A window into one's soul?underlines and marginalia
A window into one's soul?underlines and marginalia
Also a now over-referenced book among the GOFO crowd.
I'm not sure if I'd ever call that table of stats nerdery "enticement." And I'm a pretty big nerd.More enticement to read Diffusion of Military Power
View attachment 16239
"Feels like an A."True, the ultra dense tables aren't great at enticement, but rather speak more to the rigor of the work.
If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit. "Dyadic satisfaction?" For fuck's sake. I haven't read the book (I guess after this post, I have to), but if it's got sound reasoning, it sure seems like pretty damned pompous sound reasoning.True, the ultra dense tables aren't great at enticement, but rather speak more to the rigor of the work.
Get over the terminology. It's probably a term that's well defined within the genre. Just because you don't understand it at first glance doesn't mean it isn't backed up by logic.If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit. "Dyadic satisfaction?" For fuck's sake. I haven't read the book, but if it's got sound reasoning, it's sure seems like pretty damned pompous sound reasoning.
Anyone who would unironically use a phrase like "dyadic satisfaction" needs a kick to the nuts. Even being an undergrad sophomore humanities major would be an explanation, not a justification.
Meh....."mutual agreement" would have done just fine.Get over the terminology. It's probably a term that's well defined within the genre. Just because you don't understand it at first glance doesn't mean it isn't backed up by logic.
Probably would have, but you don't get a PhD or credit in a professional field using layman's terms (odds are you won't make a best seller list either, but that depends on who you want to read your work).Meh....."mutual agreement" would have done just fine.
And that's a big problem. On a side note, I don't consider "mutual agreement" as laymen's terms. Just proper English, not ancient Greek.but you don't get a PhD or credit in a professional field using layman's terms
I wonder if they're using it for the citations.That is a little scary.
Because it either means:
A) They actually read it and thought it was a good book
or
B) They didn't read it and are just jumping on the Beltway bookmobile bandwagon for this book.
Seriously, if the authors could have condensed the entire novel into a long article length vignette, it would have retained the same amount of expository value on the application of emerging technologies.
Does anyone have a recommendation for a WW1/Great War book concerning the overall history? The cause(s), the war, the aftermath.