Book Description

As Christians, we are often urged to turn away from scientific discovery and rely solely on the Bible as the source of our faith. On the other hand, many people in areas such as science, law, and education insist that Christian faith is lowbrow or unintelligent. But is it possible to reconcile science with what you believe about God? As someone who has grappled with the issues of science and faith in the public eye for more than a decade as a television journalist, Dr. Michael Guillen believes it is possible. In fact, by embracing the discoveries of science we can see God, the universe, and humanity in full, multidimensional glory.

Fortunately, you don’t have to be a genius to enjoy this book. The bite-sized chapters are full of fascinating scientific tidbits in an easy-to-understand format. Captivating stories of the author’s childhood in the Mexican barrio of East L.A. and his work in television and research are woven throughout. There is even an entertaining SQ (Spiritual Quotient) test for readers to take.

Book Description

Question: Who made us?
Answer #1: God made us.
Answer #2: Evolution made us.

Which is it? What is the true answer to the age-old question of where we came from? Is it even possible to know for sure?

In Finding Darwin's God, Kenneth R. Miller offers a surprising resolution to the evolutionism vs. creationism debate.A distinguished professor of biology at Brown University, Miller argues that the genuine world of science is far more interesting than either the scientific mainstream or its creationist critics have assumed. He begins by systematically demolishing the claims of evolution's most vocal critics, showing that Darwin's great insights continue to be valid, even in the rarefied worlds of biochemistry and molecular biology. As he puts it, evolution "is the real thing, and so are we."

Does this mean that evolution invalidates all worldviews that depend upon the spiritual? Does it demand logical agnosticism as the price of scientific consistency? And does it rigorously exclude belief in God?

His answer, in each and every case, is a resounding No. Not, as he argues, because evolution is wrong. Far from it. The reason, as Miller shows, is that evolution is right.

In this lively, fast-paced book, Miller offers a thoughtful, cutting-edge analysis of the key issues that seem to divide science and religion. As his narrative shows, the difficulties that evolution presents for Western religions are more apparent than real. Properly understood, evolution adds depth and meaning not only to a strictly scientific view of the world, but also to a spiritual one. Miller's resolution of the issues that seem to divide God from evolution will serve as a guide to anyone interested in the classic questions of ultimate meaning and human origins.

Reviews (65)

Great start; disappointing end
As many of the reviewers below have eloquently noted, the majority of Miller's book is devoted to debunking the poor science of creationists and fundamentalists who attack evolution. Miller offers an excellent presentation of the basics of evolution and refutes the arguments of several recent detractors. The story is highly readable and builds towards the inevitable conclusion that religion must conform to the truths that evolution and science in general have discovered. Along the way, Miller demonstrates the futility of stuffing God into the gaps of scientific knowledge; doing so only leads to a new crisis each time science explains what was previously thought to be the domain of God.

Having presented a compelling case for a universe that evolved according to knowable rules, Miller then attempts to show how a personal God can be consistent with our apparently Godless universe. Where does this God go? You guessed it! Into the gaps of science! In this case, it's the

indeterminacy of quantum mechanics that provides the space for Miller's God.

After such a clear explanation of the science that compels us to reject fundamentalist cosmologies, it's surprising to see Miller fall into the silly quantum mechanics mysticism of such books as "The Tao of Physics" and "The Dancing Wu Li Masters." Many aspects of quantum theory are recent and presently evolving; perhaps some yet-to-be-articulated model will explain simply what today appears indeterminate. If so, yet another gap will be filled, displacing God in exactly the way Miller decries in the first part of the book!

But even if the indeterminism of quantum mechanics remains forever a feature of the theory, there's still no reason to insert God into it. Again, after so carefully explaining the _reasons_ to reject religious dogma and creationist pseudoscience, it's jarring to see Miller assert his religious speculations with absolutely no rational justifications whatsoever. His explanation of God-in-the-quantum-indeterminacy-gap offers no hints to the nature of this God; for that, the reader apparently must turn to one of the dogmatic religions Miller has previously defenestrated.

Ultimately, Finding Darwin's God reads like the ruminations of a smart guy who is trapped by his intellect: unable to justify dogma, he accepts the material world. But unwilling to let go of the seduction of religion, he relaxes his intellectual rigor to create a little space for a God he can't otherwise find.

Lucid, balanced guide to the challenges of science for faith
This book is a "must read" for anyone interested in a thoughtful analysis both of the most popular approaches for defending a belief in creation and also for those that oppose a belief in creation in light of the findings of modern science. Kenneth Miller is a professor of biology at Brown University and a committed Christian (although the book stresses the shared convictions of the major Western religions, rather than adopting a sectarian approach).

Miller considers first the arguments of young-earth creationists (Whitcome and Morris, Duane Gish, et al.) and answers these with an avalanche of scientific evidence. He then examines in two chapters the claims of old-earth creationists, especially Philip Johnson (who stresses a lack of transitional forms in the fossil record) and Michael Behe (who identifies what he considers are "irreducably complex" biochemical machines in the cell). In his careful analysis of these views, Miller helps the reader appreciate how both approaches are, in effect, misguided attempts to defend creation with a "God of the gaps." Each offers examples which, the authors hope, defy explanation by modern science. This (temporary) inability of modern science is then taken as evidence in support of the work of the Creator at that point. Miller shows the consistent failure of this mode of argumentation in the past and cites evidence published since the appearance of Johnson's and Behe's writings, which, unfortunately for them, fills in their hoped-for gaps.

One of the greatest dangers of a God of the gaps argument, Miller notes, is that each time science succeeds in filling one of these alleged gaps its success is misconstrued by atheistic scientists as proof that God must not exist. Miller turns his attention in the second half of his book to a refutation of the equally deficient views against creation that have been advanced by atheistic scientists.

In the end Miller affirms the wisdom of resting one's faith in a God who is the God of the stuff in between the gaps - whose handiwork is best seen in facts and qualities of the universe which are well known to science, rather than in those which are as yet undiscovered. Although he strongly affirms evolution, natural law, and chance, he sees these as means which God used for accoplishing His creative intention and safeguarding the genuine freedom and independence of His Creation. Miller affirms that the existence of the universe is not self-explanatory. Although he recognizes that the convictions of faith cannot be proven absolutely, he considers faith in the Creator to be reasonable and supported by such evidences as the anthropic principle. He also favors the possibility that God may utilize quantum indeterminacy and chaos as subtle means for interacting with His creation.

Terrific book
This is a tremendous book that will help any seeker reconcile both evolution and the existence of evil with a caring and loving God. This may help you believe in a Theist God but for me it falls short of the Christian God because it doesn't show the role and purpose of Jesus. Nevertheless, a great book for any theist or those considering theism.

Best of Type
I have been intrigued by the on-going debate regarding evolution. As a result, over the last year I have read a range of books on the issue starting with Darwin's Origin of Species, and, including works by Pennock, Dawkins, Johnson, Behe, Dembski and others. Of recent works defending the theory of evolution Finding Darwin's God is the best that I have come across for a popular audience.

In the early portion of the book Miller provides a good and succinct case for evolution (something I find Dawkins incapable of). The author then addresses several of the different challenges to evolution (Young Earth Creationists (YEC), Johnson and Behe). He is most successful against the YEC, but his responses to the others challengers, if not decisive, are well articulated.

A point that is particularly well done is the discussion with respect to why evolution is such an emotionally charged issue. I agree with Miller that one of the causes of this is the extreme extrapolations atheists such as Dawkins, Gould et al make from what at the end of the day is a limited scientific theory (albeit an interesting one). For those unfamiliar with this aspect of the discussion, many "popularizers" of evolution attempt to use the theory to argue for materialism/determinism and eliminate the possibility of the supernatural.

In the second part of the book Miller goes on to argue that evolution and belief in God are not incompatible. In doing so, he touches on a range of scientific and theological issues including: deism, quantum theory, cosmology and apologetics. This part of the book was not as well done. I support Miller's general contentions but, believe that he tried to accomplish too much and got out of his intellectual depth. Although it had some good points the second half was repetitive and a bit disjointed. I will just offer a few comments on some of these latter arguments before closing.

First, Miller reads too much into quantum theory. Neither God's ability to act in the word nor free will are contingent on quantum indeterminacy. Readers seeking an introduction to free will can refer to sections in intro level philosophy books such as Pojam's Introduction to Philosophy (an excellent collection of essays on various philosophical questions). Additionally, similar to other scientific fields much work is on-going in quantum theory and many of the current limitations in this area could prove to be methodological.

Second, Miller's handling of cosmology and its theological ramifications are weak. Readers seeking a better understanding of this issue can seek one of Bill Craig's many excellent works in this area.

Third, it is not surprising that the author as a scientist approaches the issue from a classic modernist standpoint (i.e. science is the only source of truth). Much fascinating discussion has taken place around this issue and, some significant challenges have been raised by postmodern thinkers. For an introduction to postmodern philosophical work Stanley Grenz's A Primer on Postmodernism is simply outstanding.

Finally, the author gives to much credence to the threat evolution poses to religion. In contemporary apologetics the argument from design plays a limited role and, when used it revolves around the fundamental relationships in the universe not evolution (Miller touched on this issue). All but the most literal of Christians (YEC types) do not see evolution and a Christian worldview as incompatible.

In conclusion, good book, well worth the money. For those exploring the evolution argument I recommend it along with Behe's Darwins's Black Box and a work by Philip Johnson such as The Wedge of Truth (to get a fell for both sides).

Contains many major mistakes
Although this book has much good material, it contains many major mistakes. For example,research by ophthalmologists has clearly shown why the human retina must be of the "inverted" design. Miller claims that this design is suboptimal because the photoreceptors are on the inside curvature of the retina, forcing the incoming light to travel through the front of the retina to reach the photoreceptors The photoreceptors (rods and cones) MUST face AWAY from the front of the eye in order to be in contact with the pigment epithelium on the choroid, which supply it with blood. The verted design claimed by Miller to be best would not place the photoreceptors in contact with their source of nutrition (the choroid). This is a serious problem because rods and cones need an enormous amount of energy for repair and they completely replace themselves at a very high rate (about every 7 days or so), due to phototoxicity, and other damage. Miller's design simply would not allow the rods and cones to function because of their extremely high rate of metabolism. Furthermore, placing the neural components of the retina in front of the photoreceptors does not produce any kind of optical handicap, since the neural elements are separated by less than a wavelength of light, so very little or no scattering or diffraction occurs, and the light travels through this area as if it was near-perfect transparency. ... Read more

Book Description

Why did the stock market crash more than 500 points on a single Monday in 1987? Why do ancient species often remain stable in the fossil record for millions of years and then suddenly disappear? In a world where nice guys often finish last, why do humans value trust and cooperation? At first glance these questions don't appear to have anything in common, but in fact every one of these statements refers to a complex system. The science of complexity studies how single elements, such as a species or a stock, spontaneously organize into complicated structures like ecosystems and economies; stars become galaxies, and snowflakes avalanches almost as if these systems were obeying a hidden yearning for order.

Drawing from diverse fields, scientific luminaries such as Nobel Laureates Murray Gell-Mann and Kenneth Arrow are studying complexity at a think tank called The Santa Fe Institute. The revolutionary new discoveries researchers have made there could change the face of every science from biology to cosmology to economics. M. Mitchell Waldrop's groundbreaking bestseller takes readers into the hearts and minds of these scientists to tell the story behind this scientific revolution as it unfolds. ... Read more

Reviews (53)

this book should get 6 stars
In one word, this book was awesome. Waldrop's account of the development of the science of complexity is both compelling and spell-binding. His historical account of the Sante Fe Institute and its members was an inspiring story. Written like a novel, this book was very simple to read and understand and very easy to follow. Even the casual reader could follow its simplifying explanations of the complicated theories invovled in the science of complexity. This book is also a great follow-on to James Gleick's "Chaos - Making a New Science". I would highly recommend this book to anyone interested in complex adaptive systems theory, especially its applications in the realm of economics. Waldrop's work here is outstanding!!!

A must read!
This book is not about a mathematical explanation of complexity. This book will not teach you how to construct a neural network or create autonomous cellular automata.

This book is about the process that some of the world's best scientists went through to realize why a theory like complexity is needed. The book will give any reader a deeper understanding for, and appreciation of how such a broad and information rich topic like complexity is becoming better understood. Insights are also given into how this new understanding of emergent behavior may soon be applied to what were once considered unsolvable problems of Economics, Artificial Life, Biology, Physics, etc.

Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos is the story of a group of humans trying to understand the very nature of nature itself, a superhuman task. An exciting drama that just happens to be about cutting edge science instead of science fiction.

Wonderful reading for every science enthusiast!
The cover of the book says " If you liked Chaos, you will love complexity". I just finished reading the book, that validated the claim. While Chaos is written as story of discovery of a new science, Complexity excels as a saga of men who ventured into previously unchartered domains addressing for the first time issues like:

What is life? What is driving force that caused cells to appear from a primordal soup of all elements, when the probability of so happening is infinitesimal? What causes evolution? Do nice guys finish last? What makes evolution, coevolution, adaptation, extinction work? Why do we organize ourselves into families, cultures, nations?

Why do stock markets crash, boom? What controls the emergence of economies? Why can USSR go from one of strongest nations/economies to the state of divided helplessness in less than a few years?

Why are we here? What is life? Artificial Life? Are we still evolving? What is the cause of increasing complexity?

On mundane level: What is non-linearity? What is Chaos? If this science is all that important, why did we wait this long for recognizing it?

What are the paradigms in which sociology and physics settle into same patterns? How neural networks were born, brought up and mastered?

This novel/book is as much about these questions as it is about the scientists who engaged in unravelling many of these mysteries. It speaks about their failures and successes, their approach, ethic and driving force, their fears, fights and friendships. For most part it reads like a thriller, and by the time you are done, you find yourself searching for another book on Chaos, complexity, life at the edge of chaos, genetic algorithms, artificial intelligence. After just 358 pages, your imagination and knowledge of science leaps from Newton's linear models to the twentyfirst century stuff.

Good for Science groupies - no description of theory here!
I found it impossible to tolerate the hundreds and hundreds of pages of oggeling the great men of science and the mundane minutia of thier careers, personalities and personal lives. There's not a single equation or chart in the whole book.
Look elsewhere if you want to get up to speed on the "new science".

Easy to Read, Powerful To Ponder
Complexity is one of those rare science books that manages to teach the reader a great deal without boring them to tears. Using the Santa Fe Institute and many of it's founding players as the backdrop for the story, Waldrop tells stories about people, while exploring their science. The result is a book that is fun to read, and that makes you think at a deep, deep level.

The gist of complexity is the notion that nature really does explore, all by itself, the continously evolving boundary between order and chaos. If you've ever explored the boundaries of fractal patterns, such as the Mandelbrot Set, you've seen a visual example of complexity at work. When you're done, you realize that you have a better intuitive understanding of how the universe operates, how evolution works, and how societies organize themselves...all without having to solve a single mathematical equation! I loved it!

This is one of those books that reshaped my world view, and it is one that I highly recommend to any reader, regardless of their scientific background. ... Read more

Book Description

The Einstein revealed in these writings is witty, keenly perceptive, and deeply concerned for humanity. Einstein believed in the possibility of a peaceful world and in the high mission of science to serve human well-being. As we near the end of a century in which science has come to seem more and more remote from human values, Einstein's perspective is indispensable. ... Read more

Reviews (6)

The World As I See It
It still amazes me to think that this book exists at all, and for one very good reason: no one ever mentioned to me that Albert Einstein was a quasi-philosopher-turned-political-activist. I grew up hearing about 'Einstein the Scientist' but knew nothing of the man who spoke out about global disarmament, pacifism, and even the reconstruction of Palestine in spite of persecution at home (think Germany, 1933) and abroad. It wasn't until I stumbled upon a few quotes of his that I realized his mind worked beyond even the limits of science, and it wasn't until I stumbled across an e-book titled "The World As I See It" by Albert Einstein that I realized there were publications in his name beyond his Scientific Journals. When I saw a real copy in one of my favourite used-book shops, of course I had to buy it.

The book is really an incomplete collection of Einstein's articles and writings put together "to give a picture of a man," we are told by the editor, as "his character and opinions are being exhibited to the world in an utterly distorted form...to forestall this fate is the real object of this book." If nothing else, this collection gives a clear picture of the things that Einstein was concerned about, which speaks volumes more about his character than a biography could. Topics within the text vary greatly, though inevitably touch upon religion, personal philosophy (yes, those are two separate categories to me), and world politics.

Of particular interest to me was those articles written in pre-WWII Germany as they absolutely reek of the political turmoil of the times, which remind me greatly of the political bantering surrounding a post-9/11 United States. Specifically, there are a series of letters exchanged between Herr Einstein and the Prussian Academy of Sciences in which Einstein is accused of "atrocity-mongering" after resigning from the Academy due to the Prussian Government's inequities against individual freedom. The Academy essentially twists Einstein's actions and words in an effort to slander his good name, and each retort quid pro quo paints the formulaic picture of an irrational "authority" attacking those who speak out against them. After re-reading the articles just now, I can't help but be reminded of the Bush Administration's attacks on the Dixie Chicks after the attacks on the World Trade Center.

I would like to address each of the ideas presented within this book, but would rather save that for a proper essay as each deserves more merit than a few brief scribbles in a book review. I will say this though: Albert Einstein's theories on disarmament, world peace and global unification seem as attainable as they are idealistic when coming from the pen of such an honest, genuine, intelligent man. He speaks with complete understanding and acceptance of himself, others and the politics in between when touching upon subjects ranging between Good and Evil to The Meaning of Life to Peace, Fascism, Culture and Prosperity, and I found myself with little choice but to listen whole-heartedly and agree with the brilliance captured within these few pages.

I recommend this book to everyone (and I *rarely* recommend books) and believe it should be a mandatory-study in high school for its sheer breadth of scope in understanding the globe we call Earth as it is today, and as it should be tomorrow.

A Rip-Off
Readers should be aware that this edition of "The World As I See It" is, in fact, an abridged version of the original publication. Without bothering to mention this on the title page, it has dropped the entire fifth section on "Scientific Questions," including such classic popular expositions of Einstein's basic philosophy as "Geometry and Experience" and "Principles of Research." Editing a book of Einstein's writings which deliberately excludes all mention of science is like publishing a biography of Mozart - without any reference to music.

It is, I think, significant of the dumbing down of American publishing that the German edition of the same book ("Mein Weltbild," published by Ullman) has continuously added new material on politics, fascism, Judaism, peace and science over the years! Readers who want to know what Einstein was really like should obtain a used copy of the original full version.

To know Einstein's thoughts, the rest are details
To know Einstein's thoughts is to understand the nature of one of histories finest minds. Beyond all else, Albert Einstein was a man, a man of deep social & moral conscience. As I read this book, I was struck by the thought of George Santayana, "Those who do not study the past are condemned to repeat it." To be able to travel back nearly 100 years and view the world throught the mind and spirit of Einstein is a pleasure indeed. I found myself at odds with some of what Einstein thought. However, what a great experience it was to explore those thoughts and how many still appear true today. Albert Einstein once said "Imagination is more important than knowledge". The man knew what he was talking about.

Great Humble Mind, Greatest Scientist
The book reveals, the thoughts of the great mind known as Albert Einstein. His social life was as enlightening, as his intellectual mind. He had god given gift of opening god's secrets, and he did it beautifully, and humbly. I have read this book many times, and feel divine about thinking about Albert Eintein.

A great book to read, especially if intrested in Einstein
This book was a really interesting to read because I've never read any letters Albert had written, and it tells about events in his life you wouldn't ordinarily know. The only problem for me was the book didn't quite grab my attention in some parts very well. But other than that I loved the cover and the book, I would definitely recommend it. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Shattering deeply held beliefs about sexual relationships in humans and other animals, The Myth of Monogamy is a much needed treatment of a sensitive issue. Written by the husband and wife team of behavioral scientist David P. Barash and psychiatrist Judith Eve Lipton, it glows with wit and warmth even as it explores decades of research undermining traditional precepts of mating rituals. Evidence from genetic testing has been devastating to those seeking monogamy in the animal kingdom; even many birds, long prized as examples of fidelity, turn out to have a high incidence of extra-pair couplings. Furthermore, now that researchers have turned their attention to female sexual behavior, they are finding more and more examples of aggressive adultery-seeking in "the fairer sex." Writing about humans in the context of parental involvement, the authors find complexity and humor:

Baby people are more like baby birds than baby mammals. To be sure, newborn cats and dogs are helpless, but this helplessness doesn't last for long. By contrast, infant Homo sapiens remain helpless for months ... and then they become helpless toddlers! Who in turn graduate to being virtually helpless youngsters. (And then? Clueless adolescents.) So there may be some payoff to women in being mated to a monogamous man, after all.

Careful to separate scientific description from moral prescription, Barash and Lipton still poke a little fun at our conceptions of monogamy and other kinds of relationships as "natural" or "unnatural." Shoring themselves up against the inevitable charges that their reporting will weaken the institution of marriage, they make sure to note that monogamy works well for most of those who desire it and that one of our uniquely human traits is our ability to overcome biology in some instances. If, as some claim, monogamy has been a tool used by men to assert property rights over women, then perhaps one day The Myth of Monogamy will be seen as a milestone for women's liberation. --Rob Lightner ... Read more

Reviews (14)

The Truth Is Revealed, But Choice Is Always Ours
What I mean by "Truth is revealed, the choice is ours", is the theme of this review. It is also the message in the book, although many readers have misinterpreted the entire theme, believing the co-authors, David P. Barash and Judith E. Lipton, are simply feeding us hard reality and crushing dreams of blissful and faithful marriage. David and Judith are experienced, older scientists, specializing in the observation of birds and apes, with a profound understanding of logic, human emotions, sociobiology and biology in general. They both hold high degrees- Judith has an M.D. and David holds a Ph.D. It is noteworthy, also, that they are a happily married couple and have been so for many years. Their real message and theme from this outstanding book is that although by nature, humans are generally not faithful to their long-term mate (spouse, boyfriend, girlfriend), we have evolved so much that we can chose to be faithful and monogamous to our partner and truly be satisfied, fulfilled and completely happy. Monogamy is not extinct, it is rare. Half of all marriages end in divorce. When a couple has been together for many years, it's world news. It is the greatest partnership, relationship, union, and the most peaceful, happiest and fullest feeling. But it is always the individual's choice. If a partner cannot remain faithful, we now have a reason and explanation for it.

The reason why so many find it difficult to be faithful to their partner for a long time, is biological. Originally, before an evolved society with its ground rules grew from primitive communism, the homo sapien men were polygamous, especially because genetically, nature demanded variety from their offspring. Incest, of course, was formerly practiced to keep a family bloodline, true even to the highest societies, royal dynasties of ancient Egypt, etc. There was a time when free will seemed to bother no one, and men had many wives, shared partners and even shared land. But eventually, power and property was established, much like class systems, and it came to be a violation when someone "outside" the group took one of the wives from another male. Feeling of jealousy and ownership were established and so, when religion began to take over people's consciousness, they labeled this "taking", "adultery". The biological needs of women are important in the scene, as well, in fact, perhaps the most important link. Women's sex cells contain life-giving ovum, enabling them to bear children, and because they are so few and rare in them, they are selective about their sexual/romantic/etc partners. They are far more choosy because it is going to reflect on the ensuing progeny, their children. Men's sperm is abundant and cheap, and they are less selective. It's all down to our biological make-up. This book is very casual about the whole matter and contains not only very scientifically accurate truth, but very genuine humor and witty lines, making reading this book very enjoyable.

This book is very insightful, and opened my eyes about sex, relationships and the many unbreakable "differences" between men and women, such as why do women like tall men ? Why are men so attracted to larger breasts, why are men far more visual and enjoy pornography and why do women act demure and modest in order to attract their mate before showcasing their wild sexual abandon ? These all contain biological reasons. But this does not mean that men are women are not equals, nor are we forever ruled by "animal instincts". We are more intelligent than the animals and have evolved so wonderfully, that we can now chose to be married for a long time with a single mate and live happily ever after.

A provocative and -- at times -- humorous look at monomgamy
In this book, authors Lipton and Barash take a look at mating patterns throughout the animal kingdom (though they seem to spend more time on behavior in birds than on other animals). The conclusions they draw can be anticipated from the title -- that monogamy is not natural, at least based on biological, physiological, anthropological, and other evidence, and in fact is not as widely practiced as once thought. However, this is not to say, as some reviewers seem to think, that they believe that monogamy is thereby unnatural. In fact, in one place they say, "...even if human beings were more rigidly controlled by their biology, it would be absurd to claim that monogamy is unnatural or abnormal, especially since it was doubtless the way most people lived..." (p. 153) And later on, they affirm that "human inclinations may be able to fit whatever matrimonial pattern happens to exist in the society they happen to experience." But monogamy does go against the grain of human nature, according to the authors, and so you have to work at it.

A delightful aspect of the book is its humor. For example: "Nothing succeeds, we are told, like success. And indeed, social success...succeeds mightily when it comes to securing extra-pair copulations. (Maybe this is what Henry Kissinger meant when he noted that 'power is the best aphrodisiac.')"

All in all, this is a very provocative book. Because it draws a conclusion that goes against the grain of our culture's (though not all human cultures') norms, some people may find it offensive (as seen from other reviews). But the authors make their case convincingly (their case being that monogamy doesn't come naturally to human beings, but that doesn't mean that it can't be done) and it would be hard to refute their argument based on the evidence of evolutionary biology, which is the framework in which they are operating.

Like any book, you shouldn't take other people's opinions at face value. Read the book and judge for yourself.

"We are biological creatures . . . "
Keep that notion in mind as you follow the authors on their marvelous tour of sexual behaviour in all nature. Most of us were raised with the notion that humans "must" be monogamous. Often, animals such as swans or foxes were held up as examples to emulate. Barash and Lipton expose the hollow basis of these examples. The notion of human monogamy becomes a fragile ideal - nature, and we are part of nature, is anything but monogamous. In a book combining solid science and entertaining prose, this pair have produced an informal, but information-packed review of new finds in the sexual behaviour of a wealth of species.

One small flaw must be dealt with first - sexual behaviour studies must retreat from overuse of the poor screw-worm fly. The authors cannot resist numerous word plays on the poor creature's name. As the subject of an early attempt at controlling pest populations, the screw-worm fly initiated the host of studies of sexual behaviour among animals. Barash and Lipton describe sterilization of this insect as largely successful, reducing its population significantly. Screw-
worm flies are monogamous, which reinforced the notion as predominant in nature. However, a 1970s groundbreaking paper indicated monogamy might not be universal in animals. From that start a wealth of new studies demonstrated that it was monogamy that was rare, not the reverse. The screw-worm fly turned out to be a rare exception to the rule, and the basis of comparison for the later research.

Bowing to the expected abuse of "anthropomorphising" biology, the authors eschew "adultry" in favour of EPC [Extra Pair Copulation] in describing the common practice in nature. They show the distinction between "social" and "sexual" pairing. Social pairing includes nest building, territorial defence, raising offspring and other "family matters." Copulation itself, they show, has many more factors involved than simply insemination. Mates must be available, attractive or both. Age, health, even "marital status" may be taken into consideration. And these factors are weighed for "adultery" in animals! Males might need a special physiology or the ability to prevent EPC, even while seeking to achieve it on their own.

As they must, the authors arrive at last at humans. Noting how difficult research on human sexual behaviour is to document, they cite, albeit with many reservations, several noteworthy studies. If nothing else, the work proclaims that monogamy among humans is not the "norm." In relating the studies, they present anthropological data, surveys of modern societies and clinical studies. The authors grind no axes and are quick to criticise studies they feel are suspect. The dearth of valid data, however, leads them to present any plausible suggestion that seems either supportable or capable of further investigation. Throughout the narrative they insist that no predictable pattern can be applied to humans any more than with the other animals. Even our closest relatives all retain individuality among their members.

A running theme in the book is the authors' call for more research. How do female blue tits judge the ability of some males to resist winter cold more than others. "No one knows. [Yet]" and similar statements permeate the book. Anyone fearing there is little in biology left to investigate should read this. The sparseness of their references certainly supports this plea. While much work has been done, particularly in recent years, an immense range of study topics remains to be investigated. Younger readers should seriously consider the number of topics requiring clarification. A valuable book for these and many reasons.

Humans are quite different from birds
What makes us different from birds and animals is our ability to feel compassion towards one another. A biological explanation of polygamy in birds and animals does little to prove that humans should mindlessly follow their own animal nature. If we did, we wouldn't be much different from animals. Ability to spare our loved ones of the deep hurt that is inevitably caused by infidelity, - and ability to restrain our animal instincts out of compassion towards another human being, - is what makes us human.

Thought Provoking..
Monogamy is a sensitive, yet alluring, subject from both a biological and sociological standpoint. Ever since the founding of sociobiology by people like Edward Wilson, scientists (among many others) have been intrigued by the thought of just how dominant our genetic code is with respect to our behavior, as compared to the dominance of society's enforcement of it's contrived morals. Wilson once stated that culture is on a leash held by Genes, and one could claim equally that our genes are on a leash held by society. This book is a delightfully written perspective that deals with the intersection of those two powers in a way that is both enlightened and nonjudgemental.

The authors give an excellent review of how genetic fingerprinting has dispelled the here-to-fore assumed monagamy of a host of different animal species, and quote a number of respectable studies in the process. The astounding and outstanding result is the realization of just how rare it is to find any animal species that is totally monogamous in nature, and humans are animals that happen to not be totally monogamous---by their very "nature". This begs the question "is adultery therefore natural, and hence forgivable?" Will Durant once adressed this issue by noting that many of our current vices were once indispensable virtues in the struggle for survival, and in keeping with this observation, it would seem reasonable to posit the idea that humans havent had enough time to evolve biologically or culturally beyond certain genetic features that have outlived their primal usefulness, and yet continue to stubbornly hang on--despite societal taboos. "Myth of Monogamy" is a book that helps to highlight that struggle without presuming to tell the reader what their ultimate conclusions should be. As such it remains to its end a fairly objective look at a very sensitive subject.

Finally, and gratefully, this book is well written, with generous amounts of humor thrown in to keep the reader's attention, and perhaps to help him or her to maintain a healthy perspective throughout their reading of it---I actually laughed out loud several times, which I cant say is all that common when reading a scientific text.. This is a thoroughly enjoyable read. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Well written, engaging, but with a fundamental oversight
Philip Kitcher again shines as a well informed philosopher of science. This book can be regarded as a sequel to his magnum opus _The Advancement of Science_. It deals with the relativists and antirealists quite well, though does presuppose some familiarity with these debates.

However, I find that Kitcher's new position on the nature of science and its relations to society at large suffers from an apparently glaring oversight. He tells us that those who have a stake in the outcome of scientific research should have a say in how it should proceed, be funded, etc.

Since we have long known (and Kitcher himself is aware of the fact) that the outcome of basic scientific research is unknown, i.e. we do not know what position (if any) it will affect, we cannot realistically adopt Kitcher's suggestion. His proposal is emmently sensible in technology, where the goal is not to know but to change or prevent change. But the history of science shows that the proposal of making basic science sensitive to people's interests _that_ way will not work. Further, it is vague, even if it could be done: how do we determine the effect? Christian conservatives like Philip Johnson would curtail or slow research into evolution because he feels it is socially undermining; biologists and
other scientists (rightly) regard this as distressing. Science *should* puncture illusions, as Kitcher points out happens. On the other hand, if the "say" is simply to be a sort of "gripe session" where people can say their piece to scientists, this is a recipe for squabble, or worse, just ignoring people, which is the (perceived) problem in the management of science now.
(I think actually that the insistence from some that science is alienating because it is undemocratic is wrong, but that's another story.)

One should not read this book, however, without a grasp of some of the issues this review sort of brings up. As another reviewer said it is sort of for the academic. I wish that weren't so: but sometimes we academics have to debate amongst ourselves a bit first, before popularizations come out. Of course this is just some of the same concerns again ... and around we go.

Waving a flag and kissing a baby...
Kitcher oozes reasonableness, and so I reach for my wallet. If the best course of action was always to split the difference between two extremes, then Kitcher would be the Solomon of science policy. Unfortunately, divisions in the real world do not correspond to the poles of philosophical disagreements. This is one for the seminar room, not the corridors of power.

What the world needs now is this book.
I am impressed with Kitcher, actually stunned. This book needs to be read by every politician in office. The fact that our government does in fact function much better than middle east gov's is due to separation of church and state, but now what we need is to really incorporate that idea, especially with a little more truth. The science of life is accepted as Kitcher mentions as irrefutable by all, but the truth of it is jet lag, not really here. I say yes, read this book, to anyone. I want to recommend another book very similar to this but in entertaining format which puts this subject across well, SB 1 or God By Karl Maddox. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

A must read
This is just an excellent book. With questions that all early physics students ask and are usually shunned for asking them. Is the electric field a real entity? What is the difference between a real quantity and a math tool that gives us the right answer. Spactiotemperal locality is covered very well, the mix of physics and philosophy is superb. The last chapter on quantum mechanics could be expanded and perhaps the author can do a seperate book on that topic. This book is a must for all students of physics and philosophy. ... Read more

Book Description

Why have we humans always longed to connect with something larger than ourselves? Even today in our technologically advanced age, more than seventy percent of Americans claim to believe in God. Why, in short, won’t God go away? In this groundbreaking new book, researchers Andrew Newberg and Eugene d’Aquili offer an explanation that is at once profoundly simple and scientifically precise: The religious impulse is rooted in the biology of the brain.

In Why God Won’t Go Away, Newberg and d’Aquili document their pioneering explorations in the field of neurotheology, an emerging discipline dedicated to understanding the complex relationship between spirituality and the brain. Blending cutting-edge science with illuminating insights into the nature of consciousness and spirituality, they bridge faith and reason, mysticism and empirical data. The neurological basis of how the brain identifies the “real” is nothing short of miraculous. This fascinating, eye-opening book dares to explore both the miracle and the biology of our enduring relationship with God. ... Read more

Reviews (57)

Meditations effect on the Brain
This book does not try to prove the existence of God, but what it does is emphasize that there is evidence that the existence of God is at least a possibility. The authors mainly takes a view that humankind can't help but ponder the plausibility of an afterlife. Their studies mainly focus on meditative states of various religions and shows why there is some truth or common theme underlying all religions which is hard to disagree with. Where the authors and I part company however is that he believes that "all roads can lead to Rome", per se, or at least that all roads lead you to the right road.

However, the reader should focus on the neurological aspects which are interesting and where the author's strength lies. The rest is opinion, which they are certainly entitled to. The true beauty of the text is that they are able to at least able to add some physical, logical legitimacy to the notion of deep meditative states and the explanations given by those that have encountered them across various religions. To their credit, they do a decent job of adding some realism to a very controversial subject in the scientific community.

An Important book for our time
This is an outstanding book. Having been brought up in a scientific household, I have long suspected that the prevalence of religion in human history can only be explained by evolutionary theory, i.e., there must be an evolutionary advantage to the brain structures that cause humans to believe in god, in the face of so much contrary evidence. This book does an elegant job of positing just such an advantage, but it also does more. It offers evidence of the precise brain structures that give rise to religious feeling, and makes a good case for how they came into being in the first place. Clearly the book will have its detractors, principally other scientists envying the authors' job of putting their hypothesis together. And it is certainly plausible that some aspects of their supporting evidence may be in need of refinement. In the main, however, they have made a major contribution to resolving one of the central issues of our time, the seeming conflict between science and religion. Moreover, they suggest a moral implication, which is that when people understand the common biological basis of religion, perhaps they will begin to realize the stupidity of religious intolerance. Can anything be more important to the survival of our species?

Exciting subject
I was impressed that subject matter of this nature is gaining more widespread interest in the last few years. It seems there was a real dearth of study on the concepts of religion and the science of the brain. This book dovetails nicely then with a number of great books that have recently hit the market exploring this topic.

Horgan's "Rational Mysticism," Pinker's "The Blank Slate," and even the Dalai Lama's "Art of Happiness" were books I was reading at about the same time as this one. The cumulative effect was very thought-provoking.

This book is again refreshing because it dares to explore the relationship (all too often the struggle) between Religion and Science - concepts as old as humankind itself.

I think a truly free-thinker has to entertain ALL possibilities so as not to become a raving theophobe that excludes possible answers in the name of the deity of Science. Religion has taken its toll in human casualties throughout history, true, but we may well be living in an age that can embrace both without stigma or favouritism to the other?

The research at times appears hit and miss, even inconclusive, but a systematic approach to the world of mysticism is long over-due and for this reason the seminality of the work is to be applauded. Perhaps in time others will stand on the shoulders of this kind of study, taking it further.

A fascinating book well worth the time.

Walking By Faith -- Intrigued By Science
In the epilogue to the paperback edition the authors write, "...Reality happens in the brain, and while our imaging studies do not prove the existence of a higher spiritual plane, they do indicate that to the brain, these states are as real as any other" (p.178). Therein lies the crux of this book. If you are interested in an in-depth explaination of the how, what, where etc., in fairly popular language, this is an excellent choice.

The authors argue neither "for" or "against" the actuality of God or a realm of the spiritual, they merely demonstrate how the findings of neurobiology indicate that we are hard-wired for transcendent experiences. Personally, I believe in a Creator behind, above, beneath, before, around, in, through, and energizing all of Creation, who created me and all of us with the very hard wiring that would instill in us a longing and a capacity to experience the transcendent.

My friend Darrell Johnson, professor at Regent College in Canada, puts it this way: "At the center of the universe is a relationship...It is out of that relationship that you and I were created and redeemed. And it is for that relationship that you and I were created and redeemed" (see his book Experiencing The Trinity). I have found this relationship with the transcendent through the grace and truth that have come to me through the love of Christ. I know others who have comparable but different experiences with the transcendent through other avenues.

The fact that throughout human history, long before the Jesus through whom I have found this connection walked the earth, humans have sought to engage with something greater than oursevles is not necessarily evidence that God exists. And, the apparent fact that our brains "create" the capacity to seek and experience the transcendent is not necessarily evidence that God does not exist.

Those of us who choose to take a spiritual path know better than to depend on science to prove that our experiences are real or that the God we believe in exists. Ultimately, faith is assurance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. As the saints and mystics in many traditions have shown us, it is typically in the unknowing and darkness that the spiritual life most deeply unfolds.

A worthwhile read
Not perfect, but a good read. The authors are on to something here and have done their homework. They present a well thought-out body of theories based on scientific evidence and reason, but while they deeply examine how brain structure and function relate to religious belief and experience, they do not use this as an opportunity to *invalidate* religious belief. Carefully done. ... Read more

Book Description

Introduces the embracing world-concept long sought by scientists, mystics, and sages: an Integral Theory of Everything.

• Explains how modern science has rediscovered the Akashic Field of perennial philosophy.

• Reveals how the universe stores a record of all that is happening and has ever happened on Earth and throughout the cosmos.

• Explores the origins, role, and future of life and consciousness in the universe.

Mystics and sages have long maintained that there exists an interconnecting cosmic field at the roots of reality that conserves and conveys information, a field known as the Akashic record. Recent discoveries in the new field of vacuum physics now show that this Akashic field is real and has its equivalent in the zero-point field that underlies space itself. This field consists of a subtle sea of fluctuating energies from which all things arise: atoms and galaxies, stars and planets, living beings, and even consciousness. This zero-point Akashic-field--or "A-field"-- is not only the original source of all things that arise in time and space; it is also the constant and enduring memory of the universe. It holds the record of all that ever happened in life, on Earth, and in the cosmos and relates it to all that is yet to happen.

Scientist and philosopher Ervin Laszlo conveys the essential element of this vision of the "informed universe" in language that is accessible and clear. The informed universe lends credence to our deepest intuitions of the oneness of life and the whole of creation. We discover that, as philosopher William James stated, "we are like islands in the sea, separate on the surface but connected in the deep." ... Read more

Book Description

Uniting staunchly opposed viewpoints into one groundbreaking new perspective, this startling and timely work illuminates the complete interdependence between Biblical reports and modern scientific discoveries. Comparing key events from the Old Testament with the most current findings of biochemists, paleontologists, and physicists, Gerald Schroeder resolves age-old debates about miracles, the origins of the universe, the first life on Earth, and the meaning of free will. Through thoughtful, engaging discussions--even using Einstein's theory of relativity to validate a six-day creation timetable--The Science of God ultimately proves both Darwin and creationists right. ... Read more

Reviews (78)

The Diference between faith and reason
One of the most interesting facts of this book, in my experience, is people's reactions after reading it. Religous christians attack it for being unorthodox. Religous Jews tend to want to debate its points. Why?

Because Schroeder, a religous Jew, accepts the value of the many supportive texts that Jews read along with the bible. Christians reject these texts and look mainly to the texts obvious meaning. That is unfortunate.

Imagine, a 12th century Jewish comentator described the "big bang" in almost exactly the way a high school physiscs teacher would in 2001?. The writers of the talmud saw each stage of creation "evolving" into the next and discussed whether 6 days for the divine was the same as 6 days as they experience it. For me, such facts are mind blowing.

I urge anyone interested in understanding a Jewish approach to the world to read this text. We believe people were created with reason exactly so we could probe the mysterys of creation and help in the divine plan. Along with everything else, Schroeder demonstrates that much current science was prefigured by religous scholars who used holy texts as their source.

If you want to understand why faith and reason are not in conflict, I urge you to read this book.

An amazing, thought-provoking read
I never realized that a book dealing with science could be so poetic and intriguing. Yet Dr. Schroeder has written such a book: a real page turner. Using information from the fields of micro-biology to quantum mechanics to cosmology, as well as traditional biblical commentaries from past centuries, Dr. Schroeder brings amazing and convincing data to support his thesis that science and the Bible are not only compatible but the study of one is enhanced by the study of the other. The knowledge brought from both do not compete or contradict, but converge.

Without being in any way dogmatic or preachy, Dr. Schroeder shows how biblical texts have within them the hidden meanings known in ancient times which we can only now more completely understand with the help of science. One cannot come away from this book without a deeper appreciation of the intricacies of of the world we live in from the smallest particle to the scope of the expanding universe. The "how" that we can learn from science is absolutely mind-boggling. Dr. Schroeder helps synthesize this with the no less intriguing "why" that we can gain form biblical sources.

Anyone interested in such diverse topics as what kind of statistical possibilities are necessary for random evolution, the naturalness of miracles, and what kind of god allows the good to suffer will appreciate this awesome book.

Science of the Goofed!
The most charitable comment I can give to this book is that "it is a journey". More specifically, it is a torturing journey. The author tends to mix up very simple scientific methodology and metaphysical philosophy. Often, Gerald seems to look like an armchair philosopher and jumps to unsupported onotological conclusion. One may find plenty philosophical problems in the analysis, arguments from personal credulity and incredulity. The arguments are not even close to being convincing. I would not recommend this chauvinistic exegesis to anyone would like to 'find things out'.

Thinking outside the box,-- a seminal effort worth a read
As a scientist in an ongoing search for truth, I have been disappointed by ham-handed efforts of the creation crowd to cling to extreme minority viewpoints of credentialed scientists from diverse fields of science that would collectively be required to support a *literal* interpretation of Genesis. Similarly, I have been mystified by scientists who reflexively dismiss the idea of some kind of intelligent design outright by way of circular reasoning, arguing that since intelligent design can never be disproven, it is not scientific and thus could not be truth, since only science can properly assess truth.

It is hard to understate, then, the moxie of Schroeder's innovative attempt to reconcile with Genesis scientifically DOMINANT paradigms (i.e. universe many billions of years old, terrestrial life hundreds of millions of years old, species variation to extensive degree by alteration or differential expression of genes). Schroeder introduces his intent thus: "In the following chapters, I attempt to avoid the subjective tendency of bending Bible to match science or science to match Bible." (softcover p.19) Whether he was successful or not is in the eye of the reader, but the explicit intent is refreshing.

This book, then, would be of particular interest to two groups:

1) Scientists who wonder how their mainstream conclusions could possibly be reconciled with ancient accounts of creation from the Hebrew Torah.

2) Jews and Christians who are discomforted by the apparent incompatability between the text of their faith versus the observed truth about our planet and universe as collected and interpreted by the VAST MAJORITY of professional scientists.

The prime example of this reconciliation is Schroeder's attempt to fit a 15-billion year old universe with the six-day account of Genesis by arguing that: 1) from a collective, "Creation-wide" perspective, time advanced differently in the primordial hot universe (time dilation), and 2) that "days" in the ancient hebrew text only adopted the terrestrial perception (instead of universal perception) of time passage upon the creation of man late in the "creation" process.

Later chapters address other issues, such as the likelihood that genetic variation by mutation at rates observed in today's laboratories (or even much greater rates) were sufficient to generate the speciation evidenced in the fossil record within the abbreviated time-frame indicated by the fossil record itself.

By virtue of his theological background and professional training (MIT-trained physicist), Schroeder is uniquely qualified to attempt such a reconciliation. However, as evidenced by several previous reviews, this training is not enough-- at least not enough to win over skeptical scientists. It may be that the sheer enormity of burgeoning data within each of the fields (molecular genetics, population genetics, paleontology, geology, as well as cosmology and particle physics) is simply too great for one individual to incorporate into solid perspective within *each and every* discipline to present an airtight case on all scientific fronts.

Previous reviewers have asserted gross inaccuracies with the science presented in this book. As a clinical neuroscientist, I am not in a position to assault or defend Schroeder on evolution, genetics, particle physics or cosmology. However, I would argue against throwing the baby out with the bathwater. For example, the latest data on cosmic background radiation indicates an accelerating expansion of the universe, and an approximate age of 13.7 billion years instead of the 15 Schroeder cites. Must this nullify the core of his whole premise? Maybe so, but not enough to discard this book out of hand.

The strength of this work is in its innovation. Schroeder rightly notes that the Bible is silent on many subjects, and actually leaves room for many observed phenomena, such as speciation and niche-filling by DNA alteration. It is only the rigid mindset of many religious individuals that closes this possibility.

The weaknesses of the book lie in the specific physical science undergirding Schroeder's arguments, as well as in his over-reliance on conjecture. I thus was left with the same mind-set I had before I read the book, namely that the simplest explanation for why the Genesis account is not borne out by the findings of mainstream science is that Genesis was inspired and spoke great *truth* on a metaphorical and didactic level-- but not at a literal level.

On the whole, I found it a fascinating read. In accord with previous reviewers, I liken this effort to a Model-T. Crude in the light of today, yet innovative at its introduction, with the potential to be honed with further investment in this line of reasoning. This whole line of inquiry would benefit enormously by some kind of COLLABORATIVE work, with each chapter penned by a bona-fide expert in that field of the physical sciences, where this expert can build a much more solid case in conjunction with the totality of data in his or her field. I could even envision anonymous contribution, inasmuch as publicly arguing for some kind of intelligent designer is probably not conducive to garnering tenure in the Paleontology Department of Secular State University....

Great subject to attempt to tackle
Not one of his best books. I thought the hidden face of God was much better for the money. Schroeder sympathizes with the intelligent design movement and makes a compelling case for his cause from a theological standpoint. For Schroeder, the mind can be converted into energy and energy can then be converted into mass. This is the next great step in physics and is just a few years before discovering the path for this venture. However there is much speculation and little evidence to back up the claims presented. The book is often lax on supportive evidence and testimony.

Schroeder believes physics will drastically change in the following years but his revolutionary view ends with that subject. Schroeder seems to blindly accept many other avenues without fail, such as geological dating, human evolution, and even embryology. Subjects which have much more subjective and questions marks. Further Schroeder's rational for doing so is not much more than simply accepting the status quo. His whole argument, for instance, against YEC and Noah's flood revolve around dated writing tablets. Schroeder argues the flood could not have altered dating schemes because certain writing pieces are dated at 10,000ys old. This is simply flawed reasoning and can be explain by skewed dates produced because of the flood.

There were several chapters were Schroeder went off topic and started going on some tirade. The chapter on free will was interesting but I expected more. His chapter on randomness and how mathematically evolution has many problems was very detailed. I thought that his take on Adam being the first human with a soul was an interesting way of interpreting genesis. A tough topic to cover, but Schroeder does ok. ... Read more

Book Description

Book Description

The national best seller--an unparalleled collection of timeless writings by one of the most beloved and original thinkers of the twentieth century.

The Pleasure of Finding Things Out is a magnificent treasury of the best short works of Richard Feynman, from interviews and speeches to lectures and printed articles. A sweeping, wide-ranging collection, it presents an intimate and fascinating view of a life in science-a life like no other.

From Feynman's ruminations on science in our culture to his Nobel Prize acceptance speech, this book will fascinate anyone interested in the world of ideas. Newcomers to Feynman will be moved by his wit and his deep understanding of the natural world and of the human experience; longtime admirers will discover many treasures available nowhere else. ... Read more

Reviews (37)

Brilliance and charm: Feynman as a teacher
I very much enjoyed this entertaining and delightful collection of lectures, talks and essays by the world-renown and sorely missed Professor Feynman, Nobel Prize winning physicist, idiosyncratic genius and one of the great men of the twentieth century.

I particularly enjoyed the subtle yet unmistakable way he scolded the people at NASA for putting their political butts before the safety of the space program they were managing in his famous "Minority Report to the Space Shuttle Challenger Inquiry." But the chapter that really sold me on Richard P. Feynman, boy wonder grown up, was "It's as Simple as One, Two, Three" in which he explores the ability to do two things at once through an experiment with counting. Such a delight he took in learning as a kid from his friend Bernie that we sometimes think in pictures and not in words. And then the further delight he took in learning that some people count with their inner voice (himself), and others (his friend John Tukey) count by visualization.

I was also loved the chapter, "What is Science?", a talk to science teachers in which Feynman demonstrates that the real difference between science and other ways of "knowing" (e.g., religion) is the ability to doubt. In science we learn, as Feyman said he himself learned, to live with doubt. But in the religious way of "knowing" doubt is intolerable. Feynman gives an evolutionary illustration of why doubt is essential. He begins with the "intelligent" animals "which can learn something from experience (like cats)." At this stage, he says, each animal learned "from its own experience." Then came some animals that could learn more rapidly and from the experience of others by watching. Then came something "completely new...things could be learned by one animal, passed on to another, and another, fast enough that...[the knowledge] was not lost to the race...," and could be passed on to a new generation.

Now, let's stop for a moment. What a great teacher does--and here and elsewhere Feynman proves himself to be a great teacher (although he said he doubted that!)--is to guide the student just enough so that the student arrives at or anticipates the point of the lesson before the teacher gets there. What is the punch line of this lesson for the science teachers? Namely this: with the passing of knowledge from one generation to the next it became also possible to pass on false knowledge or "mistaken ideas." Feynman calls this a "disease."

"Then a way of avoiding the disease was discovered. This is to doubt that what is being passed from the past is in fact true, and to try to find out ab initio, again from experience, what the situation is, rather than trusting the experience of the past..."

In other words, don't blindly accept the word of authority. Test it for yourself! And this is what science does. It tests and it tests again, and it doubts and it doubts--always.

I loved this because one of my dictums is "always guide the experts"--the lawyer, the doctor, the insurance adjustor, et al. Always guide them because, although they are the experts, you're the one who really cares. To this I can now add that you should also doubt the experts because even though they are experts they can be wrong. And, as Feynman showed in his report on the Challenge disaster, they can be wrong for reasons that have nothing to do with their expertise.

I also liked the commencement address he gave at Caltech on "Cargo Cult Science...and How to Not Fool Yourself." We fool ourselves a lot. The managers at NASA fooled themselves; what's their names of cold fusion delusion fame fooled themselves. Feynman has noted that he has fooled himself. Science, he avers, is a tool to help us to not fool ourselves. He is profoundly right. Without science we would go on fooling ourselves with all sorts of mumbo-jumbo, "revealed" religiosity and scientific-seeming stuff such as Rhine's ESP experiments some years ago at Duke, the entire litany of New Age pseudobabblese, and--yes!--such stuff as the amazing Cargo Cult Science in which some Pacific Islanders, in an attempt to attract the big birds of the sky with their cargoes of goodies, built "nests," that is, landing fields with empty cargo boxes, and faux towers, etc. in the hope that the planes flying overhead would see them and land on their island. Feynman has taken this as an example of pseudoscience, that is, behavior in the form of science without the substance of science, without the "integrity" of science.

The integrity of science, Feynman advised the graduates, demands that all the information about the experiment be given, even detrimental facts. Feynman contrasts this idea with that of advertizing in which only that which makes the product look good is given.

When reading this book it helps to imagine that one is listening to Feynman speak. The text includes repetitions and the omissions which he no doubt conveyed with his voice, expression or gesture. When one reads him this way, some of Feynman's endearing charm and the gentle, self-effacing humor for which he is famous comes through. Here's a joke from pages 206-207: He is at Esalen in a hot bath with another man and a girl. The man begins to massage the girl's foot. He feels something in her big toe. He asks his instructor, "Is that the pituitary?" The girl says, "No, that's not the way it feels." Feynman injects, "You're a hell of a long way from the pituitary, man." And they both look at him. "I had blown my cover, you see--and she said, It's reflexology. So I closed my eyes and appeared to be meditating." Yes, Feynman is a long way from reflexology.

Find out
Anyone who became familiar with Richard Feynman from his hugely popular memoirs What Do You Care What Other People Think, and Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman will find The Pleasure of Finding Things Out an intermediate step between those books and the dense scientific texts behind his Nobel Prize and reputation as one of the 20th century's great minds.

This book is not meant to be entertaining, but I suppose a glimpse into Mr. Feynman's mind cannot help but be entertaining, even when it is a series of lectures based entirely on science. Here he talks about what he calls the "thrill" of boldly finding out what no man knew before, on subjects ranging from the discovery of the reasons behind the crash of the space shuttle Challenger to the atomic bomb project at Los Alamos and from the role of science in society to his Nobel acceptance speech. And while it is not specifically written with the non-scientist in mind, a strong background in science is not necessary to understand and enjoy the wind-ranging collection of philosophies, musings, and remarks collected on these pages.

scraping the bottom of the feynmaniana barrel
This book is yet another posthumous compilation of Feynman's musings. With each successive book - starting from the wonderful transcriptions of Leighton, Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman - they have been declining in quality for years. Well, this is a hodgepodge of paper scraps and even raw oral interviews that have been thrown together to exploit just about the last drop of these kinds of things, and I can say that I don't think the process should continue.

There are some amusing things in this book and some interesting details, but there really isn't anything special except for the fact that Feynman enjoys the personality cult associated with a zany physics genius. He was an original character and, in physics, a truly great thinker. But that doesn't make every last little thing that he ever said or scribbled down interesting, except to uncritical devotees who live with the fantasy that everything he said was better than worthwhile. Indeed, if you know about something in great depth he writes (well talks) about, his views appear as superficial as the rest of non-specialists on the subjects. Where he is truly interesting in on physics, mathematics, and science - and the overwhelming majority of what he produced on those subjects is already available.

I would not recommend this book, except as a source of Feynman trivia if that is your bag. Indeed, I had heard most of these things before - either in films about the man or from his earlier writings. As such, that makes this book the crassest attempt to commercially exploit the legacy of this great man yet again. If such a thing were possible, the editor should be ashamed.

different but in a way too different
I found this book to be complicating as it jumped from subject to subject. It wasnt really that informative. It gave out the authors personal information and feelings rather than actual facts. I guess it was something that one with the same mind frame as him could relate to. I had to read this book for school. I got nothing out of it, except the ignorant and close minded thoughts of the author. The grammar was also terrribe. It wasnt written in a way that one could follow. I had to use my imagination to kind of figure out the authors feelings of whatever he was talking. It was written in a way as if he was actually talking to in person rather than through a book. But I do have to say that it was different. I guess if you are into and study science it is the book for you. But its not really a book to learn from. Instead its more like a book to say "Oh! I feel that way too." To conclude, I dont know what to say to those of you who are into science, but to those of you who do not have much of an interest in it i would reccomend that you choose another book.

A grab-bag of a book.
This book is a hodge-podge of personal and professional reminiscenses and interviews. Feynmann tells stories about building the A-bomb, his Dad, teaching his children, curiosity, learning, "the big picture," and how he learned that different minds work differently. I enjoyed parts of the book, particularly the parts most related to the book's title, like how his Father taught him scientific curiosity.

It is obvious that a lot of people have respect for Feynman, and I don't doubt he earned it. But as a story-teller, while he is sometimes interesting, frankly a lot of the time he is rather incoherent. The interviews are especially inarticulate, fumbling for words. I guess you had to be there. Elsewhere, Feynman comes across as another famous scientist piddling in other fields in his spare time. As an educator he is interesting, though not always fu