I’ve occasionally bought lecture courses from “The Great Courses.” For example, I bought a 36 lecture series on the history of Russia.
I don’t buy them very often because they’re expensive and there are so many great podcasts out there for free. (NEVER buy one of these lectures when they’re not on sale. But even on sale, you’ll spend real money. The 96-lecture series on astronomy is on sale for $114.) But the production quality was excellent and the subjects interesting.
Every once in a while, they’ll put up a free lecture from one of the courses, in order to entice me to buy the whole thing. The last one I saw was on voting.
My first thought was, “how are you going to talk about voting for 30 minutes?” I mean, how much is there to say?
I was wrong. 25 minutes of the 30 minute lecture are really interesting. The video is a little hokey, but the content is worth your time.
Thanks, that was interesting.
“In that case, I want to go to Paris.”
It’s interesting that he brings up Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem, as I’m rereading _Godel, Escher, Bach_. Hofstadter is probably one of those who Stevens means about taking the Theorem a bit out of it’s intended venue. When he first described the IRV method, it made me think there was something really untrustworthy about it, so it was good to hear the description of its faults. I actually enjoyed the whole lecture, so no 5 minutes wasted for me.
Wow, “Godel, Escher, Bach” brings back such memories. All those conversations between Achilles and the Tortoise.
Yes, the first time I read it, I focused on those and skimmed some of the rest. Remember the contracostipuntus (or something like that) conversation? It’s a book I like to pick up every once in a while. My copy is falling apart now, so maybe I’ll get an electronic version.
More for my education than to be pedantic, I have a question. Aren’t book names supposed to be underlined, and quotes used for plays, songs, and other (shorter?) kinds of work?
I kind of remember something like that about underlining.