Book Description

A brief treatise on the Russell Cosmogony, with its new concept of Light, Matter, Energy, Electricity and Magnetism. This is a simple yet complete, consistent and workable cosmogony which wil enable future scientists to visualize the universe as One Whole, and will open the door to the new age of transmutation. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

BEYOND PROFOUND!
Reading the illuminated writings of the late, GREAT Walter Russell staggers the mind. He was so far ahead of his time that proper description of this man's genius is impossible. Not only did Russell have his knowledge come to him via direct communication with the SUPREME BEING and Creator of ALL, his breakthroughs in science as well as his achievements in 5 seperate careers puts him head-and-shoulders above the more publicized, but totally inferior "great personalities" of modern times. READ THIS BOOK! ... Read more

Book Description

The Open Universe is the centerpiece of the argument of the Postscript. Popper argues in simple language for the freedom, creativity, and rationality of mankind. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Surprisingly good arguments in defense of Indeterminism
I started this book expecting to disagree with it. Although I am not a full-fledged determinist, if I was forced to choose between determinism and indeterminism or "free will," I would choose determinism, because the other side of the question is so often used to defend utopian social ideals. If human beings have free will, then (so it is argued), just about any social system, whether laissez-faire or communism, syndicalism or anarcho-capitalism, becomes possible. I regard this way of rationalizing political and social ideology as palpably dishonest. Whether human beings are "determined" or not, they do in fact exhibit certain very definite tendencies of behavior and reaction which make them, within certain parameters, predictable, so that, if you study human nature and society long enough, you will easily understand why all these systems will never happen, and that only hybrid systems are at all possible. The other problem I have with indeterminism is that it goes against the grain of scientific methodology. Scientific knowledge is based on the premise of determinism. In short, science practices a form of methodological determinism.

Popper addressed both my concerns, fully admitting their legitimacy but arguing that they don't necessarily contracdict his indeterminist thesis. The criticism of free will by Hobbes, Spinoza, and Hume, Popper admits, is "sound." But, he insists, that,in and of itself,doesn't establish scientific determinism, and it is scientific determinism that he alone is combatting. As for methodological determinism, Popper again admits its validity, but denies the "metaphysical" conclusions that are so frequently derived from it. Since science is always "incomplete," there is no validity in arguing from a useful method to a dogmatic theory about the universe.

Popper's arguments for indeterminism are very brilliant and convincing--certainly a lot better than that wretched argument cooked up Murray Rothbard and propagated by Ayn Rand's followers. Popper stresses the inability to grasp, in a deterministic sense, human creativity, and then goes on to argue that the problem of self-prediction leads determinism to absurdity.

It is always refreshing to come across a book that is actually rational enough to change one's mind. Most philosophy books generally are of the preaching-to-the-choir variety: if you agree with their conclusions, you will think them brilliant; if you don't, you will regard them as silly and inept. Popper is a cut above these mere rationalizing philosophers. His books are addressed to those who are sincerely interested in learning the truth about the universe. As for those who desire merely to have their own pet ideas reinforced, they should look elsewhere. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Good Good Stuff
Delanda is certainly not the least controversial of Deleuzeans, so I imagine some folks will dislike the (sort of) analytic flavor of this work. Nonetheless it gives--or makes a painfully valient attempt to give--what a lot of 'clarificationary' work on Deleuze ultimately fails to provide. A solid, relevant reconstruction of Deleuze's world without all the cumbersome jargon that bogs down the more continental reconstructions (e.g., Badiou's "Clamor of Being"...really an excellent book, but rough-going in the prose department).
Delanda takes his by now standard fascination with complexity theory and other cool stuff and mines Deleuze's works for its scientific & mathematic underpinnings. John Protevi's "Political Physics," another book in this series, could be seen as an intro. to this book--not to downplay the significance of Protevi's work. Where Protevi explored the possibilities for Deleuzean applications to complexity, Delanda actually applies it, fearlessly, using the analytic style, I imagine, as a way to not cower in the face of some of Deleuze's absurdities. This work should be hotly debated, but it should be deeply appreciated as well, for the age of freeplay is waning, and now that the fog is clearing it really is time to figure out what the hell Deleuze was talking about.
This is first on my list of Deleuze commentaries, and it stands as a powerful independent work in its own right. Read it. Delanda rules. ... Read more

Book Description

This is a lively and clearly written introduction to the philosophy of natural science, organized around the central theme of scientific realism. It has two parts. 'Representing' deals with the different philosophical accounts of scientific objectivity and the reality of scientific entities. The views of Kuhn, Feyerabend, Lakatos, Putnam, van Fraassen, and others, are all considered. 'Intervening' presents the first sustained treatment of experimental science for many years and uses it to give a new direction to debates about realism. Hacking illustrates how experimentation often has a life independent of theory. He argues that although the philosophical problems of scientific realism can not be resolved when put in terms of theory alone, a sound philosophy of experiment provides compelling grounds for a realistic attitude. A great many scientific examples are described in both parts of the book, which also includes lucid expositions of recent high energy physics and a remarkable chapter on the microscope in cell biology. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

An Introduction That's Not Just for Neophytes
This book, which is among my all-time favorite philosophy books, is a paradigm of how the subject should be introduced. It succeeds in introducing readers to many of the most important issues and ideas in contemporary philosophy of science; it's informed by a thorough knowledge of the history of both science and philosophy; it advances a unique perspective, one emphasizing the importance of experimentation as opposed to theorizing, on debates about scientific realism; and it is written in a straightforward and engaging style. In other words, this is an excellent book--one that manages to be both entertaining and informative.

As I mentioned above, Hacking's emphasis here is on experimentation as opposed to theorizing. Naturally, philosophers of science are drawn to the study of scientific theorizing; theorizing is what they do, and it's what they understand. But Hacking argues that the prospects for scientific realism (i.e. for the view that the sciences are objective and reveal the (approximate) truth about the world) are dim if you focus on theory alone, and he thinks this is something that has been borne out by recent philosophy of science. Rather than focus on theorizing, he claims, we should focus on the ways in which science involves intervention in the world. Through experimentation, scientists can step into the world and manipulate and change it. This is the way that science allows us to discover something about the world around us--not by the relatively passive activity of formulating theories, but by action in the world.

Hacking starts his book by giving a brief overview of how the historicism of Kuhn altered the project in the philosophy of science. He argues that earlier philosophies of science, like Carnap's positivism and Popper's falsificationism, had agreed on quite a bit despite their superficial similarities. Kuhn's work came along and upset all of this consensus. He denied that there was any particular method shared by all the sciences across time, that the sciences involved a cumulative process of knowledge acquisition, that observation could be distinguished from theorizing and understood as an independent source of evidence for and against theories, that the sciences could be understood ahistorically, etc. These views also posed some problems for the objectivity of science. The assumptions Kuhn denied were those undergirding the traditional conception of the objectivity of science, of how scientific inquiry arrived at truths about the world.

But does this mean that an understanding of the history of science should undermine our confidence in the objectivity of science and the accuracy of its results? In some ways, Hacking's book is an introduction to these worries and the various possible responses to them. For most philosophers, issues concerning the objectivity of science turn on the question of whether we have good reason to believe that our best scientific theories are true (or approximately true) or that we are making gradual progress towards true theories by doing science.

In the first half of the book, Hacking discusses important arguments for and against the view that we have good reason to believe that our best scientific theories are true. Here he is primarily concerned with what he calls realism about theories: the doctrine that scientific theories are true or false, and that we have good reason to believe that many of our best theories are true (or approximately true). Hacking covers a lot of interesting ground in his discussion of the prospects for this sort of realism. He begins by discussing positivist and pragmatist accounts of the nature of science and the reality that science can reveal to us. He then takes up arguments about incommensurability that have been developed by Feyerabend and Kuhn, and that appear to question our understanding of science as progressing towards the truth about the world. This is followed up by a chapter about causal theories of reference and how they might allow us to avoid arguments from meaning incommensurability. Hacking then takes a bit of detour and considers how Putnam was led from his causal theory of reference to a form of anti-realism; this chapter, while perhaps not central to the argument, is an interesting introduction to Putnam's views around the time of the publication of Reason, Truth, and History. He then discusses Lakatos's methodology of scientific research programmes.

All of this first half of the book is very exciting, and it's somewhat different from the usual introduction to the philosophy of science. It's not that Hacking is discussing material different from what you find in introductory texts of this sort; he isn't. But he is more interested in drawing lessons from the history of philosophy and in appealing to views outside the narrow confines of the philosophy of science. For instance, the chapter on Putnam's internal realism (and its similarities to Kant's epistemological views) would be out of place in most introductory philosophy of science tests, but it's a perfect fit here. This makes this book more interesting to philosophers in general, and it also reflects that fact that individual areas of philosophy aren't wholly separate from one another. While the philosophy of science does have a distinctive subject matter, it is bound to be influenced by developments and trends in other areas of philosophy.

Anyway, Hacking has serious doubts about the plausibility of realism about theories. This doesn't mean he doubts the objectivity of science, however. He thinks we should shift our emphasis, when discussing issues of objectivity, from theorizing to experimentation. So he defends realism about entities: the doctrine that scientific experiments involve the observation and manipulation of real entities, and that we have good reason to believe experimentation involves this sort of interaction with the real world. But, he thinks, this doesn't establish that the theories we have about these entities are correct in all their details. The second half of the book is an extended defense of Hacking's realism about entities.

The ideal audience for this book is philosophically sophisticated readers who don't know a great deal about the philosophy of science, though I think much of the book would be useful to anyone interested in the philosophy of science.

Hacking's Introduction to the Philosophy of Science
This book is an extraordinarily well-written introduction to the philosophy of science. However, it is far from a mere introduction. Hacking's take on the realism/antirealism debate, and observable/unobservable distinction, is far from being simply expository. But perhaps most importantly, his philosophy of experiment demonstrates his impressive ability to clearly articulate the nature of empirical scientific inquiry as he sees it. I recommend the book to philosophers of science, analytic philosophers in general, and those seeking a lucid introduction to the philosophy of science.

A classic in the philosophy of experimentation
I was an avid fan of Feyerabend when I came across a curious little article by a certain Ian Hacking in a Feyerabend reader. This particular article was startling in its down-to-earth approach to the philosophy of science. It's insistent mantra mirrored that of my supervisor's, "always go back to the experiment".

That article turned out to be from a pivotal chapter of Representing and Intervening, a lovely little book that I have grown to love. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that this book revolutionised the philosophy of science by turning on its head the role of theory and experimentation (experimentation is king whereas I am a lowly theoretical biophysicst!).

The question that dominates the second half of the book, by far the better half, is when does a entity in science become a real entity. The answer, according to Hacking is "if you can spray it then its real." In one fell swoop, Hacking side-steps thorny and abtruse concepts that have plagued the philosophy of science such as falsification, induction and paradigms. Hacking re-interprets historical episodes and demonstrates how the final acceptance of a theory was its experimental reliability, not just in single instances, but in a diverse range of applications. The power of his examples is that they are drawn from contemporary experiments - something that not many philosophers of science actually do.

As a companion to the book, I really recommend Bruno Latour's "Laboratory Life". Latour complements Hacking by showing just exactly how a single scientific entity changes shape as the experimental techniques which intersect it are expanded and improved upon.

Another beautiful quality of the book is the lucid prose. Hacking shows how philosophers don't need to write in a profound style to convey profound thoughts.

Very important philosphical argument for experimentaion
This book awakens the interest about practice in natural science. So Hacking stresses the singificance of experimentation and criticizes the bias for theory in philosophy of science. Very insightful and challenging trial for the new direction for philosophy of science. ... Read more

Book Description

Every day we hear news about medical or scientific breakthroughs and the complex ethical issues they raise. Feats that were never before possible including cloning, genetically modifying food, mapping human chromosomes and using animal organs for human transplants have opened up a Pandora's box of ethical questions.Technology is advancing at such a rate that the issue is not so much what we can do but rather whether we will do it. According to Margaret Somerville, a leading international authority on medicine, ethics and the law, society must set ethically acceptable limits on scientific advances. In this controversial, timely and much-anticipated book, Professor Somerville sheds light on the urgent ethical and legal questions that vie for our attention. Along the way, she calls upon us to recognize the mysteries that lie at the heart of our lives and the metaphysical reality that gives meaning to life. ... Read more

Book Description

With brilliant clarity, Jonathan Sarfati, author of the best-selling Refuting Evolution (1 and 2) has produced a comprehensive and ringing refutation of the position of "progressive creationist" Hugh Ross, whose views are causing massive confusion about science and the Bible. This book is one of the most powerful biblical and scientific defenses of a straightforward view of Genesis creation ever written. ... Read more

Reviews (15)

I "literally" don't understand this position...
Sarfati and the Answers In Genesis organization have a lot to lose if they are wrong about the young-earth position. Having a lot to lose ultimately leads to desperation and attempts to belittle the opposing view. However, Hugh Ross is right (in his latest book "A Matter of Days" that this day issue has got to be resolved soon or nonbelievers will continue to see us as a bunch of buffoons. There are theological questions no matter which interpretation you take, but the creation accounts in the Bible are certainly not exhaustive. Furthermore, councils from various denominations on "day" interpretaion have concluded that "day" can mean a 24-hour period or long (but finite) periods of time - both are "literal" interpretations.

However, I'm quite concerned with the direction that AIG has taken. One example (from their website) is the recent citation by Carl Wieland (a colleague of Mr. Sarfati) of an "open letter" from the secular scientific community regarding their doubts on the "Big Bang" theory. The irony is amazing: they are citing an open letter from secular scientists to cast doubt on the Big Bang theory. Unfortunately, these same scientists aren't casting doubt on the AGE of the universe whatsoever, just the particular theory that describes its beginning. Furthermore, it is quite reasonable to assume that these same secular scientists are attempting to cast doubt on the Big Bang in order to rekindle the Eternal Universe theories that remove the causation that the Big Bang has demanded. So in other words, Answers In Genesis is attempting to provide evidence for their young-earth position by citing secular scientists who doubt the Big Bang - not because they think the universe is young - but because they want to remove the very possibility of God from its creation! This citation is precisely the kind of tactic that leads unbelievers to dismiss Christianity, yet in their desperation, they'll cite from any source.

Part of the measure of a man is being able to admit error. I can understand how the young-earth position was once reasonable, though Scripture never has demanded it. But the position has been untennable for quite some time. Admitting they are wrong on this issue does not mean (contrary to their book) that they are compomising Scripture, nor does believing in an old earth mean equivocation with Darwinian Evolution.

Pseudo "unity" with unbiblical "science": Compromising??
This is the best book on the subject of how many Christians compromise with worldly scientific theories to interpret God's revelation. It's a dangerous position to be in. Instead of harmonizing the latest 'scientific' theories to God's Word, the Old Earthers are willing to change the Bible's clear meaning of 6 days and a recent Creation to accomodate to secular interpretation of scientific data.

Most unfortunate to see critics who are oblivious to attacks on the Bible and the church from WITHIN by Old Earthers like Dr. Ross.

When Christians start compromising with secular science the way Ross does in contradiction to the Bible's clear testimony, that is an attack on Scripture. The Word of God should never be subject to human scientific adjudication as to what to believe.

Remember, friends. God Himself was there at Creation. The Holy Spirit inspired Moses exactly how and what to write to us. 6 days means 6 days,not Ross' contrived 6 eons or 6 ages or 4.6 billion years, etc. If that's what Moses really meant to convey to the Hebrews and to all Church History up until Darwin's time, he sure went about it in an ambiguous way!

Remember, friends. Secular scientists and compromising Christians were NOT there at Creation. Too many believers are second-guessing the Holy Spirit's clear testimony and putting words and re-definitions revisionistically into God's mouth.

If the Bible says 6 days = Young Earth and 'science' or Ross says 6 eons/ages = Old Earth, dear readers, whom are you going to believe? The Holy Spirit through Moses or astrophysicist Ross and those willing to change the natural meaning of Genesis?

It's required of Christians not only to contend with attacks from outside the Faith, but also from the misguided, sincere-yet sincerely-deceived WITHIN the Faith as well. Genesis must be safeguarded from BOTH attacks. Unfortunately, Ross and his disciples are unwitting combatants AGAINST the Bible's very words in the name of scientific respectability and people's offense at Genesis conflicting with Old Earthism.

This book is a fair, balanced, Scriptural defense of Genesis against attacks by well-meaning Christians who go too far to avoid scientific discomfort.

Better scientific discomfort than Bible discomfort!

Read John MacArthur's Battle for the Beginning to understand Satan's attack on Genesis: "Did God really say 6 days means 6 days?"

Gets Moses' Original Intent Correct - BRAVO!
Only Moses' original intent settles how long the first of weekdays went.

Thank you for an excellent biblical and settled-science refutation of compromising progressive creationism.

Excellent resource for biblical christians
If your supreme authority is the infallible Bible you will enjoy and profit from reading this book. It is an excellent resource not only for refuting the compromise positions of people like Ross but also giving a very clear and concise refutation of the myth of evolution.

If your supreme authority is something other than the infallible Bible, you will probably hate this book. Although I'd urge you to read it with an open mind and open bible!

Alternate Cosmology
If you want a 400 page tirade against astronomer Hugh Ross with a preposterous cosmology thrown in that includes such ideas as "white holes", a universe centered on our galaxy, and "quantized red shifts", then this book is for you. I view Brian Greene's writings as a much better investment for someone seeking an enlightened education in the latest cosmological findings.
Sarfati apparently considers Hugh Ross the biggest threat to Christianity since the ancient Romans. Why else would he mount such a vicious, malicious, and personal attack.
Save your money and your time. ... Read more

Reviews (21)

A scary crop of academia nuts
Despite the subtitle "The Academic Left and Its Quarrels With Science," the dangerous aspects of the misconceptions exposed and dissected in this book are due much more to irrationality than to politics. Fortunately the authors take pains to clear up a potential misunderstanding by pointing out that there does exist a generous complement of academics who are left-leaning, rational, and not inclined to quarrel with science.

Gross and Levitt perform a valuable service in three parts. They take the time and trouble to wade through the more obviously idiotic postmodern anti-science drivel, they refute it, and they remind us that the purveyors of it are firmly ensconced in the faculties of major universities.

The authors of "Higher Superstition" are academics themselves, and write elegantly in prose laced with vocabulary-stretching words like hermeneutics, conspective, auspicating, tatterdemalian and weltanschauung. While not a particularly easy read, the book makes its main point clearly and simply enough: the postmodern science-bashers are aiming their largely spurious complaints at subjects they secretly resent and barely comprehend. Science has produced edifying, useful, beneficial results with more regularity and less ambiguity than any other field of human endeavor. To claim otherwise is deeply dopey. If academia tolerates a clique where such claims resonate, something is seriously out of whack and we must thank Gross and Levitt for providing fair and frightening warning. Self-styled progressives who berate science with politically correct non sequiturs are no less goofy than the religious zealots they so pointedly disdain.

If it doesn't work for science...
Gross and Levitt know their subject, and they present their case with wonderful lucidity and sophistication. Some may call it pedantic, but it taught me a few new words, and for that I am grateful.
However, there remains something troubling about this book. First of all, the author's views of politics are egregiously simplistic. As far as their concerned, there are only two political beliefs: left and right, the latter being populated mostly by their enemy the "creation scientist." Second, the book sends dangerously mixed messages. They call the academic left their "friends" even as they lambast them in a manner that would give Ayn Rand a lesson in polemics. Because of this, their critique is limited to myopic analyses of specific blunders (with a hasty appeal to their representativeness), while leaving untouched the mistaken postmodern premises that give rise to such blunders.
Last, and most importantly: Gross and Levitt come across as watchdogs patrolling their own profession. When they find a transgressor, they simply throw her over the fence into the humanities and social sciences, to run amok as she pleases. Granted, the sorry state of the humanities is not their problem; they are scientists. However, as scientists, they of all people should hold the virtues of objective inquiry in high regard. If the postmodern word-salad of relativism does not work for the natural sciences, why should it work in the humanities, which is every bit as concerned with understanding of reality?
I give the book four stars because these men are heroes for taking on the postmodern academy. I did not give them five stars because they do not go far enough. They pawn their misguided "friends" off onto their sister departments, and think that sufficient. But they will always come back. By refusing to strike the root, Gross and Levitt work against their intention.
Still, what is good in here is EXTREMELY good, and I recommend the book highly.

Lower sub-stition
When I first read this book I found it hilarious and in so far as I don't ride with postmodern appropriations of science I thought it merely odd. But with the passing of the Sokal episode and its trivia the basic issues have resurfaced and the harm done by this book suddenly came home to me. Let's face it, the book is more stupid than what it critiques. Science is failing. Period. It has failed on the theory of evolution, and given us reductionist views on man the average Buddhist finds embarrassing. Whatever the sins of the postmodernists they at least sensed the problem.
The most pathetic bit in this forgettable book is the excoriation of Jeremy Rifkin's Algeny, admittedly a book hard to take, and one that caused palpitations in Gould who reviewed it. I actually tracked the book down and discovered a very acute critique of Darwinian theory. It is no great shakes as a book, but at least the author could see the problem.
That's the point where this science arrogance is so ill-advised and misleading, the tactics those of the Big Science bullies preening with their positivistic idiocy.

For a history of the science wars, cf. The One Culture? J. Labinger, ed

"a reality-driven enterprise"
Triggering the most hilarious literary scandal in recent years, this book will be a major influence in determining how our society progresses. Science has been under severe assaults during the past generation. Much anti -science feeling arose as a reaction against the use of science and technology to support war. Later, science was accused of supporting racism and sexism. Now, as this book makes clear, a new wave of slander on science has arisen and is gaining strength. The origin of these assaults began with the wave of "postmodernist" writings among French philosophers and social commentators. The attitude of science being merely the tool of society instead of working aloof or apart from social issues leapt the Atlantic to take firm root among North American academics. This "academic left," having begun as a movement for social equality, has turned its wrath on science. Nearly every element of science, from relativity to biology, has come under the distorted scrutiny of humanities scholars. Alan Sokal's fictitious example in Social Text demonstrated just how contorted this outlook can be.

After an excellent presentation of "postmodernist" concepts, the authors address the anti-science critics declarations. The authors offer us a rogues' gallery of misguided "spokespersons" who bend language, misinterpret what science discloses and the methods it uses, and who fail to comprehend the very topics they purport to critique. They accept that much of science seems obscure and eludes quick or superficial comprehension. Why then, they query, do these critics insist either on denouncing its methods or adopt the findings in an attempt to restructure society? In Gross and Levitt's view, the critics see attacks on science as a means of attaining intellectual power and guiding society along a revised path. Since these critics see corruption at every level, they mean to "purify" society by tearing out any and all roots supporting it. That they have been effective at this slashing exercise in many areas is the reason this book was written.

Gross and Levitt show that those condemning science as "patriarchal," environmentally destructive or racist, are almost universally devoid of knowledge of the workings of science. These attackers seek to replace traditional science with new "ways of knowing." Gross and Levitt offer some real howlers as examples of this genre. From the frivolous "Newton's Principia is a rape manual" to the bizarre notion of a "feminist algebra," Gross and Levitt expose the fallacies of these "anti-patriarchal" constructs. Given the long term campaign by feminists to rebuke science, they show remarkable restraint in their assessment of this aspect of post-modernist techniques. The chapter "Auspiciating Gender" is but seven pages longer than the next longest one. Still, as they remind us, those adherents to such grotesque notions are now firmly established in academic positions and making education policies.

Throughout the book, the authors remind us that science is "a reality-driven enterprise." Science achieves its results by constant attention to methods and results. Whatever impact "culture" has on science, it isn't in the methodology. No reputable scientist assumes his theories will go unchallenged, especially as new data emerge. The cycles of checks and confirmations or refutations has kept science moving forward since the Enlightenment. Gross and Levitt urge readers to remember that without the methods and results of science, countless human achievements from the elimination of smallpox to the computers viewing this page would never have occurred. In the words of Richard Dawkins, "show me a cultural relativist in a jet aircraft at 35 000 feet, and I'll show you a hypocrite." What more can be said?

Illuminating
A nice dissection of various strains of irrationality that have sprung up, mostly on campuses. The authors look at the misunderstanding and confusion about science that characterizes such things as postmodernism, "Deep ecology", and some forms of radical feminism. Somewhat prolix. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The parallels between modern physics and Eastern mysticism are no longer mere esoteric musings, and nowhere is that concept shown better than in Thomas McFarlane's Einstein and Buddha: The Parallel Sayings. As in other titles in the Parallel Sayings series, the author cuts and pastes sayings from one thinker or school of thought and matches them to resonant sayings from another wholly different tradition--to astonishing effect. The correspondences between modern physics and Buddhism (and Taoism, which McFarlane also includes) are attested to by the physicists themselves. In his preface, McFarlane, who has degrees in physics as well as philosophy and religion, identifies the major parallels as "the wholeness of all things, the description of reality through paradox, [and] the relationship between the observer and the observed." Only occasionally succumbing to pitfalls that crop up in other books in the series, such as focusing on translated terms rather than concepts or keying on narrow passages rather than fully contextualized views, McFarlane uncovers both the science of Buddhism and the mysticism of physics. --Brian Bruya ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Such a significant book
If Hafiz incarnated and started throwing parties in New York and LA, and if the impossible were to happen at one of his wild bashes -- if one were to start to feel bored -- he might start reading from this wonderful book.

Who knows... maybe Einstein and the Buddha will slip into a few dreams of those squatting in the White House and boost their IQ's substantially -- which could then well result in making this book (and maybe a few Hafiz poems) mandatory reading before military service or even a mere drivers license was bestowed. And maybe everyone would be required to carry this book in their golf carts -- and if one forgot it (for even one hole) helicopters might swoop in and administer breath tests that were so sensitive that alarms would go off if you were a religious bigot, that is if you were anti-Einstein.

I better quit this review; the FBI might hound me, and
water-torture me into a Republican.

Daniel Ladinsky
Best-selling Penguin author of The Gift: Poems by Hafiz

Brilliant collection! Mr. McFarlane, just one suggestion:
In your book, would it be better to use "spiritual leaders", "religious figures", or even "eastern philosophers" rather than "mystics"?

Nonetheless, what a wonderful work to remove the superstitious impression on eastern religions of people who narrow-mindedly believe in science. Thank you so much!

Some additional information about the book, by its Editor
The over 120 parallels, each matching a modern physicist and an Eastern mystic, are a collection of startling clues that hint at a deeper relationship between science and religion. Statements by Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrodinger, and other founders of modern physics are paired with remarkably similar statements by Buddha, Shankara, Chuang Tzu, and other Eastern mystics. This book shows you the surprising parallel statements of the physicists and mystics, grouped into a variety of themes, and lets you ponder their significance for yourself. What do they suggest to you about the relationship between the scientific and spiritual approaches to understanding reality? Regardless of whether or not you think the parallels indicate a profound unity behind physical and spiritual aspects of reality, these sayings should raise important questions and stimulate deeper insight into the mysterious relationship between science and religion. ... Read more

Book Description

In the final book of his astonishing career, Carl Sagan brilliantly examines the burning questions of our lives, our world, and the universe around us. These luminous, entertaining essays travel both the vastness of the cosmos and the intimacy of the human mind, posing such fascinating questions as how did the universe originate and how will it end, and how can we meld science and compassion to meet the challenges of the coming century? Here, too, is a rare, private glimpse of Sagan's thoughts about love, death, and God as he struggled with fatal disease. Ever forward-looking and vibrant with the sparkle of his unquenchable curiosity, Billions & Billions is a testament to one of the great scientific minds of our day. ... Read more

Reviews (62)

Carl Sagan's last book: A fitting finalle
Carl's latest book is much the same in format and tone as ``Demon-Haunted World,'' both collections of articles taken almost verbatum from his weekly Parade magazine articles. The tone is the same in both books as well. In DHW, Sagan urges an abandoment of pseudoscientific thinking, in ``Billions'' he urges that we consider the lessons of the past century and we must undertake forward-thinking views. The opinions are strong, but forwarded in an entertaining and non-threatening way.

In this book, Sagan tackles a wider range of subjects than DHW. The first section talks about the magic of quantification, understanding light's wave/particle duality, and plots the direction of science in the future. The second section is sure to be controversial, as Carl examines current environmental problems and what we can do about them. He tries not to scare, while stating the facts bluntly. This is a refreshing pace from many other books on environmental issues in that it tries to convey a sense of hope and optimism. The final section seems to be a miscellaneous collection of chapters, covering politics, abortion, a recap of the most meaningful accomplishments of the twentieth century, and finally, Carl's own ruminations on his brushes with death.

The main problem with B&B is that the chapters are pulled from Parade magazine articles, which means that the book doesn't seem to be a coherent whole. It feels like a collection of chapters and doesn't hold together that well thematically. Also, repetition is rampant, and by the end we can almost guess what Carl is about to say before we read it.

However, it is a good read. Carl is a wonderful author and one of the few with the talent to entertain and teach at the same time. It is a good antedote to the end of the millenium pessimsm of books like ``The End of Science.'' The lesson Carl tries to teach us is that with war, hunger, pollution, and ignorance we still have long strides to go, difficult decisions to make, new discoveries to acheive. And he expresses it through the eyes of a child, wonderous and enthralled.

A duff note to go out on...
I'm a big fan of Carl Sagan. I loved the 'Cosmos' series, I thought 'The Demon Haunted World' was an outstanding treatise on really important subject, and I really dug the movie 'Contact'. I have only respect for his views the role and value of science and rational thought in everyone's daily life. So I looked forward to 'Billions and Billions', his last work before his sad death a couple of years ago.

Well, while much of the book is true to form, in parts I was a little disappointed. For the first time, and maybe exactly because of his own dreadful circumstances, Sagan allows himself to stray from his stock material, - matters scientific and logical, where he's pretty unarguably right - to matters where, to my mind, he isn't - matters moral and political. So his chapters on the crises facing the world, all of which start out nicely enough, start introducing solutions which have a cloying, left wing, aroma to them.

To my reading of it, Sagan's basic thesis is that we (the proles) can't sort out the world's problems by ourselves, so we need a panel of wise men to legislate them away for us. That's a pile of old rope. Frankly, I have yards more confidence in the judgment (collectively) of the "man on the Clapham omnibus" than of any politicians (and I don't think the latter in any meaningful way represents the former), so I don't buy Sagan's argument at all.

But what bugs me is the unspoken intellectual imperialism of it. "Not only are there Wise Men who must make critical decisions for you", implies Sagan, "but they are people like Me." Well, sorry, but as anyone who has done a Bachelor's degree will know, the only people worse equipped than politicians to make judgments on behalf of the rest of us are people who spend their lives hanging out at places like Cornell University.

As a result Sagan starts sounding less like the completely dispassionate scientist and more like your common or garden sci-fi writer - his conceptions of how useful an idea government is aren't far off the loopy ones Arthur C Clark used to trundle out in his potboilers: you know, where, in five hundred years, finally the human race will Get It Right and we'll all live happily ever after.

Call me cynical, but it don't work like that. Given the history of science, a scientist of Sagan's calibre ought to know that.

A compelling read
This is the first book by Sagan that I've read. Simply said, it's written brilliantly ! I was amazed when I read the chapter on abortion. Sagan leads you to start thinking about issues in a different plane altogether. His systematic, analytical & scientific approach to solving problems would help anyone with a little logical bent of mind. The chapter on '20th century' seemed to cover environmental issues (again !) though Sagan had dealt with those exhaustively in earlier chapters.

All in all, definitely worth reading. Pity that we don't have him around to share his views on what is going on in today's world !

Environmental eloquence, mediocre musings.
Modesty was a bit difficult for Sagan. The first we learn of the author is that he was a celebrity. Witness the Tonight Show appearances and the Parade Magazine articles (and Sagan makes sure we do). There surfaces a certain immodesty of words as well. Words such as 'geosynchronous' are procured and proliferated (and anthropocentrically so, I might add).
In some ways the book is better than I anticipated and is pellucid and even [modestly] eloquent in the consideration of ozone-depleting ("greenhouse") gases and the cost of environmental irresponsibility. As I have chided Sagan for his immodesty, I must also note that he is humble indeed compared to the swaggering, blustering, anti-environmentalist loudmouths with which we are too familiar. Says Sagan: "It's hard to understand how 'conservatives' could oppose safeguarding the environment that all of us -- including conservatives and their children -- depend on for our very lives. What exactly is it conservatives are conserving?" Had the scope of the book been more modest, i.e., had it stayed closer to environmental issues, it would have been better. But the author intended this volume to be something of a 'summa saganii' (Saganites will love it).
Sheer poetry, of sorts, wins the day in statements like this: "We used [intelligence and tool-making] to compensate for the paucity of natural gifts -- speed, flight, venom, burrowing, and the rest -- freely distributed to other animals ... and cruelly denied to us." Of course, we don't fly for the same wonderful physical reasons that tree sloths and wallabys don't, and it is hardly "cruel" that humans can't inject their opponents with venom. Had humans venom and speed instead of intelligence and tool-making, Sagan's musings could not happen. I myself am happy to possess intelligence and forgo venom. Of course Sagan is too, he just can't resist waxing poetical.
After the consideration of environmental issues, the text degenerates. The discussion of "Pro-Choice" versus "Pro-Life" starts as if it is leading somewhere but ends in a kind of 'hey, we just do the best we can.' The discussion of "ethics" versus "pragmatism" steps into the void. While it is admitted that subjecting ethics to Game Theory may be dubious (even scientifically), Sagan thinks it's fun and perhaps profitable. This is the domain of men without chests.
The author finally makes a case for disarmament and peace; a case for science as a kind of candle in the dark (which includes a bit of scientism bearing the label of science); and a brief discussion of the conflicts and comforts involved in his approaching death.
In summary: the book contains some strengths, some flaws, some errors, some tedium. Not recommended.

Open Minds... READ IT.
I think Brett Williams felt attacked by this book. It is certainly true that it challenges a lot of modern ideas about the world and how we all fit into it. It is jam packed with facts to back up his thoughts. This is not a book I would reccommend for my parents generation- the sixty something's and up- but I wish that GW Bush would take a good hard look at it someday really soon before it's too late. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Thoughts from a scientist
Dr. Anthony Rizzi's book "The Science before Science: A Guide to Thinking in the 21st Century" is a refreshing analysis of the problems of modern natural science. And it includes a solution! Dr. Rizzi gets to the bottom of one of the major issues that we have all come across in our encounters with statements from modern scientists in the press: bewildering propositions that cause us to question our ability to reason or to throw up our hands in contempt for science. For example, in a recent article, it was posited that one possible "explanation" of some aspects of modern physics is that there are copies of ourselves in an infinite number of other universes. What are we to make of this bizarre statement? We either conclude that we are completely unable to trust our reason which says "that is ridicules," or we lose confidence in science.Dr. Rizzi comes to the rescue by pointing out that we are not crazy, and modern science is internally reliable; it's just that the modern scientist has not properly translated his/her work from highly constrained theoretical conceptions to day-to-day reality. Rizzi says "they are not grounding their thinking in the basic understandings we get from a deep analysis of common experience (which Rizzi artfully does in his book) and which were so well established in classical philosophy." The solution is to reconnect philosophy with natural science. This reconnection is difficult but it is imperative in order to understand the relationship of modern scientific findings to the real world. Dr. Rizzi has both written the book and established an institute for just such an application:The Institute for Advanced Physics. The book is a "must read" for all natural scientists as well as the educated public.I recommend it highly.

Informative reading for all students of science
Anthony Rizzi earned two degrees in physics, one from MIT and the other from Princeton University. Among his accomplishments is included the resolution of an 80-year-old problem in Einstein's theory; the first scientist to be appointed to Caltech's Laser Interferometer Gravity Wave Observatory (LIGO, LA), and founding The Institute for Advanced Physics where he also serves as the full-time director. In The Science Before Science: A Guide To Thinking In The 21st Century (which is also available in a hardcover edition (1418465038, $28.95), Rizzi maintains that there "good science" is that which expands the human mind; "bad science" is that which confuses the human mind. He also points out that "good religion" confirms our nature while "bad religion" confounds our nature. What is needed is a combination of good science and good religion if we are to achieve a true and expanding understanding of the universe we live in. Along the way, Rizzi addresses such unusual issues as the possibility of time travel; how a fuller science naturally leads to proofs for the existence of God; artificial intelligence, other forms of intelligence in the universe, and more. As much a treatise on the philosophy of science as it is a compilation of the nature of sound inquiry whether it be in the fields of physics or metaphysics, The Science Before Science is engaging, informed, and informative reading for all students of science, philosophy, and religion.

Al Forrester, Author andConsultant, Atlanta, Georgia
Dr. Rizzi's book is beautifully written and of profound importance for our culture.Currently, we are mired in a crisis of truth. People generally reject the notion of objective moral truth, in favor of a nihilistic relativism.Scientists, in principle, but not in practice, also tend to reject the certainty of truth in their own specific fields.No one seems to be sure of what they know, and many doubt that a person can know anything absolutely.This is the consequence, Rizzi says, of poor philosophical formation at the most basic levels of common sense.

Dr. Rizzi is not only a brilliant phyisicist, but also an outstanding philosopher.His book gives us the philosophical tools which help us answer these questions, tools which help us to see clearly that we can know truth, objectively.He dispells the myth relativism as it appears in all fields of science, from morality and ethics to physics.

I would also add that his book is written in such a way that it is very accessible to general audiences.I recommend it highly. ... Read more

Book Description

This timely volume brings together essays by an internationally distinguished and diverse group of scholars. Contributors thoughtfully explore the ethical, public policy, and scientific implications of embryonic and adult stem cell research.

Part one of the book offers a variety of scientific and public policy perspectives, including essays on stem cell plasticity and using umbilical cord blood as an alternative source of pluripotent stem cells. Part two vigorously examines the ethics of stem cell research and considers issues of social justice, morality, and public policy. Scientific alternatives, a natural law perspective regarding federal funding, and a discussion of the possible moral complicity of Catholic researchers are among the distinctive contributions made to the stem cell research debate by this collection.

The objective and balanced discussions contained in this volume serve as an accessible introduction to the bioethical questions, issues, and problems surrounding stem cell research.

Contributors:David A. Prentice, Kevin T. FitzGerald, S.J., John Langan, S.J., Ronald M. Kline, Ira B. Black, Dale Woodbury, Karen Lebacqz, Edward J. Furton, Lisa Sowle Cahill, Richard M. Doerflinger, M. Therese Lysaught. ... Read more

Book Description

How can science, when it is based on a narrow perspective of life, ever understand the essence of natural problems since they occur in a much wider context? In Science, Order & Creativity, David Bohm and F. David Peat present a compelling argument that science, in fact, cannot hope to provide answers when its approach is narrow and fragmented from other disciplines such as philosophy, art, and religion. A revolutionary approach to scientific inquiry, Science, Order & Creativity is an accessible entry into the extraordinary work of one of the century's greatest thinkers, David Bohm. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

A book that could lead to new sciences
David Bohm ignores the "usual" approaches to the investigation of fundamental questions in science, in fact in human life in general, and always provides a fresh and creative perspective. In this book he looks at the idea of order in the universe and the mind as well as the basis of creativity in human thought. Instead of assuming that order has already been understood as it is often portrayed in the popular science press he unveils the ideas of degree and levels of order and sidesteps the seemingly antagonistic concepts of order and disorder (the approach used by a mind whose thinking is habitualised by anaytical thinking of the world into separate and distinct pieces). He avoids this routine type of thinking and draws forth fascinating concepts giving a basis for a new science of order and a whole new way of "seeing" the creative mind. It is unfortunate that Bohm's thinking is generally ignored by mainstream scientists who could gain astonishing insight from such new ideas about creativity, the mind and order. As the new science of chaos has shown it is possible to engender a whole new science using a fresh approach, Bohm once again demonstrates this ability whole heartedly. ... Read more

Book Description

An elderly lady once left $20,000 and "my Bible and all it contains" to her nephew. The young man knew what the Bible contained so he didn’t bother to open it. He merely picked it up and put it on a high shelf in his house, and headed for Las Vegas.

It wasn’t long until all his money was gone. He lived the next 60 years as a pauper, scraping for every meal and barely having the clothes on his back.

As he was moving to a convalescent home he reached up to grab that old Bible and accidentally dropped it from his trembling hands. It fell to the floor and opened, revealing a $100 bill between every page.

That man lived his life as a pauper when he could have lived in luxury, simply because of his prejudice. He thought he knew what the Bible contained.

Most people don’t know that the Bible contains a wealth of incredible scientific, medical and prophetic facts. The implications are mind boggling… ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Not as good as it sounds
This book is fun to read, yes, no question about that, the problem are the facts inside.

In the first pages I found the first error. I continued, but without knowing if what I was reading was true. For example, Mr. Comfort, in page 12, states: "It was another 2000 years later (at a time when science believed that the earth was flat) that the scriptures inspired Christopher Columbus to sail around the world." Well, the problem is that, first, Columbus wasn't inspired by scriptures and, second, in those times people didn't believe that the earth was flat.

I am a Christian, and I'm very disappointed. Mr. Comfort's efforts to find evidence of modern science, modern hygiene and even dinosaurs in the Bible are simply unbelievable, and many times feels forced. He even quotes famous people on the Bible, I mean, if Napoleon said anything good about the Bible, that is a proof of is supernatural origin? He founds what his eyes want to find, he understands what he wants to understand... The worst is that he sees things that are not there and compares it to data that is wrong... The result is a fun but messy book.

Don't believe the lies; The Bible is Truth and here's proof!
[Cool, first review!]

This is chock full of scientific facts, historical evidence, and world-leader quotes all related to the Bible.

Don't believe it is God's word? Think it is out of date? Just because its cover is dusty in your home doesn't mean its contents are no longer applicable. This short little book is a good addition to an evangelizing believer, and will give the skeptic and critic something challenging to consider.

And for a dose of eye-opening facts that is like 100x as powerful as this, check out Ray Comfort's highly praised "The Evidence Bible" -...

May you seek truth and seek the One who is the Giver of that truth. ... Read more

Book Description

An award-winning philosopher uncovers the Christian foundations of modern science.

Renowned historian and philosopher of science Stanley Jaki boldly illumines one of the best-kept secrets of science history— the vital role theology has historically played in fruitful scientific development.

Beginning with an overview of failed attempts at a sustained science by the ancient cultures of Greece, China, India, and the early Muslim empire, Jaki shows that belief in Christ—a belief absent in all these cultures—secured for science its only viable birth starting in the High Middle Ages. In the second part of the book Jaki argues that Christian monotheism alone provides the intellectual safeguards for a valid cosmological argument, restores the sense of purpose destroyed by theories of evolution, and secures firm ethical guidelines against fearful abuses of scientific know-how. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Fascinating topic from a miserable writer
Stanley Jaki has taken it upon himself to write a book with an absolutely fascinating thesis: that without the Christian worldview modern science would never have been born. He discusses some extremely interesting historical trends, most notably the "stillbirths" of science that occured in China and the Arab world. Though such cultures did have occasional scientific discoveries (such as gunpowder) they never came anywhere near developing a fully-orbed "program" or "culture" of science. Indeed, the subject matter that the book covers is absolutely intriguing. Unfortunately, it is so poorly written that it is basically unreadable. If one reads other books by this same author, one finds that same problem. Stanly Jaki could not write three consecutive UNDERSTANDABLE paragraphs if his life depended on it. He is a miserably bad writer, structuring his sentences in a very haphazard, illogical manner. If you really decide to read this book, you are bound to be extremely frustrated. Instead of this book, I would recommend "The Soul of Science" by Nancy Pearcey and Charles Thaxton. It covers the same material, but even more competently than Jaki, and it is wonderfully readable.

Fascinating, yet difficult
Jaki's thesis is an interesting one--that Christian monotheism is the only worldview that makes science--such as we have it--possible. However, it causes problems in two ways. The first is theological--that it would seem to suggest that this-worldly successes such as Western science (and subsidiary benefits like modern medicine, agriculture, etc.) are traceable to Christianity, and this view tends to contradict Paul's teaching in 1st Corinthians about the foolishness of the cross. The second problem is that most of the advances in science occurred in the years following the enlightenment and were concurrent with the decline of Christianity in the West. However, Jaki suggests that it is the philosophy behind modern science, which arose out of late medieval scholasticism, that is impossible without Christianity. If that were true, though, one would expect the decline of science along with the rise of postmodern unreason.

Admittedly, Jaki is a brilliant mind, but his style failed to convey his thinking in a very coherent way. The book often seemed tangential. The anecdotes (such as the story of a young German's letter to Darwin) were extremely interesting. But it seemed to detract from the flow of the book.

blasts the imaginary conflict between faith and science
There is much nonsense afoot that would have one believe that religion, especially Christianity and the Catholic Church, has always been hostile to science and greatly innhibited its progress. This view is plainly contrary to the facts. Many of the greatest scientists were sponsored and paid by the Church. In fact, many were members of a clerical order.

Consider this. If one were to take a wall map and draw an outline of the areas of the world that have seen the most scientific progress over the past 1000 years, and then draw an outline of the area of what one might call Christendom, one will find that the two outlines match up very closely. This could certainly not be the case if Christianity was hostile to science. Rather, just the opposite is true. If one wants to understand how this is so, Jaki's work is a great place to start.

Excellent reading on the history of science.
This book is about the history of science, particularly the origin of science as we know it. Written from a Christian perspective, Jaki argues that Jesus himself is ultimately the savior of science. Jaki's review of ancient cultures such as Greece, Eqypt, China, and India is fascinating, as he explains how theological errors were the key factor that inhibited the development of science that came about in the Christian world. Fascinating reading. ... Read more

Book Description

Reviews (2)

A clear exposition of Shannon's results by a great mathemati
A Y Khinchin was one of the great mathematicians of the first half of the twentieth century. His name is is already well-known to students of probability theory along with A N Kolmogorov and others from the host of important theorems, inequalites, constants named after them. He was also famous as a teacher and communicator. The books he wrote on Mathematical Foundations of Information Theory, Statistical Mechanics and Quantum Statistics are still in print in English translations, published by Dover. Like William Feller and Richard Feynman he combines a complete mastery of his subject with an ability to explain clearly without sacrificing mathematical rigour.

In his "Mathematical Foundations" books Khinchin develops a sound mathematical structure for the subject under discussion based on the modern theory of probability. His primary reason for doing this is the lack of mathematically rigorous presentation in many textbooks on these subjects.

This book contains two papers written by Khinchin on the concept of entropy in probability theory and Shannon's first and second theorems in information theory - with detailed modern proofs. Like all Khinchin's books, this one is very readable. And unlike many recent books on this subject the price is very cheap. Two minor complaints are: lack of an index, and typesetting could be improved.

More rigorous version of Shannon 1948 paper
Shannon's paper is great. Easy to read (though many people misunderstand many concepts - I may too) but lacks mathematical rigor. This book has redone several points that Shannon made but more accurately. It requires ergodic theory and measure theory to follow every detail, but some parts may be usable even without much background. I don't think the book is perfectly edited, but I know I paid too little for the knowledge I gained from this book. ... Read more

Book Description

What do a seventeenth-century mortality table (whose causes of death include "fainted in a bath," "frighted," and "itch"); the identification of South Africans during apartheid as European, Asian, colored, or black; and the separation of machine- from hand-washables have in common? All are examples of classification -- the scaffolding of information infrastructures.

In Sorting Things Out, Geoffrey Bowker and Susan Leigh Star explore the role of categories and standards in shaping the modern world. In a clear and lively style, they investigate a variety of classification systems, including the International Classification of Diseases, the Nursing Interventions Classification, race classification under apartheid in South Africa, and the classification of viruses and of tuberculosis. Sorting Things Out has a moral agenda, for each standard and category valorizes some point of view and silences another. Standards and classifications produce advantage or suffering. Jobs are made and lost; some regions benefit at the expense of others. How these choices are made and how we think about that process are at the moral and political core of this work. The book is an important empirical source for understanding the building of information infrastructures. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

A real advance in knowledge - inspiring.
Most everything in modern societies rests on rules, standards, and regulations of one kind or another. Where do these endless detailed lists and definitions come from? This book is really unprecedented in the way it takes apart the practice of rule-making and nomenclature, to show us that there is a social and cultural process that lies behind the faceless lists. For me, it was like having the curtain of OZ lifted aside, so I could see for once the messy, petty, and often political way that things are sorted into categories and labeled.

I disagee that the book is badly written. I found it better than the average academic title in studies of technology and society, where thick jargon is the primordial soup. This was one of the most original books about technological systems I have read in years, with wide application in many different fields.

A diamond-studded dungheap
This tragic book is full of important ideas and significant research, but it's so poorly written you hardly notice. Other reviews kindly describe its style as "academic," but it's just bad writing. It's really shocking that publishers still consider this kind of jargon-filled nonsense acceptable to publish outside of the UMI thesis-reprint circuit. (I write professionally, so I'm not unqualified to make this assertion.)

After making a cogent point with examples and internal references, the authors feel the need to bridge to the next section with this clotted delight:

"Leaking out of the freeze frame, comes the insertion of biography, negotiation, and struggles with a shifting infrastructure of classification and treatment. Turning now to other presentation and classification of tuberculosis by a novelist and a sociologist, we will see the complex dialectic of irrevocably local biography and of standard classification."

Wha? What you mean to say is:

"This tension between personal experience and clinical priorities plays a large part in our current understanding of 'tuberculosis.' To further examine this tension, we will now examine the personal tuberculosis stories of a novelist and a sociologist."

The former kind of self-important, get-it-all-down academic writing is as embarrassing to read as adolescent poetry; they're both driven by a desire to make sure the reader gets every last nuance, and the lack of subtlety makes you want to toss the book across the room.

But the ideas buried within this book...the ideas are so sweet. If only they'd had the sense to ghostwrite this book. It could be a classic.

classification as discourse
This is an excellent book on classification as discourse. The authors do an excellent job of discussing this topic in terms of its social, political, and professional history and implications. It is an important title in the cultural studies of information and should be familiar to all concerned with this area of study. ... Read more

Book Description

The clash between evolution and creationism is one of the mosthotly contested topics in education today. This book, written by one ofAmerica's most distinguished science educators, provides essential backgroundinformation on this difficult and important controversy. Giving a sweeping andbalanced historical look at both schools of thought, John A. Moore shows thatfaith can exist alongside science, that both are essential to human happinessand fulfillment, but that we must support the teaching of science and thescientific method in our nation's schools. This highly informative book will bean invaluable aid for parents, teachers, and lawmakers, as well as for anyonewho wants a better understanding of this debate. From Genesis to Genetics showsus why we must free both science and religion to do the good work for which eachis uniquely qualified. Using accessible language, Moore describes in depth these two schools ofthought. He begins with an analysis of the Genesis story, examines other ancientcreation myths, and provides a nuanced discussion of the history of biblicalinterpretation. After looking at the tenets and historical context ofcreationism, he presents the history of evolutionary thought, explaining how itwas developed, what it means, and why it is such a powerful theory. Moore goeson to discuss the relationship of nineteenth-century religion to Darwinism,examine the historic Scopes trial, and take us up to the current controversyover what to teach in schools. Most important, this book also explores optionsfor avoiding confrontations over this issue in the future. Thoughtfully and powerfully advocating that the teaching of science be keptseparate from the teaching of religion, Moore asks us to recognize that avigorous and effective scientific community is essential to our nation's health,to our leadership role in the world, and to the preservation of a healthyenvironment. ...