Not for everyone, but those who it is for very much should read this - but not without understanding that it can be quite triggering at times. :
The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma
-Bessel van der Kolk
It's not an easy read for said people, but very worthwhile. Was introduced at a friends place and got a little ways in, waiting to pick up my own copy now.
Edit:
Also "The Art of War" is fun. It mostly boils down to common sense, but it's interesting to see application of first principles to ancient warfare.
I read it recently and didn't like it that much. 1/3 of the book is author praising himself for what he had accomplished, another 1/3 are success stories from his patients and one-sided presentation of research that agrees with his points. The rest 1/3 of the book I found interesting.
As many modern books - it suffers from lack of focus; my opinion.
If you don't mind me asking, do you suffer from any of the things he discusses in the book?
I'm just curious to know how our context differs if any, not trying to imply anything else.
For me at least, there were things he talked about which felt like there was someone/something that understood and that there was a chance to work forward through things. There were also a few things I read which... well, lets just say I added the warnings for a reason.
> If you don't mind me asking, do you suffer from any of the things he discusses in the book?
Yes, the book was recommended by my therapist. There were interesting and helpful parts to the book, in my case specifically the idea that it's hard to be anxious in a relaxed body, the yoga part, and the chapter about psyche being composed of different parts that protect one another and you can ask them to "step aside" were the most influential.
So I took useful things out of it, but I cannot say it is well written. In particular a lot of "meta" conversation would have been better left out. Like coming back to the DSM classification and ranting how it doesn't include childhood traumas even thou the author feels he demonstrated they should be a separate entity. And on research - I don't know much, but I know something about epigenetics. There was a chapter that touched upon epigenetics (about how stressors change the expression of our genes), and the papers were cherry-picked to agree with what the author was saying. I didn't like that and this made me doubt some of the cited literature in other chapters that I cannot judge on my own.
If you know the art of war, and you do understand that it requires no trigger warning, why would you assume it applies to it and not the book you do not know about?
Edit:
Also "The Art of War" is fun. It mostly boils down to common sense, but it's interesting to see application of first principles to ancient warfare.