychology major on ROK? What a joke. A real man doesn’t need to use pseudo science to justify his beliefs, he just believes them whether people like it or not. Early philosophy was the precursor to the scientific method, which is very valuable. Medieval philosophy is the perfect example of trying to make the illogical logical, and it was a failure. Philosophy since then isn’t much better.

        1. Early philosophy was rationalist, which do not use the scientific method as their primary arguments. In fact, rationalists don’t even really use “evidence”, they use rhetoric and arguments, such as Contraposition, tertium non datur, etc. Funny that you call philosophy pseudoscience, because unlike rationalist philosophy, it uses actual science and empirical data.

      2. The only thing I’ve gained from Austrian economics is that it is extremely useful for making morons think they’re economic geniuses and is best used as a tool for making their adherents completely impervious to contradicting evidence.
        Libertarianism. The perfect globalist political cult.

        1. Calling people names, because you do not agree with them, is always such a winning argument. And very globalist of you, to boot.

        2. LMFAO I’m not Libertarian but to call it a globalist political cult is hilarious. It’s as close to anarchism as it gets without actually being so.

        3. Anarchism has historically been anti-capitalist to the nines, so much so most nationalistic variants of it oppose wage slavery. Don’t listen to the nonsense Molyneux spouts.

        4. … and in anarchy, there are no borders. What is not globalist about that? Do you understand what globalism is?

    2. The most successful States owe their success to high-IQ people, mostly. I’d better live in a minarchist State with high IQ men (especially White ones) than in a big State ran by idiotic assholes.

      1. I’d rather live in a society with high IQ people and a strong, nationalistic mixed economy (i.e Nazi Germany).

        1. I’d rather force others to live in a strong nationalistic mixed economy and violently eliminate anyone within a designated geographic region who doesn’t agree with me or others in my groupthink hive.
          Fixed it for ya.

        3. No. I actually appreciate it when violent nutjobs announce who they are. It makes it so much easier to shoot them in the face when they come to TRY and force their mental illness on me.

    3. Philosophy isn’t invented, it’s discovered through reason.
      I hate it and it’s garbage is not an argument.

      1. Objectivism bases itself on methodological individualism, which goes against everything we know about human psychology and political science. Human beings are not atoms, they are all part of the organicism that is a society.

        2. Wrong. There’s a reason fashions, cultures and traditions exists, and it’s because humans are herd animals.

        4. Objectivism practices methodological individualism, i.e the belief that the individual is the only analyzable economic actor and that all group biases are examples of “identity politics” that are to be fought at all costs.

    4. What (((Ayn Rand))) did was basically a mashup between Nietzsche, Ortega Y Gasset and extreme capitalism. That mongrel resonates in the deep self of a lot of Americans, who are basically individualistic egocentric machines that consider themselves Übermensch, but in real life are just effete hipsters with a useless M.A. and dedicated stoners.

      1. “and dedicated stoners.”
        love that, smoking that sophisticated dope!

    5. “Austrian…pure garbage”
      What school of thought offers better analysis of the world around us?
      Yeah… thought so.

      1. Austrian economics bases itself on methodological individualism, which is fundamentally anti-nationalist. This means it is opposed to all what this site stands for.

    6. And the globalists say, one world government is inevitable, because nationalism is pure garbage, get use to it.

  13. Twice, I have tried to delve into Ayn Rand’s nonfiction works: /For The New Intellectual/ and /Philosophy: Who Needs It?/. The first book is basically a stinky narrative which aims at tainting most history of philosophy and make Rand look like a genius. The second is a collection of essays I failed to find interesting.
    To be charitable, Rand’s collection of essays critical to the Left (/The Anti-Industrial Revolution/) is more interesting.
    One can be an awesome fiction writer and a decent critique/journalist without having to be a philosopher.

  14. For the opposite effect, just read everything on the internet, preferably on your smartphone

  15. how about only reading banned books

    I don’t mean the pervy porno but the politically disapproved ones. That way you’re not just swallowing your cultural medicine, but working out where you are in relation to the culture you live in.
    Just be aware that we already live in a culture that celebrates the transgressive, so you have to work out what really is banned, what really is transgressive, which is always relative to the culture you live in.
    So don’t read Lolita by Nabokov or you’ll end up in John Podestas book club

    2. My understanding is that only Rand herself and a tiny handful of her most devoted disciples were considered worthy of the “Objectivist” title. Most of her acolytes have to make due with the designation “Student of Objectivism”.

  17. One’s actual mileage varies so I would never critique your list. My list looks like this:
    The Art of War, by Sun Tzu (James Clavell translation)
    The Art of Worldly Wisdom, by Baltasar Gracián (Christopher Maurer translation)
    First Things First, by Stephen R. Covey
    The New American Standard Bible (Updated Version)
    By the bye, I did love the Campbell book and I believe it had a very positive impact on my fiction writing.

    1. My most formative four:
      Think and Grow Rich – Napoleon Hill
      Catch 22 – Joseph Heller
      2001 – Arthur C. Clarke
      Rickenbacker – Eddie Rickenbacker (autobiography)

      1. Got a lot from Think and Grow Rich at the time that I read it. You might want to give Outwitting The Devil a read. It is in the same veil of self help but easily more prolific because it targets all of the aspects that deter a person from making positive changes in their lives. A must read.

    2. It is to be noted here though that wisdom isn’t necessarily tied to inteligence.

  18. No cult member wants to admit that an ordinary schlub founded his cult, so the cultists tend to pad their cult founder’s résumé with all kinds of unlikely accomplishments, like how the Scientologists have turned L. Ron Hubbard into a real-life Doc Savage.
    So in Ayn Rand’s case we hear that she revolutionized our understanding of: philosophy! psychology! economics! history! politics! the potentials of art and literature! even sexual relationships!
    Fortunately this nonsense stops short of claiming that Rand dispensed revolutionary health advice, unlike Hubbard and many other cult founders. The people who knew Rand could see, and smell, that she chain-smoked, ate a bad diet, didn’t take care of her teeth, never exercised and seldom bathed.

  19. Epistemology, psychology, and philosophy, aka the soft sciences, are interesting but a waste of time. Can’t tell you how many pretentious hipsters i encountered in these courses in college. The problem is that none of them can arrive at any definitive answers, only raise questions. Great if you want to be able to argue a point, but these kind of do nothing majors in school aren’t helping anyone. Bunch of navel gazing nonsense if you ask me (i was a philosophy minor, and realized fast how full of shit the teachers and students were).

      1. Ha, nah, just a seinfeld joke attached to a funny sounding last name. Heheh

    2. I have always said they are studying “cant” in Philosophy, and not Kant. Which, one definition of “cant” is, “the expression or repetition of conventional or trite opinions or sentiments; especially : the insincere use of pious words.
      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

    3. Waste of time? Hardly. You must have dabbled in continental crap. Analytic philosophy spawned linguistics, logic, and a host of other disciplines. Carnap, Frege, Russell, etc etc.
      I learned far more computability theory and logic in my philosophy program (honors) than in my grad degrees in computer science. To this day I rarely meet other PhD level computer scientists who can debate me on logic, whether modal, deontic or the like.
      Also a good background for law school. In teaching for 5 years I noticed Philosophy grads had an edge. So too did graphic designers and musicians, oddly enough. The people with degrees in STEM fields were generally useless. Couldn’t write, couldn’t reason.

  20. I think reading any hard discipline will improve your intelligence. Could be pyschology, could be economics, could be physics. The brain, like any organ, like any muscle, improves with use.

      1. I’m trying to decide between ebonics and mandarin… both are so far removed from english that they should prove a challenge.

        1. One will open up opportunities for business with a billion wealthy civilized people and their slim attractive women, while the other might get you through the inevitable gibsmedats riots when the national debt collapses the economy and welfare cheques stop being sent out. Hard choice.

      2. Actually learning a new language now. You can actually feel your brain growing.

    1. I read Lolknee in chess just to beat the Russians. Wait-I’m confused now…

  22. The comments suggest 90% of ROK readers don’t get laid.
    More focus on mastering the information in the posts and less circlejerking in the comments k?

  23. Learn ancient Greek and then translate the new testament into English by yourself without the aid of the internet or modern technology. Then consider yourself equal to a scholar from the 1600s. If that doesn’t raise your iq nothing will

    3. I personally would rather spend my time reading a physics textbook or the like. If I want to read fiction, there are a lot better books out there than the bible.

      1. Haha! You showed them mate! Sharp wit killing then with the fictitious Bible punchline!
        But really, the problem with people like you is that not only do you not read any book of the Bible you criticise, you don’t read the physics textbooks you claimed were superior (because you’ll realise reading a straight textbook is the dullest way to learn about the natural sciences. Thus, you’ve probably never systematically learned from one).
        The bigger this new right wing movement gets, the more I realise too many are not cut out for what’s going to be a vicious cultural war. I just saw The Patriarchy Facebook post an image with a “video games are for cucks” message and the triggering was staggering, on the level of an entitled Jezebel feminist. Too many boys and not enough men informing and strengthening themselves through blood, sweat and tears.
        Anyway to take it back to your post, it’s not really meant to just anger you, but dude, the reality behind it is proper pussy. False Internet bravado is not going to win back civilisation.

        2. I was raised(brainwashed) Southern Baptist. My family was literally a fundamentalist cult. I’ve spent 18 hours straight reading the bible, and was beaten severely for not doing it longer. I’ve read the entire thing probably 5 times. I grew up going to tent revivals, church 3 times a week, you name it.
          It took me up until 22 or so, to finally say the bible was bullshit, and to feel a relief. If that depth of brainwashing didn’t convince me to believe, you won’t. The bible is actually a mishmash of several previous religions.
          And I’ve actually learned a lot from textbooks, and don’t find them dull. Try “Physical Chemistry: A Molecular Approach”, by Donald McQuarrie sometime, it’s really in depth and fascinating, though I hope your QM and math is up to snuff, it’s pretty dense. I have to take it this spring(Pchem 2) and that class is pretty brutal.
          For learning about the natural sciences, a textbook is pretty mandatory, at least at first. You aren’t going to progress very far without a pretty solid math background.
          And for a cultural war, I was OIF 04, so I’m good there too. You didn’t anger me at all. Random comments online making assumptions about me usually don’t.
          I don’t have an issue with pussy. Had a few shitty relationships, but not really a problem.

  24. Instead of criticizing the SJWs as ugly morons, we say they’re rehashing the strict materialism of the early 19th Century
    Can’t we do both?


    1. This video perfectly sums up what individualism is about.
      I’m not convinced by this supposed “dismantling”. Objectivism is about rationalism, individualism and ethical egoism. In many ways, this is a very good thing. You may find people who use objectivism as an excuse to justify their weaknesses, but such people are weak to begin with and is not the fault of the philosophy.
      Ayn Rand is certainly far from perfect, but I choose to take only the best parts of her philosophy rather than its entirety. She may not be a model worth emulating, but she did make valid points in her books. I just don’t understand why people think any single ideology or philosophy will provide them with all the answers they seek. An individual’s philosophy is nothing more than an amalgamation of his lifestyle, experiences and observations. The best you can do is to create your own philosophy by combining the philosophies of multiple individuals.

      1. i guess the point of the article is it’s easy to point fingers at others and blame them for there poor lot in life, it’s easy to claim to be self made, like this guy –

        but there’s a lot more randomness to it than objectivists would have you believe.
        anyway, i really enjoyed the article, it hit a spot in me when i read it first, a few years back. happy to get the chance to share it. thanks for reading and providing the vid

      3. Still influencing generations of architects who are too aloof to listen to their clients, consultants, financiers, building codes, physical environment….

  29. Works that will raise your intelligence even if it is already high:
    Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid by
    Douglas Hofstadter
    Paul Graham’s essays
    The Oxford English Dictionary, unabridged – (browsing)
    A Deepness in the Sky – Vernor Vinge

    1. I second the recommendation for GEB. It shows you the connections in everything, and will restore your sense of wonder about the world. You literally feel smarter as you read it–a pleasant illusion, at least in my case.

  30. Every myth is not the same. That is just the author’s opinion. It’s clear that dragons are despised throughout Europe and praised in Asian culture. Again, not the same. I don’t want to be St. George. Learn to think on your own, question everything and everyone. You’ll raise your IQ dramatically.

  31. Simple list: Freud, for breaking in your knowledge of human psychology (no need for anything else on that…psych is pretty stale and redundant/fake beyond him, unless you want to read about MKULTRA hypotheses)
    Nietzsche, for a hard look at human morality and the animal that is homosapien. Also is a cold reminder that not all humans are not equal
    Culture of Critique, to know who really hates the west and how they operate
    Mein Kampf. for anyone who is sick of hollywood and literally everyone telling you what to think and how to think about the period of 1933-1945
    Holy Bible (older versions), to have a greater understanding of the side you are on in this war and to absorb the most powerful patriarchical handbook ever written.
    Currently working on Bible cover to cover

      1. Any Bible printed before the mid-20th century. There are “new versions” that skew the originam meaning of it under the guise of “reinterpretation” or “learning what they REALLY meant when writing in Latin.” You know how the priest says “the lord be with you” and instead of saying “and also with you,” we say “and with your spirit” now? Older versions are less likely to be ruined by the cucked version of Christianity we have now that permeates the religious sphere. I would start with an older Lutheran or King James Bible.

  33. Articles like this and the ones recommending movies are some of my favorites on Return of Kings.

  34. I strongly recommend Thick Black Theory by Li Zongwu and its follow-up Thick Face, Black Heart by Chin-Ning Chu
    Li Zongwu writes, “When you conceal your will from others, that is Thick. When you impose your will on others, that is Black”. “Thick” emphasizes shamelessness and “Black” emphasizes ruthlessness. The point is to use immoral means over others to achieve your end. Even if you don’t want to employ Thick and Black, it is still wise to learn it so others cannot use it on you.
    As an added bonus, this book was banned in China because it is subversive, which is further proof of its value.

    1. Sounds like a fascinating read. Do you have a link to the book Thick Black Theory in english? For some reason I can only find it in its chinese version.

  35. Those are all good choices so I’m not going to get into a critique (read those, but more than those.)
    I was into Ayn Rand in my early 20s but outgrew her with the help of several critical analyses of her work. On analysis, her philosophy is mostly rhetoric.
    I’ll read anything that challenges my brain and expands my horizons. Much of philosophy is just a mind game, but that’s not to dismiss it — the more you get into it the more you learn how the game is constructed and played.
    Lately I’m getting into a lot of material dealing with consciousness, how the mind works, mathematics, and so forth … fundamental level structures.
    Also true life tales of men who suffered like sonofabitches but ended up walking away and learning a thing or two from the experience. They make my life feel less shitty by comparison.

  37. Out of these, I’ve only read Introduction To Objectivist Epistemology. Which I left for last, after reading everything else in Rand. And something extraordinary happened to me, because of it. Which I have never seen anywhere, even amoung Objectivists. Something I’ve never told anyone. Because I can’t prove it.
    It gave me a photographic memory. That’s right. I’m not kidding. Reading Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, gave me a photographic memory. I could glance at any number, such as phone numbers on TV, and instantly memorize them. I could remember them for weeks at a time. I could never do that before. It came in real handy at work. I no longer had to look up order numbers, or struggle with new ones. A glance or two would do it. I also did not need a dictionary anymore either. I use to be a terrible speller. I mean, really terrible. Now, I could spell like a champ.
    Just one thing. It did not last. This amazing effect, did not last. It faded away. It did not disappear instantly, the way it appeared. It faded away slowly on me. I did not know what to do. How to fight to keep my new memory. I considered re-reading the Rand book again, but did not. I don’t want to go into the reasons why I did not. But the amazing experience remains. I have not forgotten it. I may try it again one day. But hopefully, find a way to keep the photographic memory.
    At this point, I suspect it had something to with the structure of her book. Its ruthless organization, more than its content. It somehow temporarily reordered my mind. But that’s just a guess. I don’t know for sure.
    At any rate, after my experience with Rand, I kind of gave up on philosophy. After that, I’ve only read brief summations of others.
    Because I could not be more wary of dogmatism. I’ve learned the hard way too many times from experts. First, from the Christians. Then from the skeptical left. Then from the Objectivists, and libertarians. I don’t want to learn the hard way again. Like from the mystics.
    Which is more of what I’m into these days. Mysticism. Like with Rand, I don’t really want go to into why. Other than to say, it has something to with manifested healing. Another experience I can’t prove. Not even to my doctor. I let him think it was him.

  39. 4 books by jews…and none involving problem solving exercises. How did that increase your IQ, and what was it before/ after?

  41. The Hero of a Thousand Faces is an excellent recommendation, not only to “increase your IQ” (if that’s even a possibility) but to increase your social intelligence and selling power. What do I mean by this?
    It’s that everything you may be selling, including yourself, should be pitched to your prospect as part of a story with your prospect as the center and you an important character or part in it. If you can fit your character or pitch with the classic myth story, your message will be received better. Pre-Suasion can show you one such template to incorporate this with, in the form of the classic mystery story. http://masculineepic.com/index.php/2017/05/13/pre-suasion-review/

      1. Thanks for the heads-up. These days I make a habit of researching the author before I read any of their books – fool me once!

  42. You increased your knowledge, not your IQ. IQ is a genetic given.
    If you could increase your IQ by reading those books then that would mean that were you previously unable to grasp, say the metric tensor, you suddenly do after reading said unrelated books.

  43. no way you can maintain your IQ gains and walk down the streets right after reading. Just looking at the degeneracy around will drop your IQ.

  44. “Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions,” by Edwin Abbott.
    Free pdf online.

        4. You know that would be a good “art” project. Carry that around various cities in public and record the reaction.
          Provided the guy carrying it can survive. 😀

        5. The Law of Double Standards prevents such an exercise from being called “art”.

        6. And to blow people’s minds even more, have a black guy or Asian guy reading it.

        7. Just splash some period blood around on your clothes while reading it and say it is a statement of solidarity and support for humans who menstruate.

  46. When my brain gets fried from too much reading I look at visual art. This uses different parts of your brain than reading and so you get a more rounded learning experience. Ditto listening to good music actively. Then the outdoorsy physical stuff for an all-around workout of mind and body.

  47. OP–Interesting. Rand recommended Windelband to her students, and her books are all about the Hero’s journey Campbell describes.

  48. My favorite saying about Ayn Rand is that her fiction was philosophy, and her philosophy was fiction.

  49. Considering you think a book by Ayn Rand is worth a read, if your I.Q. did indeed go up 10 points it went from 50 to 60

  50. Gotta recommend these works by Edward Tufte, a statistician and computer science professor. They have very useful information and are wonderful to look at, too. They are not particularly long and are full of great graphics (and examples of bad graphics and how poor graph design can be used to deceive or hide information, very revealing.)
    1 The Visual Display of Quantitative Information
    2 Visual Explanations: Images and Quantities, Evidence and Narrative
    3 Envisioning Information
    “THE VISUAL DISPLAY OF QUANTITATIVE INFORMATION
    The classic book on statistical graphics, charts, tables. Theory and practice in the design of data graphics, 250 illustrations of the best (and a few of the worst) statistical graphics, with detailed analysis of how to display data for precise, effective, quick analysis. Design of the high-resolution displays, small multiples. Editing and improving graphics. The data-ink ratio. Time-series, relational graphics, data maps, multivariate designs. Detection of graphical deception: design variation vs. data variation. Sources of deception. Aesthetics and data graphical displays.”
    https://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/books_vdqi

  51. Empiricism vs. rationalism; liberal vs. conservative.
    Aka: muh feelz vs. “well, actually…”

  52. I’m ordering some of these on Amazon now. I was just trying to get through ‘Wired for Love’ yet it’s another misandry soaked crap-fest just 20 pages in. Apparently, the author (backed by the publishing industry) believes cavemen (males only) have less concern for their offspring than every other mammal in existence, because of course they’re male yet females throughout history seem to be doing everything right.

Comments are closed.