Comments on: TEN MOST HARMFUL BOOKS OF THE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURIES

By: Shawn Olson

Shawn Olson — Mon, 02 Jan 2006 15:58:16 +0000

I think that listing Dewey here is ignorant. It’s been fashionable to bash Dewey for decades. But it seems that when one actually discusses Dewey, it becomes apparent that critics (and proponents) of Dewey usually have read very little (if any) of Dewey’s work. Extreme leftists misuse quotes from Dewey and those on the right are legendary for taking Dewey quotes out of context.

By: Fresh Air

Fresh Air — Sun, 05 Jun 2005 17:21:13 +0000

Judge–

I think you did say something about book burning. But in any case, your honor will be intact if you make yourself scarce from this website.

By: Fresh Air

Fresh Air — Sun, 05 Jun 2005 05:40:58 +0000

Hey, judgemc. I think the proprietor of the site asked you to leave. He really doesn’t owe you an explanation. It’s his bandwidth, not yours.

By: Fresh Air

Fresh Air — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 21:37:56 +0000

Rick–

Excellent list. Here are two more candidates:

1. Silent Spring by Rachel Carson, which was the mainspring of the Seventies’ anti-science movement, and which indirectly led to the banning of DDT in developing nations and thus killing millions.

2. The Koran. I need not elaborate. Though I realize it was first published 1,200 years ago, it just seems so damn dangerous in the hands of people with warped minds.

By: Brainster

Brainster — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 15:47:55 +0000

Chomsky isn’t significant enough; he’s about as dangerous as Erica Jong. I think the best argument for a book that belongs on the list is for “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”.

By: Rick Moran

Rick Moran — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 15:29:29 +0000

You are correct about the title of the book.

I’m just wondering how you get from my statement “I recommend reading each and every book listed” to me advocating book burning?

Please point out in my post where I advocate book burning? You can’t, of course. There isn’t even a hint or a suggestion of it. Only in your warped, ignorant, and confused, hate filled mind is the suggestion made.

Perhaps you’re projecting your own wishes about other books? That’s the only explanation I can think of.

I’m sick of your inane comments. I’m sick of you putting words in my mouth and attributing ideas to me that have no basis in fact.

I’m sick of you. You’re banned.

By: judgemc

judgemc — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 15:21:42 +0000

O.k. let me rephrase Darwin wrote “The Origin Of Species” not “Origin of the Species” If your going to burn a book at least get the title correct. YOu can take a remedial reading cource if you cannot understand the diference Rick.

By: dymphna

dymphna — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 14:31:05 +0000

How about Sartre? Or Rousseau? Or that dumb Bishop Berkley who tried to refute Darwin on religious terms, thus making a serious categorical mistake and enlarging the science/faith chasm…dumb.

Oh yeah…Chomsky. Anything out of the mind of that man…

But when you think about it, if these particular excresences didn’t exist, someone else would’ve written equally bad ideas…gullibility, thy name is half-educated.

By: Rick Moran

Rick Moran — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 13:55:37 +0000

“Darwin wrote The Origin Of Species.”
“And even though they included both Darwin’s Origin of the Species and Descent of Man…”

What part of that didn’t you understand?I think you need a remedial reading course.

Also, I would recommend reading each and every book listed here - not putting them on a “bonfire” dingbat.

By: judgemc

judgemc — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 01:37:13 +0000

Darwin wrote The Origin Of Species.