This shows you the differences between the selected revision and the current version of the page.
| home 2010/01/24 22:27 | home 2010/07/02 06:31 current | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ====== Quick Introduction ====== | ====== Quick Introduction ====== | ||
| - | Abridge Me is (or may become) a wiki collection of abridgements of books, particularly (but perhaps not exclusively) non-fiction books. There isn't much here at the moment. Its rules of engagement haven't really been worked out yet, but if you have anything to contribute (mistakes to correct, embellishments to add, or entire abridgements/critiques of books to upload) then feel free to [[http://abridge.me.uk/doku.php?id=home&do=register|create an account]] and get wikifying. | + | Abridge Me is a wiki collection of abridgements of books, particularly non-fiction books. There isn't much here at the moment. Its rules of engagement haven't really been worked out yet, but if you have anything to contribute (mistakes to correct, embellishments to add, or entire abridgements/critiques of books to upload) then feel free to [[http://abridge.me.uk/doku.php?id=home&do=register|create an account]] and get wikifying. |
| Line 25: | Line 26: | ||
| * [[The Partys Over|The Party's Over]] by [[wp>Richard Heinberg]] (**New** as of January 2010) | * [[The Partys Over|The Party's Over]] by [[wp>Richard Heinberg]] (**New** as of January 2010) | ||
| * [[The Return of Depression Economics]] by [[wp>Paul Krugman]] | * [[The Return of Depression Economics]] by [[wp>Paul Krugman]] | ||
| + | * [[Fair Trade for All]] by [[wp>Joseph Stiglitz]] (**New** as of May 2010) | ||
| * [[The Roaring Nineties]] by [[wp>Joseph Stiglitz]] | * [[The Roaring Nineties]] by [[wp>Joseph Stiglitz]] | ||
| Line 49: | Line 51: | ||
| * [[http://www.varsitynotes.com/|Varsity Notes]], lecture notes on university subjects; | * [[http://www.varsitynotes.com/|Varsity Notes]], lecture notes on university subjects; | ||
| * [[http://www.sparknotes.com/|Spark Notes]], a commercial site containing study guides. | * [[http://www.sparknotes.com/|Spark Notes]], a commercial site containing study guides. | ||
| + | |||
| ====== Slow Introduction ====== | ====== Slow Introduction ====== | ||
| Line 70: | Line 73: | ||
| Further, a good critique is fantastic --- and a bad one is a horror. When reading an abridgement one does not have enough time or detailed knowledge of the original (unabridged) text to always be able to spot mistakes, bad logic, general idiocy and so on on the part of the original author. A good critique provides that extra guidance, judging the soundness and import of ideas as they're explained (without adding in too many extra mistakes, too much extra bad logic and general idiocy). | Further, a good critique is fantastic --- and a bad one is a horror. When reading an abridgement one does not have enough time or detailed knowledge of the original (unabridged) text to always be able to spot mistakes, bad logic, general idiocy and so on on the part of the original author. A good critique provides that extra guidance, judging the soundness and import of ideas as they're explained (without adding in too many extra mistakes, too much extra bad logic and general idiocy). | ||
| - | What makes a critique good or bad? Well, there's the usual tumble of writing style and so on, but perhaps most important is that the critic happens to share your own peculiar array of foibles, fanaticisms and general political prejudice. You may be quite happy reading an (honest-minded) fascist's abridgement of a thermodynamics textbook, but you're unlikely to be satisfied by his comments on [[wp>Wilhelm Reich|Reich]], no matter how witty and intelligent he might be. (That is, assuming you're not a fascist yourself. If you are then you will hopefully be appalled by everything herein (at least until the thermodynamics section gets up and running) and really ought to toddle off back to the [[wp>Daily Mail]].) So is the answer to split into however-many wikibridges representing however-many minute or not-so-minute shades of political opinion? | + | What makes a critique good or bad? Well, there's the usual tumble of writing style and so on, but perhaps most important is that the critic happens to share your own peculiar array of foibles, fanaticisms and general political prejudice. You may be quite happy reading an (honest-minded) fascist's abridgement of a thermodynamics textbook, but you're unlikely to be satisfied by his comments on [[wp>Wilhelm Reich|Reich]], no matter how witty and intelligent he might be. (That is, assuming you're not a fascist yourself. If you are then you will hopefully be appalled by everything herein (at least until the thermodynamics section gets up and running) and really ought to toddle off back to the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail#Support_for_fascism_under_Rothermere|Daily Mail]].) So is the answer to split into however-many wikibridges representing however-many minute or not-so-minute shades of political opinion? |
| I don't know. | I don't know. | ||