Book Description

Napoleon's Buttons is the fascinating account of seventeen groups of molecules that have greatly influenced the course of history. These molecules provided the impetus for early exploration, and made possible the voyages of discovery that ensued. The molecules resulted in grand feats of engineering and spurred advances in medicine and law; they determined what we now eat, drink, and wear. A change as small as the position of an atom can lead to enormous alterations in the properties of a substance-which, in turn, can result in great historical shifts.

With lively prose and an eye for colorful and unusual details, Le Couteur and Burreson offer a novel way to understand the shaping of civilization and the workings of our contemporary world. ... Read more

Book Description

Reviews (44)

Does This Book Really Answer The Question
To me the title of this book suggested a treatise essentially on the psychology of belief systems. Indeed we are presented with quite interesting material in this regard. Mr. Schermer uses the fields of psychology, evolutionary biology, sociology, philosophy, and anthropology, amongst others, to help explain belief systems.

While I found that almost all the book held my interest, it seemed somewhat disjointed. Some of the material is also quite controversial. While such matters only serve to entertain me, others may get offended - Christians may take umbrage at having their beliefs repeatedly referred to as "myths".

The book presents intriguing survey results on why people believe in God. What is most fascinating is that respondents felt that other people believe in God for reasons that differ considerably from their own. Shermer moves on into a discussion of evolutionary biology and a "belief module" (more controversy). Then, surprisingly, we move into a section concerned with traditional philosophical arguments (primarily those of Thomas Aquinas) for belief in God. When you get right down to it, no one embraces religious belief purely on the basis of philosophical arguments. Creationists will be offended by a section on their beliefs. A chunk of the book is given to the Indian Ghost Dance of the 1890s, and we read a discussion on a mathematical refutation of the recent best seller The Bible Code. Good stuff, but its like reading a collection of essays that are not often obviously related to each other.

The final chapter had me scratching my head the most. It's a section discussing the controversy surrounding Stephen Jay Gould's theories of evolution regarding necessity/contingency/chance. While poring through this I kept wondering what it had to do with religion. My question was never answered satisfactorily. Shermer forces this subject into a paean to the wonders of living in a contingent universe. He states that his abandonment of religion allows him to bask in the beauty of our magnificent universe. I get annoyed with concept that if you are religious you can't appreciate science and nature. Not every religious believer is constrained by fundamentalist young earth/intelligent design theories. I am an agnostic who was brought up a Catholic. My intense curiosity and admiration of nature was as strong when I was a believer as it is as a non-believer today.

Kudos for Shermer
I have just been introduced to Shermer's work. I think he is a beaon for clear and critical thinking. We need more like him in this world ruled by religious bigotry and irrationalism.

Two books in one...and both them very thought provoking
This is one of those excellent examples of getting something extra in the bargain.
For, when one buys this book, not only do they get a very thorough treatment of the psychological, social and historical factors which incline humans toward religion but they also get Mr. Shermer's own unique take on the matter in the form of his chapter 10 which suggests that we accept the miracle of humanity's chance existence and our own by trying to make the best of it.
If you expect by skepticism, either a cynical distance or dispassion, you will find yourself pleasantly surprised with Mr. Shermer's genuine command of the multiple disciplines he must - of needs - rely upon in building his thesis that religion is the simple byproduct of human behavior and history.
The most notable characteristic about these books is usually the invariable Rorshach quality in which the author reveals himself in his views on religion and the almighty. To the careful observer sometimes one can even see the seeds of childhood disfunction in the author's projected worldview.
Again fortunately, such is not the case here where Shermer not shows an appreciation for the outside view of religion but rather also its own subtle capacity to beauty and inspiration. Indeed, this subtle beauty informs Mr. Shermer's world view.
Don't get me wrong, if you begin this book from the vantage point of one religious world view, I would offer that that's where you'll end up. That being said, you'll arrive there a little better informed.

An excellent analysis of a puzzling topic
Why people believe in the things they believe has always interested me. Shermer, who is the head of the Skeptics Society, takes a deep look into questions of "faith" and reason, and discovers answers that may surprise you.

Personally, I found this book both lucid and elegantly written... almost reminded me of Sagan. (And that is a huge complement coming from me.)

While Shermer treads lightly on religion, his message remains clear.

I highly recommend this book to anybody who either has an open mind, or wants one.

Really disappointing.
I'm a great fan of Shermer's "Why People Believe Weird Things," so it's disheartening to have to review this book negatively. Sometimes the tone is . . . genuflectional? He does address truly novel ideas, citing Tooby & Cosmides and others, for evolutionary hypotheses for the universality of religious belief, but no unified view emerges in the book. Also, there is a completely superfluous chapter defending Stephen Gould, whom he declares as his "friend" at the beginning of the book, which reveals a probable bias: Gould hates adaptive/evolutionary points of view on social matters. No wonder Shermer drops the issue like a hot potato in this book. ... Read more

Book Description

The first collection of essays from renowned scientist and best-selling author Richard Dawkins is an enthusiastic declaration, a testament to the power of rigorous scientific examination to reveal the wonders of the world. In these essays Dawkins revisits the meme, the unit of cultural information that he named and wrote about in his groundbreaking work The Selfish Gene. Here also are moving tributes to friends and colleagues, including a eulogy for novelist Douglas Adams, author of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy; correspondence with the evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould; and visits with the famed paleoanthropologists Richard and Maeve Leakey at their African wildlife preserve. The collection ends with a vivid note to Dawkins's ten-year-old daughter, reminding her to remain curious, to ask questions, and to live the examined life. ... Read more

Reviews (30)

Darwin's Dangerous Disciple strikes again!
To some, Richard Dawkins is threatening. His phrases pry open shut minds. His words bend and flex rigid thinking. His ideas trash dearly held dogmas. And, of course, he idolizes The Devil's Chaplain - Charles Darwin [the title is from a letter of Darwin's]. He performs all these feats with a graceful style - one which anyone writing science should study. This collection is comprised of letters, book reviews and even eulogies - an unusual vehicle for espousing the cause of rational thinking. If much of his writing seems intense, it's because he recognizes his role in waging an uphill battle against "established truths", no matter how false they prove. To show the validity of truth over myth requires a direct approach.

Dawkins recognizes that people abhor being called animals. The continuity of life, one of the major themes in this collection, remains an indisputable fact, he stresses. This series reinforces Dawkins' attempts to make us aware that we are part of Nature. He is always witty, using his sound scientific basis and rationale to keep us informed. Science, in his view, must not be eroded by baseless tradition nor false dogmas. The goal of living, he argues, is the understanding of life itself. Religion and philosophy have failed abysmally, the realm of science should be given its opportunity. It's a broad view, sustained by an ability to grasp it firmly. Better yet, for us, it's presented here with verve and dedication.

Segregated into [lucky!] seven sections, each addressing a general theme. He covers many topics in this anthology - evolution, of course, but medicine, genetically modified foods [many foods are hybrids resulting from genetic manipulation], jury trials, intellectual heresies, and even government policies are included. The arrangement presents no difficulty - in fact, each offering might be chosen at random without losing any impact. Selecting a favourite is an arduous task [although it promotes re-reading] but the review of Sokal and Bricmont's "Fashionable Nonsense" ranks very high. The review demonstrates Dawkins' many talents, from insight to incisiveness. Few essayists provide the imagery he can attain to explain an idea.

There are those, particularly adherents of the idea that science lacks morality, who see scientists as cold and distant. Dawkins shows how false this idea is with his laudatory comments on John Diamond, Douglas Adams and William Hamilton. He even extends an olive branch to his academic opponent, the late Stephen J. Gould. As fellow evolutionists, Dawkins and Gould forged a rapport against the rants and duplicities of the Christian creationists. It requires a broad mind to take such steps, and narrowness isn't among Dawkins' blemishes. He's a feeling human being and a tireless campaigner. We would all do well to heed and emulate him. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

A response to middle America
I'd just like to briefly respond to the "reader from middle America" who I feel is over-reacting a little to Dawkins' book.

Dawkins' main target is not what I'd call 'traditional theists', but that group of what's usually labelled "fundamentalists" who are trying to suppress science teaching and replace it with their bogus "creation science".

I know plenty of intelligent people who believe in a God. I don't know any that believe in the literal "created in six days" word of the bible or who think a belief in evolution is absolutely antithetical to religious belief.

The majority of denominations - and thus Christians - don't subscribe to the fundamentalist view (don't take my word for it, do a quick search). In fact most explicitly disavow a literal reading of Genesis. So it's entirely wrong for "middle America" to speak of creationism as a "majority" belief.

Dawkins does take a fairly militant stance. Although I share his views, I initially felt he was being a bit hard on those he disagrees with. However when I read of people seeking to have creationism ranked as "science" in schools at the exclusion of real science I think he's right to get stuck into them.

Dawkin's target isn't "middle America" or the majority of believers for whom belief in God and science can coexist. His target is what we call in Australia "the loudmouth ratbag fringe" who want to foist their view on others. And he's got me on side.

Incidentally, his broadside at postmodernism is just as much fun to read as his views on 'creation science'.

Evolution is the art of the developable
This selection of Richard Dawkins' essays is an absolute delight and a clear-cut illustration of the author's strong anti-tradition, anti-authority and anti-revelation opinions.
It deals with very important problems like the real nature of natural selection, its cruelty and blindness to suffering.
The author's life goal is nothing less than a combat with the cosmic progress and its clumsy, blundering waste, and that with one of the products of evolution itself: our brain.
Crucial is his war of words with the late S.J. Gould about the question if evolution is progressive. No, for Gould. Yes, for Dawkins. For the latter, progress cannot be defined in terms of complexity (Gould), but rather by the accumulation of features contributing to adaptation. I believe now that Dawkins is right.
Other very important issues are his battle with the creationists, his lucid pro-opinion on genetically modified food, his brilliant refutation of genetic determinism via the blueprint/recipe distinction or his necessary virulent anti-religious viewpoint (religion is a virus of the mind and the most inflammatory enemy-libelled device in history).
I have only a few remarks.
Richard Dawkins writes that 'Every time we use contraception we demonstrate that brains can thwart Darwinian designs'.
But, ceteris paribus, the outcome here is a certain defeat. The genes of those who use contraception will be overrun by those who don't. Contraception is itself a component of the Darwinian design.
In his essay 'What is true', he misses some important points.
As Tarski said, truth = accordance with the facts or processes.
Popper's importance was mainly the refutation of inductivism and its demand for infinite corroborations. As long as a theory has not been falsified we can continue to work with it. Popper's proposition constitutes a progress and time gain of lightyears for science as a whole. Also testing remains the cornerstone of scientific research.
Presenting Popper as a truth-heckler seems to me a little overdone, when we don't know 90% of the matter in the universe, perhaps 1 % of the existing virusses; when 'I' doesn't exist (V. Ramachandran) or when 'is' is an illusion (L. Smolin). As Popper said, the more we know, the more we see how little we know.
Richard Dawkins' essays are thought-provoking analyses and comments, written by a splendid humanist and a superb free mind.
This book is a must for all those interested in the fate of mankind.

A MANUAL TO THE TRUTH REVEALED BY SCIENCE
Dawkins is a well known biologist whose "The Selfish Gene" revolutionized the way we think (or ought to think) about evolution.

In this book, he puts together a collection of essays which, in the essence, is a guidebook to non-scientists to debunking pseudo-science. He does so in a variety of ways:
1. He demonstrates how complex physics concepts are used in literature to seem more scientific.
2. He shows how creationists seek legitimacy in the public eye with scientific sounding ideas like "intelligent design" and others which are nothing more than pseudo-science. He also offers ideas on how to deal with them.
3. He points out, in an open letter to his daughter, how to know what is truth and what isn't, what are good and bad reasons to believe something.
4. He recommends a number of follow up readings in his book reviews. These are mainly on Stephen Jay Gould and Peter Medawar, two other famed biologists who write for the general public.

The essence of the book is reflected, I believe, in the last essay, in which he makes the point that evidence is the only way to truth and knowledge, and the basis of science. He shows that evidence is a better reason to believe something than its three foes: authority, revelation and tradition.

I highly recommend this book to anyone looking for intelligent arguments and thoughts on a wide variety of subjects, all related to science, its importance and its usage (or lack thereof) in society.

In Defense of the Scientific Method
If you only read one book by Professor Richard Dawkins, I recommend The Selfish Gene. That book is a remarkable tour de force covering the latest thinking about how evolution really works by taking into account our understanding of genetic qualities in reinforcing the evolutionary struggle of the survival of the fittest.

By contrast, A Devil's Chaplain is a book that will appeal primarily to people who have read several books by Professor Dawkins and would like to know more about him as a person and his views outside of neo-Darwinism.

If you have not read anything by Professor Dawkins, I recommend you skip this book unless you have a thorough understanding of the latest evolutionary theories. Much of the book won't make sense to you otherwise.

A Devil's Chaplain is a series of essays (some published before and some not), laments, eulogies and a letter to his daughter. From these materials, you can learn more about how Professor Dawkins sees his colleagues, those who oppose evolutionary teachings, postmodernists, and his personal views on religious beliefs and "alternative" medicine. Much of what he says will not surprise you. As a scientist, he favors the scientific method and is rationally skeptical of anything that cannot be proven by this method. He is also annoyed by a society that grants prominent opportunities to share views that are not proven by scientific methods. As a result, he is also an atheist . . . but one who draws great joy from considering the world around him and the methods by which it has been created.

Many people think of atheists as gloomy people, or people without much emotion. Professor Dawkins is neither. His loving descriptions of relations with his colleagues, rivals and mentors show just the opposite. His concern for using scientific methods is obviously also based on a desire to help people live better lives.

Catholics may find the book a little annoying in that Professor Dawkins likes to challenge some of the "faith"-based beliefs that that religion espouses.

As I finished the book, I found that I was most attracted to the advanced speculations that Professor Dawkins used in his book that speak directly to evolutionary studies. I especially recommend the essay, "Son of Moore's Law," where he describes the timing of when individual genomes will be economically affordable and how that will influence health and medical treatments. I was also drawn to the essays that describe his optimistic belief that we can escape our evolutionary heritage and evolve into people who produce the best possible future for all.

There's much food for thought here. I doubt if any religious believers will be undone by his arguments. I also doubt that he will convert any people who believe in the literal creation as described in the Bible to change their views.

Ultimately, I was left wondering how other prominent scientists bridge the gap between their scientific methods and having a rich religious life.

I graded the book down one star because the editor presumes the reader has a little too much familiarity with the leading lines of thought about evolution. The book could have used more footnotes to explain the background of the points Professor Dawkins is making for those of us who are not evolutionary biologists . . . but simply like to read books about the subject. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Excellent, and controversial, critique of neuroscience
Undoubtedly this book contains both excellence in terms of its review thoroughness and controversey by virtue of its conclusions. It is quite clear from the beginning that Hacker's philosophical stance drives most of the conceptual critique in the book. It is a complicated book, given the vast variety of themes and attendant analyses, and a short review will do it little justice. However, Hacker is a later Wittgensteinian, and to appreciate most of the philosophical input the reader should have reasonable knowledge of the contrast between early and later Wittgenstein, and what exactly characterises the core components of the latter.

The primary criticism leveled at neuroscience is that it is a conceptual shambles due to repeatedly confusing functions of 'selves' with functions of organs (the brain of course). Neursoscience is identified with Cartesian dualism by clumsily shifting talk of properties of persons to talk of brain phenomena and assuming them equivalent. The anvil upon which neuroscience is being philosophically temepered is termed the mereological principle (or fallacy - and you can buy the book for an explanation).

Part of the criticism echoes Wittgenstein's 'if a lion could talk we wouldn't understand him', and most significantly recalls previous critiques of private langage arguments (with a nod to Kripke). It turns out, according to Bennet and Hacker, that neuroscience has been secretly keeping private mental objects alive - presumably in ignorance of philosophical canons.

The book concludes with a well argued and welcome broadside against Dennett's intentional stance (a sacred tenet among cognitve neuroscientists) and, unfortunately, a more toothless critique of Searle on intentionality.

Is this a good book? As an exercise in conceptual analysis this is an excellent text to study - and disagree with. However, implicit in the text is a philosophical backcloth that will not be accessible to many readers outside philosophy (e.g. the presentation of neuroscientific concepts as neo-platonic). It is an immensely scholarly work, but personally I believe that readers with an informed understanding of Wittgenstein will follow the threads more easily than others. Nevertheless, I heartily recommend it.

A conceptual handbook for both students and researchers
Philosophical Foundations Of Neuroscience is the collaboration and brainchild of both neuroscientist M. R. Bennett (Professor of Physiology and University Chair, University of Sydney) and philosopher P. M. S. Hacker (Fellow of St. John's College, Oxford, England), surveying numerous theories including those of Blakemore, Crick, Damasio, Edelman, Gazzniga, Weiskrantz, and others. Written as a conceptual handbook for both students and researchers, Philosophical Foundations Of Neuroscience is a scholarly, college-level text covering the history of this intersection between disciplines, cognitive powers, emotion, conscious experience, reductionism and more. Philosophical Foundations Of Neuroscience is highly recommended as an excellent general foundation resource for academic Philosophy collections and reading lists. ... Read more

Book Description

Looking into the face of our alleged ape ancestor, popular Christian apologist Hank Hanegraaff dissects and debunks the astonishingly weak arguments for the evolutionary theory, revealing it as nothing more than a "fairy tale for grown-ups."The author uses his own Memory Dynamics to make it easy for Christians to speak intelligently about evolution and speak persuasively about the Creator. ... Read more

Reviews (59)

The FACTS in your FACE
Hank Hanegraaff deserves an award for putting together an excellent and memorable addition to the many books which reveal the farcical nature of evolutionary theory. As I have followed the Creation/Evolution debate in-depth and have even written my own book on the subject, I think I am qualified to say that, although much of Hanks information is not new, his approach and style which aids people in memorizing the facts is. Although it is commonplace for evolutionists and other "believers" to ad hominem attack people who differ with them on the scientific evidence, Hank provides clear evidence from both evolutionist and creationist scientists that evolution is a theory in serious factual crisis (as the title of one evolutionist's book "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis" points out). It is easy for some with biased and ulterior motives to ad hominem attack Hank by saying he quotes authorities out of context or quotes "irresponsible" statements by scientists.

However, instead of merely making unsubstantiated assertions, I decided to actually CHECK the authorities Hank quoted. My findings? Out of 64 quoted authorities surveyed, 36 were secondary sources (evolutionists quoted in creationist material), and 28 were primary sources (actual evolutionists quoted in their material). From my own personal library, I was only able to check 23 of the 64 quotations. Out of the 23 quotes checked NOT ONE WAS OUT OF CONTEXT OR MISREPRESENTED IN ANY WAY. This includes 8 primary creationist sources, 10 primary evolutionist sources, and 5 secondary evolutionist sources. It was actually getting tiresome to keep checking the quotes, since every one was turning up 100% accurate in detail and contextual content. This is what factual evidence shows, and I challenge any HONEST person to go even further than I have and find anything different. And how exactly does one judge a statement by a non-creationist scientist as "irresponsible"? Simply because it may go against the grain of established evolutionary dogma? That seems like wishful thinking at best, and self-serving ideological bias at worst.

Once the "smoke and mirrors" of pro-evolutionary speculators using ad hoc rescues is dismissed, we find that Hank provides an excellent way to remember the fallacies of this science fiction pretending to be pure scientific knowledge. He employs the acronym FACE, which means Fossil Follies, Ape-Men Fiction, Frauds, and Fantasy, Chance, and Empirical science.

From the Fossil follies section, we learn that the fossil record is indeed "an embarrassment to evolutionists," so much so that new and innovative theories of punctuated equilibrium had to be invented to explain away the very real gaps in the record, gaps which should not be there according to Darwin's own theory (pp. 33, 42-44). Some have argued that there are "intermediates," and yet after so many millions of years of alleged evolutionary change, we only have about "two dozen" examples. That makes little sense, and the evidence from even some evolutionists shows that how one views a "transitional" form can be very subjective.

In the section on the Ape-Men and the fictions and frauds, Hank provides substantial evidence of the mishaps and mistakes science has made in an attempt to find and categorize the "missing" evolutionary link between homo sapiens and his supposed ancestors like Nebraska Man, Java Man, Piltdown Man, and Peking Man. All of these were either outright frauds, misinterpretations of data, or serious cover-ups with deception in mind. I would have liked to have seen information on Donald Johanson's "Lucy" and other australopithicines in this chapter since they are but more examples of scientists forcing evolutionary interpretations on the evidence; another example of what Hank seems to be pointing at.

In the third letter of the acronym FACE we find Hank explaining one of the pillars of evolutionary theory, which is time mixing with "Chance." Chance in evolutionary theory is not denied by any evolutionary advocate, except those who would seek to lower the role chance plays in evolution for obvious reasons. As Hank puts it, "Thus, chance implies the absence of both a design and a designer....Consider the absurdity of boldly asserting that an eye, egg, or the earth, each in its vast complexity, is merely a function of random chance" (pp. 61, 62). In Darwin's time, ignorance could cover the wild assumptions of time and chance, working with "natural selection" and mutations to create complex structures. But today, our knowledge precludes such assumptions (the reader is encouraged to read of the intricacies of how sight works in Hank's extensive notes). Chance, as the evidence from science in this book shows, cannot adequately explain the organized complexity of our world.

The last letter in Hank's acronym stands for Empirical science. This is where the rubber meets the road, and the true test of whether or not the theory of evolution is purely about verifiable scientific evidence. Hank points out, among other things, that creationists are often caricatured in popular culture and literature as "bigoted ignoramuses" while evolutionists are pictured as "benevolent intellectuals" (p. 77). However, Hank points out that many great pioneering scientists of the past were creationists, e.g., Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle, Louis Pasteur, Gregor Mendel, and Johannes Kepler. Thus the caricature is proven to be just that. Hank points out other empirical scientific facts which militate against evolutionary theory, including knowledge from what we KNOW from cause and effect, energy conservation, entropy, and common sense reason. Finally, Hank revisits the debunked but still used recapitulation theory (the "R" added to FACE to get FARCE) and goes on to conclude with appendixes to help people argue more rationally, know the veracity of the Bible as a divine Book, understand the truthfulness of Christ's Resurrection, Annihilate abortion arguments, and see the moral ramifications of human cloning. Kudos to Hank for doing a great job and putting the FACTS out there that many simply will not FACE.

Honest and fair
Hank Hanegraaff's approach to the creation-evolution controversy is excellent. It is very obvious that he has done his homework...and done it well. Instead of attacking evolutionists or characterizing them as evil, he looks at the facts. His acronym FACE (Fossil Fallacies, Ape Man Fiction, Frauds and Fantasy, Chance, and Empirical Science) makes it easy to recall the relevant points. He is thorough, while still keeping the issues at the "layman" level. For those interested in further study (on either side of the issue), he sites all sources.

Hanegraaff demonstrates a clear grasp of the issues and of the controversy around those issues. While many may still disagree with his views, he has proven himself once again to be an intellegent, well-studied author of integrity. I recommend reading this book with an open mind before dismissing creationism as a "crock"!

Whoohoo!
Hank is terrific!
Not much is new stuff here, folks. It's a reminder to us that evolution really has been proven wrong. Not many can take this harsh dose of reality, as you can see.

FARCE
An excellent book! And easier to follow than many others. Using acrononyms as an easy way to remember how to prove evolution wrong. A lot of people give it one star just because they have been proven evolution wrong and they find an excuse to put it there. Evolution has just been proven wrong-again.

The Case that Demonstrates the Crock of Creationism
Hank starts out blaming the T.O.E. for causing him to lose faith in his younger years. The view that evolution equals atheism is probably the most harmful view that Creationism is spreading today. Would Hank have lost faith if he wasn't raised to believe that evolution=atheism? The vast majority of Christians and Jews do not share this view.
While Hank attacked Darwin's racial views (which were common among Christians and non Christians alike in that time period), Hank did nothing to attack the modern theory of evolution. Obviously with a theory that is 150 years old, it's going to be easy to list all the hoaxes or avenues of thought relating to the theory that ended up being incorrect. i.e. social darwinism, that women's brains are inferior, or that some races are more evolved than others.) The current theory of evolution shows without a doubt that all mankind is one race. In fact there is more genetic diversity among a group of chimps at the zoo than there are among the most distant related humans.
I can tell Hank got most of his resources from Phillip Johnson. (a lawyer who uses lawyer tactics more than scientific ones) The reason being is that P. Johnson totally confuses the old hopeful monster theory with Punctuated Equilibrium. I'd like to point out the Hank that the term Puncuated Equilibrium itself should be a clue that P. Johnson's definition is wrong. Punctuated Equilibrium isn't about a lot of genes coming together at once to produce something like a bird coming from a lizard egg. P.E. simply states that a population can be in Equilibrium with it's habitat. Meaning that as long as there is stasis in the habitat, the there will be stasis in form. When there is an abrubt change in the environment, it puts different selective pressures on the population causing a Punctuation in the stasis. P.E. still only deals with gradualistic accumulative micro-mutations. The changes still occur over a period of tens of thousands of years. Not all at once, like Hank makes it seem when he talks about his wife giving birth to a flying baby.
Hank and all Creationists, whether they realize it or not support Darwinism everytime they say "obviously there is such thing as micro-evolution". That's the only kind of evolution there is. The rest is strawman arguments against their own ideas of what evolution is.
I realize that Hank loves truth as much as anyone else and I know he'd never purposely sell a book of falsehoods. I just think he used the wrong resources and he needed to devote more time to understanding the real theories of evolution. What happens when the uneducated Christian reads this book, then goes to college and learns what P.E. really is? I personaly think this form of Creationism causes more atheism than Darwin ever did. ... Read more

Book Description

Though many factors have been proposed to explain the failure of Napoleon's 1812 Russian campaign, it has also been linked to something as small as a button-a tin button, the kind that fastened everything from the greatcoats of Napoleon's officers to the trousers of his foot soldiers. When temperatures drop below 56°F, tin crumbles into powder. Were the soldiers of the Grande Arm&eacutee fatally weakened by cold because the buttons of their uniforms fell apart? How different our world might be if tin did not disintegrate at low temperatures and the French had continued their eastward expansion!

This fascinating book tells the stories of seventeen molecules that, like the tin of those buttons, greatly influenced the course of history. These molecules provided the impetus for early exploration and made possible the ensuing voyages of discovery. They resulted in grand feats of engineering and spurred advances in medicine; lie behind changes in gender roles, in law, and in the environment; and have determined what we today eat, drink, and wear.

Showing how a change as small as the position of an atom can lead to enormous differences in the properties of a substance, the authors reveal the astonishing chemical connections among seemingly unrelated events. Napoleon's Buttons offers a novel way to understand how our contemporary world works and how our civilization has been shaped over time. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

Napoleon's Buttons: How 17 Molecules Changed History
Napoleon's Buttons: How 17 Molecules changed History written by Penny LeCouteur and Jay Burreson is a wonderful little tome of seventeen chapters that shows the reader how 17 molecules changed history.

"Napoleon's Buttons" takes the reader on a world-wind tour de force about what Columbus could not have foreseen from the results of his search for piperine, Magellan was unaware of the long-term effects of his quest for isoeugenol, and Schonbein would have been astonished that the nitrocellulose he made from his wife's apron was the start of of great industries as diverse as explosives and textiles. Numerous chemical discoveries were, by far, some of the best serendipity and luck has often been cited as crucial to many important findings, but the ability of the discoverers to realize that something unusual has happened... and to question why it occured and how it could be useful... is of greater importance.

Perkin could not have anticipated that his experiment would eventually lead to not only to a hugh synthetic dye industry, but also to the development of antibiotics and pharmaceuticals. "Napoleon's Buttons" takes a look at Marker, Nobel, Chardonnet, Carothers, Lister, Baekeland, Goodyear, Hoffmann, Leblanc, the Solvay brothers, Harrison, Midgley, and others who have stories about their discoveries in the chemical industry making for some very interesting anecdotal stories.

"Napoleon's Buttons" has 17 chapters, making for some interesting reading, especially if you have a science background, you'll find this book enlightening, if for nothing else but the history of chemistry or better yet the chemistry in world history. This is an easy book to read and it has plenty of basic chemical structures that the authors use to explaine their points. Kind of like Organic Chemistry 101 but much simpler and well illustrated. "Napoleon's Buttons" shows us how unsuspected molecules have changed our world, for better or worse and how this affect hisory as we know it.

"Napoleon's Buttons" is a delightful read and is wonderfully readable book interwoven with events of history and how they have changed the course of human history to tranform society. This is a book that makes learning basic chemistry fascinating.

I gave this book a solid five stars for the reasons stated above and you'll enjoy reading about the way human society both paid the price and reeped the benefits. You'll find this book easy to rad and the authors do explain things enough so evan the layperson can follow along and get the jest of the story. I would recommend reading this book if you are taking any chemistry course.

Great diagrams. Very informative and educational!
I disagree with the reviewer that states there are too many diagrams in this book. Anyone with the slightest science background will be fascinated and enlightened by the diagrams and pictures which go a long towards explaining the authors' points.

A good diagram is much more interesting and effective than 5+ pages of "prose". Yuck. The authors have it right and the reviewer is just wrong.

Weekend Science Read
This book is valuable in that it makes Organic Chemistry interesting. It is also interesting in that it explores the origin of how things came to be and better yet how they could have been. If you are smart you'll like this book. Even if you have a phobia about Organic Chemistry I would still recommend this one. You might be shocked at how coherent it is. I was.

Great Read!
This book was a great read. As an physical organic chemist by training, the formulae were no difficulty, but I don't know how "civilians" would react. It is right up there with _Uncle Tungsten_ as far as books that I would recommend for chemically related cultural literacy. The stories are well told. The information is well organized, with helpful references to previous chapters. The emphasis on the social impacts of these compounds makes the book especially interesting to me (since my familiarity with the compounds is more from the technical side). If I were to find a slight deficiency in this book, it would be in the section on dyes, which does not mention food colorings (of which most that have been approved are no longer permitted).

Too Many Diagrams Not Enough Prose
The title grabbed my interest, and at the outset I found some of the early prose and the premise interesting. Unfortunately, the reader gets inundated with diagrams of chemistry compounds, to the extent they dominate the book. Futhermore, much of the explanation is devoted to explaining the molecules but not the history. Too many diagrams, not enough prose. ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Fanatics cannot see the obvious
The obvious truths as exposed in the book cannot be denied by a true scientist who has developed the ability to look beyond his personal bias. One cannot read this book or similar ones without seeing the absurdity of the notion that there is no design behind an obviously designed product.

In today's pseudo science one can pretend that books in a library talk to each other when no one is around to check on them and get away with it if he proposes a "natural" solution to the problem. A bias toward naturalism or materialism is not credible science anymore that a bias toward creationism is. Evidence, such as contained in this book, should lead where it will. If science is forbidden from seeing the obvious because it is not "natural" then it becomes nothing more than a gathering place for fanatics.

I am the author of The Blind Atheist and I have debated materialists for years. I must agree that they are grasping at straws now. Their basis of naturalism is crumbling so they now resort to a pretention that evidence that points to Intelligent Design is not scientific. Well then, is it scientific to mislead the public into a materialistic solution when an intelligent one is indicated? Will books in a library really talk to each other given enough time, or do they simply contain the intelligent input of their creator? Will the laws of physics without intelligent input produce meaningful information given enough time? All of life is based on meaningful information. Time, the crutch of evolution, only obscures the problem and the obvious solution. But fanatics cannot see the obvious.

Forget the critics
I have to give this book 5 stars to counter-balance the two reviews that slam this book. It is obvious that neither reviewer has read this book, in part or in total.

Intelligent Design is not creation science. It accepts evolution (i.e., common descent), gradual change over time, and natural selection as a fine-tuning mechanicism of life. It merely suggests that the formation of life is guided by intelligence - the exact question of how that intelligence performed its work, or who that intelligence is, is left open. (It could be anything from aliens to Zeus.)

Intelligent Design has caused Darwinian Fundamentalists to react with alarm because Darwinism is the central facet of their world view. Their objections are more philosophical than scientific (I've yet to read ONE negative review of an ID book that contains any science whatsoever). Darwinists have been the Grand Inquisitors of academia and are crushing real science. While Physics, Astronomy, Genetics, and other fields are literally taking quantum leaps into the future, evolutionary Biology has barely advanced past the early 1900s thanks to the the Fundamentalists' insistence that all evidence be construed, however obliquely, to support the notion that natural selection and random mutation can account for all life on earth.

Read about ID and make up your mind. Don't listen to Fundamentalists like Ken Miller and Richard Dawkins who are long on rhetoric and short on science.

This is unfortunate and misleading.
A previous reviewer asks why, since this book has been published, has no one refuted it? Look a little more. "Intelligent Design Creationism and It's Critics" includes reviews by some of the formost scientists in the world. Essentially, Behe's argument is the same as William Paley's and fails the same way. After 150 years, Darwin's idea has become solid fact. Over time the holes keep getting filled in with more knowledge but there will always be new details to understand. Arguing that the idea is wrong because you don't understand a detail is disingenous at best.

The Core of Design
If you want to know what is at the core of intelligent design, this is the book. With essays by Behe, Meyer & Dembski, this offers a rare multi-author volume that still fits in a cargo-pocket.

Want to know why ID critics never talk about this volume? It is too solid--they can't touch it. Plus Behe successfully responds to his critics. Instead, they have to resort to name calling and warnings of danger lest someone read this. But don't let them tell you what to think. Evaluate ID for youself.

Set Aside the Politics
...P>It's about S-C-I-E-N-C-E. It's about following the scientific evidence wherever it leads, even if it knocks over your favorite sacred cow. Seems to me that the scientists doing objective science these days, at least in the area of microbiology, are all on Behe's side. The rest are stuck back in the paradigm of the 1850's, and can do nothing constructive, only try to suppress his ideas.

Galileo would recognize these tactics in a heartbeat. ... Read more

Book Description

Millions of Americans take personality tests each year: to get a job, to pursue an education, to settle a legal dispute, to better understand themselves and others. But where did these tests come from, and what are they saying about us? In The Cult of Personality, award-winning psychology writer Annie Murphy Paul reveals the surprising and disturbing story behind the tests that claim to capture human nature.

Combining cutting-edge research, engaging reporting, and absorbing history, Paul uncovers the way these allegedly neutral instruments are in fact shaped by the agendas of industry and government. She documents the dangers of their intrusive questions, biased assumptions, and limiting labels. And she exposes the flawed theories and faulty methods that render their results unreliable and invalid. Personality tests, she contends, produce descriptions of people that are nothing like human beings as they actually are: complicated, contradictory, changeable across time and place.

The widespread use of these tests has deeply troubling consequences. Students are being consigned to narrow categories even as they're still growing and developing. Workers are having their privacy invaded and their rights trampled. Companies are wasting hundreds of millions of dollars, only to make ill-informed decisions about hiring and promotion. Our judicial system is being undermined by inaccurate evidence. Perhaps most distressing, we are all increasingly implicated in a "cult of personality" that celebrates the superficial over the substantive, the static over the dynamic, the standard and average over the distinctive and unique.

Compelling and insightful, this book is an eye-opening account of a collision among the needs of business and bureaucracy, the imperatives of a lucrative and largely unregulated testing industry, and the eternal human desire to make sense of ourselves and each other. ... Read more

Book Description

A major work by one of the more innovative thinkers of our time, Politics of Nature does nothing less than establish the conceptual context for political ecology--transplanting the terms of ecology into more fertile philosophical soil than its proponents have thus far envisioned. Bruno Latour announces his project dramatically: "Political ecology has nothing whatsoever to do with nature, this jumble of Greek philosophy, French Cartesianism and American parks." Nature, he asserts, far from being an obvious domain of reality, is a way of assembling political order without due process. Thus, his book proposes an end to the old dichotomy between nature and society--and the constitution, in its place, of a collective, a community incorporating humans and nonhumans and building on the experiences of the sciences as they are actually practiced.

In a critique of the distinction between fact and value, Latour suggests a redescription of the type of political philosophy implicated in such a "commonsense" division--which here reveals itself as distinctly uncommonsensical and in fact fatal to democracy and to a healthy development of the sciences. Moving beyond the modernist institutions of "mononaturalism" and "multiculturalism," Latour develops the idea of "multinaturalism," a complex collectivity determined not by outside experts claiming absolute reason but by "diplomats" who are flexible and open to experimentation.

Book Description

Reviews (11)

A window on emotions
Damasio has leapt almost to the top of the philosophical pyramid with his books on feelings and consciousness. Unbound by consensus thinking, he shows how the brain and body collaborate in forming what we call the "mind". In this book he reaches back in time to the works of Baruch Spinoza, perhaps the first philosopher with insights on emotions and will. Spinoza roundly refuted the separation of mind and body postulated by Descartes - a thesis with amazing tenacity. Damasio wants to revive the teachings of Spinoza in light of modern research's recent findings verifying and enlarging the Dutch philosopher's ideas. He possesses a unique style in supporting his campaign, with an ability to mix conversational and clinical presentations with fluid ease. This is his finest effort.

Damasio blithely overturns traditional philosophy by giving the body a primary role in developing emotions. What the mind feels, the body has already expressed. Because the body and brain are so deeply integrated in their functions, the combined signals are manifested as "emotion". Our feelings of joy, sorrow and the host of other classifications we use in defining ourselves are the expressions of the interactions. What we say about feelings may be applied to the entire realm of what we call "awareness". In short, the mind represents the body - we react to its actions. Spinoza, without realizing it, was far in advance of his contemporaries.

Damasio uses the wealth of research he and others have obtained over many years to support his contentions. In line with those in the forefront of "neurophilosophy", Damasio attributes evolutionary roots for his proposal. Other animals, he reminds us, react in similar ways to similar stimuli. They haven't the ability to express their reactions in language, but the body language says it sufficiently. Human evolution merely took these root causes a step further. Language, however, and the urge to detach us from the rest of the animal kingdom led us to also separate mind and body. Damasio, following both Spinoza and the finds of cognitive science, seeks to restore the integration.

With an intelligible prose style, enhanced by diagrams and line drawings, this book is a treasure of information. The questions he raises, while jarring to anyone steeped in traditional philosophy, need answering. He's never above noting where more work is required and posits topics to be investigated. The extensive bibliography is valuable in understanding what we know and what remains to be revealed. These revelations, Damasio reminds us, apply further afield than academic disputes over philosophical issues. The view of mind and body underlies most of our concepts of justice, government, public education and social behaviour generally. What gives this book its ultimate value is what basis we apply in addressing these issues. If traditional philosophy's foundation is a false bulwark, we must replace it with a more rational basis. Spinoza had not patience with arguments from ignorance, Damasio states. Nor should you. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Damasio selects Spinoza...A great book!
Damasio's Looking for Spinoza is another great book with lots of great stuff to ponder; I highly recommend it. Here's one area (of many) I found interesting:

In confronting our suffering and our need for salvation, in addition to Spinoza's requirement that we live "a virtuous life assisted by a political system whose laws help the individual with the task of being fair and charitable to others," Damasio writes (pg 275):

"The Spinoza solution also asks the individual to attempt a break between the emotionally competent stimuli that trigger negative emotions--passions such as fear, anger, jealousy, sadness--and the very mechanisms that enact emotion. Instead, the individual should substitute emotionally competent stimuli capable of triggering positive, nourishing emotions. To facilitate this goal, Spinoza recommends the mental rehearsing of negative emotional stimuli as a way to build a tolerance for negative emotions and gradually acquire a knack for generating positive ones. [Wow!--Exposure/CBT, circa 1670, but without the cognitive distortions.] This is, in effect, Spinoza as mental immunologist developing a vaccine capable of creating antipassion antibodies."

Additionally, Damasio writes: "The individual must be aware of the fundamental separation between emotionally competent stimuli and the trigger mechanism [which, as current neuroscience now shows, includes amgdala, ventromedial prefrontal cortex, cinguate] of emotion so that he can substitute 'reasoned' emotionally competent stimuli capable of producing the most positive feeling states."

In an earlier part of the book (pg 58) Damasio discusses triggering and executing emotion and writes that after the presentation of an emotionally competent object, regardless of how fleeting the presentation:

"...signals related to the presence of that stimulus are made available to the emotion-triggering sites....You can conceive of those sites as locks that open only if appropriate keys fit. The emotionally competent stimuli are the keys, of course. Note that they select a preexisting lock, rather than instruct the brain on how to create one. The emotion-triggering sites subsequently activate a number of emotion-execution sites...[which are] the immediate cause of the emotional state that occurs in the body and the brain regions that [then] support the emotion-feeling process."

"...[he goes on to say that these] descriptions sound a lot like that of an antigen entering the blood stream and leading to an immune response....And well they should because the processes are formally similar. In the case of emotion, the 'antigen' is presented through the sensory system and the 'antibody' is the emotional response. The 'selection' is made at one of the several brain sites equipped to trigger an emotion. The conditions in which the process occurs are comparable, the contour of the process is the same, and the results are just as beneficial. Nature is not that inventive when it comes to successful solutions. Once it works, it tries it again and again." Fred Hussey, 8/8/2003

The clarity of truth
As his 2 other previous books, this book has the clarity and consistency of truth. The insight it gives on our personal mental world is simply beautiful. This is just one of those books that everyone should read.

darn good book.
Basicially, Damasio's book provides a solid, testable, specific, plausible and elegant hypothesis about emotion and feeling. I found the book to be fascinating and enlightening.

While I do not agree with everything he says -
(specifically his evidence regarding the difference between 'feeling' and 'emotion' seems to me to point toward 'feeling' occuring earlier, at least in some form)
the science is there to be tried and tested.

The other thing I didn't like about it was the writing style was too much in the philosophical vein for my personal tastes... but then science is philosophy, and the style is conciously chosen for that reason.

Overall a great read, though. The ideas presented far, far *far* outweigh the minor complaints I have about the book.

A survey of the impact of feelings on daily lives
Joy, sorrow and the feeling brain are considered in Antonio Damasio's Looking For Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, And The Feeling Brain, a survey of the impact of feelings on daily lives. Such feelings have often been considered too private for science to explain and have been largely ignored: neuroscientist Damasio draws on his own research and experience with neurological patients to consider how emotions support survival itself. ... Read more

Book Description

Reviews (11)

Evolutionary morality.
Of all the differences between man and the lower animals, Charles Darwin believed that "the moral sense or conscience" is the most important. "It is the most noble of all the attributes of man," he wrote in THE DESCENT OF MAN (1871), "leading him without a moment's hesitation to risk his life for that fellow-creature; or after due deliberation, impelled simply by the deep feeling of right or duty, to sacrifice it in some great cause." Drawing from evolutionary ethics, evolutionary psychology, sociobiology, anthropology, and ethology, Michael Shermer (WHY PEOPLE BELIEVE WEIRD THINGS; HOW WE BELIEVE)takes on the difficult subject of the origins of morality and the foundations of ethics from an agnostic and nontheistic position, and contends that moral behavior can be scientifically traced to humanity's evolutionary origins. For those unfamiliar with his work, Shermer is the editor in chief of Skeptic magazine, and a frequent contributor to Scientific American.

THE SCIENCE OF GOOD AND EVIL picks up where HOW WE BELIEVE ended, defining religion as a social institution that "evolved as an integral mechanism of human culture to create and promote myths, to encourage altruism and cooperation, to discourage selfishness and competitiveness, and to reveal the level of commitment to cooperate and reciprocate among members of a community" (p. 7). Shermer divides his book into two parts, first examining how morality evolved as a species-wide mechanism for survival to enforce the rules of human interactions before there were such things as state laws and constitutional rights, and then by disputing the religious position that without God, there can be no morality. In developing his notion of "provisional ethics," Shermer observes that some form of The Golden Rule (i.e., "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you") provides the foundation of morality in all human societies.

Calling himself a "free rider" (p. 22), Shermer argues that humans don't need God to be moral, but that evolution has equipt the human brain with a tendency toward moral behavior. In other words, humans are moral by nature. "I may be free from God," he writes, "but the god of nature holds me to her temple of judgment no less than her other creations. I stand before my maker and judge not in some distant and future ethereal world, but in the reality of this world, a world inhabited not by spiritual and supernatural ephemera, but by real people whose lives are directly affected by my actions, and those actions directly affect my life" (p. 22).

G. Merritt

Raises the bar for the all too human.
Shermer's discussion of morality in this book is a continuation of that he started in How We Believe, though that book was less dry and more complete. Still, he bravely tackles morality with an approach not unlike Nietsche's (one must drop the crutch of religion and take responsibility for their own morals) only less angry and more scientific (hence the dryness). Shermer does do a fair job of trying to explain the beauty of individual moral responsibility, but the book concerns mainly the historical or 'evolutionary' explaination of morals, in that they serve a societal function. (A good companion book to this would be Sagan's Shadows Of Forgotten Ancestors.)
Shermer's lens seems greatly shaped by Darwin. That may be because one of his books between How We Believe and this on was In Darwin's Shadow (about Alfred Wallace), or perhaps Darwin's science is pretty solid stuff. At any rate, to apply a scientific approach to morality is to try and replace thousands of years of mythology which did the job until recently. Can morality be explained without religious ties? That's the interesting part of it.

I was going to give this book 4 stars because of the slight disappointment I had with Shermer's writing style, but the topic is so vast and this book gives one of the best discussions of it I've seen in a long time. So it's a Fiver!

Can there be morality without God?
Can there be morality without God? This is the question tackled by the Skeptic Society's Michael Shermer and while he definately deserves a five for his effort, the resulting book shows a man straining against inherent limits.
The first inherent limit Shermer struggles against his own upbringing wherein he indicated that his mother did not believe in God. It is very fascinating that regardless of what education one goes on to attain they invariably ultimately return to the religous views of their upbringing later in life. This is not a bad thing but it is interesting that whenever writers attempt to assert some grand new theory all they're really talking about is what their parents believed. Perhaps it is for this reason that truly revolutionary religious thought is such a rare thing.
Shermer also struggles against the evidence. In the first part of his book, Shermer is quick to assert that morality is the natural product of human evolution. However, and this is according to Shermer's own cited figures, for 84% of the people on this planet that morality ACCOMPANIES MEMBERSHIP IN AN ESTABLISHED RELIGION. In other words, one cannot fairly gainsay that morality is an evolutionary by product without also conceding that religion as well is an evolutionary by product. To be sure, an absence of religious belief cannot be said to be an absence of morality any more than the presence of religious belief can itself be said to be evidence of morality. Still the same there has been, and remains, an undeniable and as yet unfully explained relationship between religion and morality. In this sense, Shermer's first half of his book serves as a great starting point for further study of this important topic.
However, and again, we are talking about a starting point and definately not the last word.
Finally, Shermer is limited by logic. If one is to believe his earlier referenced studies that humans only appear to have free will, then why should recourse be made to the many philosophers he cites in the second half of his book? For that matter, if human behavior really is a "science" then why resort to philosophy at all? Logically, one would have to concede that that which is possible would have to yield to that which is. Phenomenon, not paradigm, is paramount.
In all, the book had a certain endearing quality. After having read the two predecessor works by Shermer in this series -- Why People Believe Wierd Things and Why We Believe -- it's strangely comforting to see Shermer admit to such a detailed knowledge of the television program Star Trek. (As he was quoting the Kirk monologue, I found myself mentally inserting the appropriate pauses between the words...just as Kirk did in the original TV episode.)
So in the end the question remains: Can there be a morality without God?
I don't know. Maybe this question should be asked when we can really be sure that we even have morality with God.

Shermer should be ashamed for minimizing the evils of 9/11!
In his latest book, The Science of Good & Evil, Skeptic Magazine publisher Michael Shermer suggests that President Bush was mistaken in calling the 9/11 terrorist attacks "pure evil." According to Shermer, no such thing exists.

On page 81, Dr. Shermer writes: "September 11, 2001, comes to mind here. United States President George W. Bush described what happened that day as an act of pure evil. Yet millions of people around the world celebrate that day as a triumphant victory over what they perceive to be an evil American culture. What we are witnessing here is not a conceptual difference in understanding the true nature of evil. Nor is it simply a matter of who is in the right. It is, at least on one important level, a difference of perspective. To achieve true understanding and enlightenment it might help to understand what the other side was thinking."

He should issue a public apology for trying to minimize the moral gravity of these actions and ignoring the human pain they caused. He should be ashamed of defending terrorists who killed thousands of innocents in the name of God. None of us will move any closer to "enlightenment" if we join him in dismissing the specific actions that caused the 9/11 mass murders as a "difference of perspective." The degree of evil of the 9/11 murders does not depend on the fluctuating measures America's popularity in foreign public opinion polls. Exploring every delusion held by the 9/11 terrorists won't make their crimes less vicious or bring their victims back to life.

According to Dr. Shermer "pure evil" is nothing but a word. Any morally blameworthy act can be nothing more than what Shermer names "provisional evil." If we accept his limited concept, an ethical and moral gray area must always exist when thousands of innocents are brutally murdered in the name of God.

In truth, the ultimate value of human life transcends space, time, material reality, and Darwinian evolution because we are loved by, and created for, eternal friendship with an eternal God who exists independent of the Big Bang and all material reality. The intentional mass murder of innocent human life is "pure evil" because it rejects the God-given inherent worth of the human person.

In a recent e-mail, Dr. Shermer told me he supports the current war in the Middle East. He also said he doesn't endorse or excuse the 9/11 attacks.

He can't have it both ways, however. The statement he chose to publish in his book gives comfort to all current and future enemies of human life, and he should print a retraction on his website at www.skeptic.com. Shame on you, Dr. Shermer.

A Reasonable Effort
This is a good overview of how ethics might have originated, but not a particularly good (pun intended) justification of ethical rule. Shermer is always entertaining, but he lacks philosophical rigor. A much better exposition on both can be found in Michael Berumen's: Do No Evil. ... Read more

Book Description

In a spellbinding narrative that skillfully weaves together cutting-edge research among today's foremost scientists, theoretical physicist Michio Kaku--author of the bestselling book Hyperspace--presents a bold, exhilarating adventure into the science of tomorrow.

In Visions, Dr. Kaku examines in vivid detail how the three scientific revolutions that profoundly reshaped the twentieth century--the quantum, biogenetic, and computer revolutions--will transform the way we live in the twenty-first century.The fundamental elements of matter and life--the particles of the atom and the nucleus of the cell--have now been decoded, closing one of the great chapters of scientific history.But this is just the preface to an even more far-reaching scientific revolution, as we make the transition from being passive observers of the mysteries of nature to becoming masters of nature, able to manipulate matter, life, and intelligence to remold the world around us.

In the first part of Visions, Dr.Kaku discusses the cyber future, when millions of microprocessors are scattered throughout our environment; when the iron principle that has ruled the computer industry, Moore's Law, finally collapses, forcing scientists to adopt startling new designs like DNA computers and quantum computers; and when artificial intelligence systems finally arrive.

In the next section, Dr. Kaku shows how the decoding of DNA will allow us to conquer devastating genetic diseases, defeat many cancers at the molecular level, synthesize new medicines using virtual reality, grow new organs, conquer aging and reshape our genetic inheritance.

Finally, he explores how quantum physicists will perfect new ways to harness the cosmic energy of the universe--from molecular machines to supermagnets that may energize a second industrial revolution, to powerful fusion engines that one day may take us to the stars.

What makes Michio Kaku's vision of the future of science so compelling and authoritative is that it is based on the groundbreaking research already underway at leading laboratories around the world.Weaving interviews with over 150 scientists--several of them Nobel laureates--into a rich, inspiring narrative, Dr. Kaku reveals the growing consensus among key scientists about how science will likely evolve through the early, middle, and late years of the twenty-first century.

An intimate, thrilling tour through the next century of science, Visions is a riveting, essential map to how scientists will reshape our future. ... Read more

Reviews (49)

a whirlwind tour of tomorrow's breathtaking technologies
In "Visions," theoretical physicist Kaku describes the boundless new technologies that will become available in the next hundred years and beyond, in three general areas: computers and information technology, biotechnology, and fundamental physics. The ideas presented are based on extensive consultation with experts in a variety of fields, and are thrilling prospects that are as well grounded in current authority as might be expected in the dicey business of predicting the future flow of technological progress.

The predictions on information technology detail ever more free-flowing information outlets and ubiquitous computerized devices. The predictions of biotechnology are perhaps the most exciting, offering a wide look at how much more advanced medicine will soon become in diagnosing and preventing cancers and other critical diseases years earlier than is possible now. Kaku describes how this will come about from the increasing understanding of the human genome and the application of electronic and information technology to biotechnology. Curiously, the third section, on fundamental physics, which actually is Kaku's area of expertise, seems the least imaginative and the most rushed. It's hard to give anything more than a cursory glance in going from coverage of current-day projects to considering warp drives, alien intelligences, and alternate universes in under 100 pages. This is made worse when Kaku stops firmly in the present to criticize nuclear power plants and the International Space Station.

Overall, it's an authoritatively speculative look at these three areas of technological promise, although the format is a little strained. If you are unfamiliar with all of these areas and want a brief introduction to each, this is an ideal place to look. Despite Kaku's misgivings about a few technological choices, he is an effective evangelist for the faith in human understanding.

A Physicist Looks at the Future
Superstring physicist Michio Kaku turns his eyes to the future, and sees many bright developments in the 21st century. What is really remarkable about this book is Kaku's ability to explain in a clear way how the Quantum revolution of the turn of the previous century has dramatically effected, or perhaps invented, the three great revolutions of the 20th century: computers, biotechnology, and quantum physics. Kaku is especially good in outlining his reasons for his view of the future; and gives pretty reasonable timelines for the achievement of certain goals. The book is easy for a layperson to read and understand, and gives a good overview of scientific development. Well worth reading, at times profound.

Quite a payload of food for thought
The intriguing and "user friendly" personality that brought you Hyperspace (Michio Kaku) returns with a heavyweight in revolutionary scientific information. This book will leave you dizzy with concrete facts as well as potential possibilities throughout different areas of biology, technology, and physics. Geniously organized, this book begins by summarizing the different areas of science and their cross-influences, then opens up a whole new world in each respective subject. From artificial intelligence to genetics and (of course) a touch of quantum physics, this book will bring the tingling excitement of a fantastical future realistically close. With insights on economic growth and influences on society, this book shows that world of science fiction luxury and awe is not so far off at all. A great way to broaden your perspectives in one handy book.

Informative
I hate futuristic books. I don't like raw speculation. So this book, given to me as a gift, surprised me. Written by a reputable high energy physicist who's taken the trouble to understand details of ideas far afield from his own, the book is a gem, written like a scientific novel. In place of futuristic speculation we're presented with well-established ideas in highly readable form. The chapters on DNA and Cancer alone make the book worth reading. Other recommended, very readable, books providing more detail are "One Renegade Cell" and "Genome".

An irritation: the author shoots half-heartedly from the hip against reductionism on pp. 10-12. The problem is that there is no falsifiable alternative to reductionism, or the isolation of cause and effect. So-called holism is a vague, not mathematically formulable notion. Holism in biology remains an empty hope. Schrödinger explained in "What is Life" why evolution can only be understood at the molecular scale and never at the macroscopic scale. Every mathematical model that succeeds empirically is a form of reductionism. Quantum physics (including all of chemistry) reduces phenomena to atoms and molecules, cell biology reduces phenomena largely to genes and proteins, SOC (self organized criticality) hopes to reduce nature to sand grains and sandpiles, network enthusiasts hope to reduce phenomena to nodes and links (wait until they try to do dynamics empirically correctly...). Economics (beyond finance) so far has failed as scientific theory because it cannot find any suitable "invariant units" to build a theory on, human preferences having failed to do the job. Computerization and advances in biology (all via reductionism, by the way) do not and cannot change these facts. Let me state this challenge to the author and to other critics of reductionism: present us with something nonreductionist that is empirically correct. Until then, be pleased to restrain yourselves from purely speculative and totally unproductive criticism of science.

A brilliant and thought-provoking celebration of knowledge
Visions is a brilliant journey into the world of tomorrow. It is full of informative and thought-provoking questions.

Visions raises points regarding the human craving for knowledge and technology, and the irreducible chaos that we may encounter in the future because of our manipulation of the planet and our bodies.

His writing again comes about lively and envigorating. His thoughts and explanation of issues are balanced and allow the reader to dwell deep into complex matters without him or her requiring a doctorate in the sciences.

This is another wonderful and excellent book that our Dr. Kaku has developed. Bravo! ... Read more