NationStates Jolt Archive

was gonna make it about books in general
but why not make one about just life of pi
although probably no one has read it except this one kid
so, this thread will eventually progress into all books but it will be named after life of pi because it's good, and confusing

That was...an interesting book. Can't say Yann Martel is even close to being one of my favourite authors, but I guess it was worth reading. I just got pissed off when he criticised agnostics...he apparently supports blind faith rather than skepticism.

you're obviously older than 13...
yet life of pi is a young reader book...
what's agnostics

i read it. yeah it was interesting. i liked it for the most part. until it got all like "but maybe the tiger was really Pi, and the hyena was really the chef" and all that crap. i liked the animal story.

I am currently reading that book, have been meaning to finish it for some time. A good book so far, I really like it.

Actually, a friend of mine's father went to Colledge with the author.

The Life of Pi was a great book. It was not really confusing, maybe befuddling or misleading at times, but it was a damn good read.

I nearly thought this forum has reached some level and you ment this: http://aronofksy.tripod.com/pi.html

you're obviously older than 13...
yet life of pi is a young reader book...
what's agnostics
An agnostic is a person who cannot make up their mind

i read it. yeah it was interesting. i liked it for the most part. until it got all like "but maybe the tiger was really Pi, and the hyena was really the chef" and all that crap. i liked the animal story.

ah, the metaphor part. that confused me

An agnostic is a person who cannot make up their mind
No, an agnostic is a person who believes that it is impossible to know whether god exists or not. It literally means "no knowing". And The Life of Pi is too advanced, conceptually, in my opinion for the average 13 year old (though, to be fair, I'm 15).

No, an agnostic is a person who believes that it is impossible to know whether god exists or not. It literally means "no knowing". And The Life of Pi is too advanced, conceptually, in my opinion for the average 13 year old (though, to be fair, I'm 15).

yet you, a 15 year old, could have the mind of a 13 year old. and me, a 13 year old, could have the mind of a 15 year old. therefore, i would be more inclined to read LOP. it's possible...

I nearly thought this forum has reached some level and you ment this: http://aronofksy.tripod.com/pi.html


kind of afraid to click that link, bud.

The Life of Pi was a great book. It was not really confusing, maybe befuddling or misleading at times, but it was a damn good read.

you didn't find the kid trying to eat pi while he was blind part confusing?

or the metaphor at the end?

or, especially, the human teeth in the rolled up balls of leaves?

No, an agnostic is a person who believes that it is impossible to know whether god exists or not. It literally means "no knowing". And The Life of Pi is too advanced, conceptually, in my opinion for the average 13 year old (though, to be fair, I'm 15).
Dear Hyinda, agnostics are also well known for using 20 words to say something that could be expressed using two words. They are notorious for taking a simple issue and making it complex....these are very confused people and I would recommend when someone tells you that they are agnostic that you laugh at them...

Dear Hyinda, agnostics are also well known for using 20 words to say something that could be expressed using two words. They are notorious for taking a simple issue and making it complex....these are very confused people and I would recommend when someone tells you that they are agnostic that you laugh at them...

i still don't get what it means, but note to self: laugh when someone says they're agnostic

but why would someone want to admit it?

i'll make sure to laugh

Gotta say, Part 1 and Part 2 shouldn't just have been different parts - they should have been different books. To me, they were aimed at entirely different audiences.

i thought part 2 was better cuz part 1 was super boring, but why were they aimed at different audiences

to add, the reader would have been super confused if they just started reading at part 2


plus, even books that are seperate but in a series are aimed at the same audience

i still don't get what it means, but note to self: laugh when someone says they're agnostic

but why would someone want to admit it?

i'll make sure to laugh

Hyinda, that's very good. the word agnostic is derived from a greek word that literally means "not knowing", an agnostic is a person who prides themselves in not knowing anything, another word for people who don't like to know things is "ignorant" which by the way comes from the same root as "agnostic", and you know what we should do to ignorant people when we meet them don't you? That's right..we laugh at them and their agnosticsm.

and we get a's on our vocab tests i suppose?

and we get a's on our vocab tests i suppose?

Yes, should always go to school and get A's that way no one will ever call you an agnostic

oh, don't worry i'm at the top of the class in the harsh and cruel world of eighth grade

oh, don't worry i'm at the top of the class in the harsh and cruel world of eighth grade

I bet some of your classmates are agnostics, and maybe some of the teachers don't know anything either....

hmmm im 47 and i enjoyed the book

it taught me alot about the psychology of animals. i sure hope the author is right about that part because it is now ALL i know about animal psychology.

the whole explaining the metaphor part should have been cut out by the editor. it ruined the whole mysitque of the book and leaves nothing for the teacher to talk about. i guess the author was uncomfortable with the fantasy aspects and had to bring it back to reality. i think it was a mistake.

yet you, a 15 year old, could have the mind of a 13 year old. and me, a 13 year old, could have the mind of a 15 year old. therefore, i would be more inclined to read LOP. it's possible...
I would not deny the possibility of that, however, my reading level was post-graduate in 8th grade. I do not read at my age or education level.

Dear Hyinda, agnostics are also well known for using 20 words to say something that could be expressed using two words. They are notorious for taking a simple issue and making it complex....these are very confused people and I would recommend when someone tells you that they are agnostic that you laugh at them...
They are notorious for questioning things. They do not proclaim to know what is unknowable.

Hyinda, that's very good. the word agnostic is derived from a greek word that literally means "not knowing", an agnostic is a person who prides themselves in not knowing anything, another word for people who don't like to know things is "ignorant" which by the way comes from the same root as "agnostic", and you know what we should do to ignorant people when we meet them don't you? That's right..we laugh at them and their agnosticsm.
That is really funny, because I could've sworn that "agnostic" was derived from the Greek word agnôstos, meaning "unknown, unknowable". An agnostic is a person who prides him- or herself in not making impossible assumptions. And, you know what, it's actually kinda interesting, because "ignorant" isn't even derived from Greek. It came to English from French, from Latin. The Latin word was ignarus "not knowing, unaware", from in-, "not" and gnarus, "aware, acquainted with". Though, to be honest, I guess you could trace it back futher ultimately to the Greek root of gignôskein, "to know", but there is no linear reltionship. And I think it can even go back to the Proto-Indo-European base of *gn-, but I could remember that wrong. By the way, I'm an agnostic. Apparently I'm not quite as ignorant as you've led our friend Hyinda to believe... I can also ramble about pathology and entomology, not just etymology and theology, if you'd like.

until it got all like "but maybe the tiger was really Pi, and the hyena was really the chef" and all that crap. i liked the animal story.
I thought that the metaphor was what made the book unique, and I liked it. Allegory is an incredible tool when used as Martel used it.

The whole book was a little confusing. Too many things could have been Pi just hallucinating from lack of food or it could have been real. I think martel left that up to us to decide, made poignent by the interview with the Japanese buisness men at the end.

I did hate how he criticized the agnostics as well. He supported his own faith (Christian, Muslim, Hindu) even though all three have differing ideologies. He even supported atheists, though he thinks they will find god in the last minutes ( I have my differences there as well). When he goes after agnostics though, he is irrational. "They will think its lack of oxygen going to the brain" Well, of course its lack of oxygen you nitwit! Just because you are unwilling to view anothers position from their shoes (so to speak) does not mean they are wrong.