The Canon

[kittynh]

Forget "A Candle in the Dark", THIS is the book for your woo friends!

With barely a sniff of that word "skeptic" Natalie Angier has written a book that expresses almost everything we repeat over and over again on the forum. She does it in an entertaining way, while quoting MIT professors and some of the best and brightest minds in science today.

We all know the claim by the "woo" in our lives that science is cold and gives one a jaded sad view of life. But Natalie Jaran not only believes "A rose is a rose is a rose; but the examined rose is a sonnet". And she has the ability to convey that to the average person (or former art major such as myself).

This book sets out to reassure the non scientist that a lot of us have a poor knowledge of science. I enjoyed reading about the Harvard graduation where they asked graduating seniors to explain why we have seasons. Most of them got it wrong (and happily I knew the correct short answer already!). The chapter that really hooked me though was "Probability". So get your "victim" to at least keep reading until chapter 2. It's such fun to read this book you just keep turning page after page. NOT for the scientist that knows it all already. More for the person that really wondered HOW Fermi could figure out how many piano tuners there are in Chicago (it's not that hard). And what 95% accurate means (it isn't what I thought).

Anyone would enjoy reading this book. A great gift! and while she calls it "thinking scientifically", she is really pushing skepticism with a vengance!

Natalie Angier is a Pulitzer Prize winner, and this book reflects the excellence of her craft.

<iframe src="http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?t=thejamesrandi-20&o=1&p=8&l=as1&asins=0618242953&fc1=000000&IS2=1&lt1=_blank&lc1=B30616&bc1=000000&bg1=FFFFFF&f=ifr&nou=1" style="width:120px;height:240px;" scrolling="no" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" frameborder="0"></iframe>

[jenspen]

I'm reading this at the moment and enjoying it more and more. I like the way she presents scientific topics so that I look at things I thought I'd just about grasped and see them from a different perspective. Have particularly enjoyed the section on chemistry. I'm an Arts graduate too by the way.

I was a bit disappointed though that she said there were platypuses in New Zealand....

[articulett]

I loved it too... especially the part on evolution... and the part about her sister having let her childrens' membership at Science Museums and Zoos lapse.

I love the part about the gecko in a box...the way she describes it as a marvelous toy... only to realize it's real!

[JamesDillon]

I read this recently and loved it, but I'd disagree that it's a better book for believers than The Demon-Haunted World. Sagan's book focuses on the process of critical thinking, and most importantly, why we should care about it, while Angier's book is all about the substance of scientific knowledge. It seems to me that an appreciation of the process of science is more important as a cure for credulity than is the corpus of knowledge that we have accumulated by applying that process to the natural world. Of course, the chapter on probability is more attuned to critical thinking and skepticism than the rest of the book, for reasons that are obvious when you think about it.

That said, this is a great book for anyone interested in an introductory-level overview of the basics of science. I enjoyed it immensely and plan to re-read it if I can work it into my schedule at some point, though I would add that she tries a little too hard with the levity at times.

[Stir]

I loved the concept: a simple explanation of the basics of the sciences written for a lay audience ... but hated the realization. It didn't help that she demonstrated a complete misunderstanding (in my opinion) of the nature and role of mathematics (and dismissed those who work with math as math rather than as a description of the world as a tiny minority). What I found irritating was the failure to explain concepts (or even state them clearly) and the constant attempts at humor (almost every sentence, it seemed, included some 'wit'). The result is a hard to read, muddy book completely useless as a reference. And yes, I know it's not intended as a technical reference book, but if it were well done could have been something a layperson could use for a quick answer. Too bad.

[Blondin]

I'm about a third of the way through this book and I agree with Stir. It seems like every sentence contains a pun or a clever metaphor or simile or some other device. A sprinkling of such wit is entertaining but in this book it is just tedious. I can sense Natalie's joy in crafting the explanations and narrative but I just find I have to "translate" almost every sentence and it kind of takes the joy out of reading it.

Also I noticed there is a section where she discusses placebos and testing and she implies that acupuncture has been proven effective in controlled tests. I haven't got the book here with me but I don't think there were any notes attached to that to indicate what tests she was referring to.

[JamesDillon]

Stir,

I agree with you that the "wit" was overdone, but can you explain what you mean about the failure to explain concepts? I thought she did that quite well.

[fishbait]

Stir,

I agree with you that the "wit" was overdone, ....I'm half-way through the book and find myself cringing every time I read one of the many, many "witty" comments. While I understand the attempt to make the book light and readable for the layperson, these attempts at clever writing are becoming very distracting. Otherwise, I think the author does a good job of getting her message across. I would recommend it to certain people.

[Cincinnatus]

Ditto

[Jimbo07]

:mad:

I'm on page 37 of the paperback edition


Also I noticed there is a section where she discusses placebos and testing and she implies that acupuncture has been proven effective in controlled tests. I haven't got the book here with me but I don't think there were any notes attached to that to indicate what tests she was referring to.

on pg. 33:

"They wanted the fourteen-karat validation of a blinded study, in which one group of patients received acupuncture and one did not, and neither set would know who was the treated, who the placebo... When patients with nausea and vomiting reported relief from bona fide needling but not from sham acupuncture, even the most skeptical Western doctors had to concede that the 5,000-year-old practice might have its limited uses."

No citation given in the references. :mad:

I wanted to give this book to a lay person, but am worried that it violates its own position on scientific thinking (blinded studies) in a single passage!

[Kuko 4000]

I'm about a third of the way through this book and I agree with Stir. It seems like every sentence contains a pun or a clever metaphor or simile or some other device. A sprinkling of such wit is entertaining but in this book it is just tedious.

Also I noticed there is a section where she discusses placebos and testing and she implies that acupuncture has been proven effective in controlled tests. I haven't got the book here with me but I don't think there were any notes attached to that to indicate what tests she was referring to.


I agree on both counts, the puns and the "poetic" style began to grow old quickly, going by this book she just doesn't have the talent / skill / vision to pull it through. Well, at least she tried, that's more than what can be said of many others. The acupuncture thing jumped out of the book in a bad way, even more so if she didn't offer any citations (I've only listened the audiobook).

Overall, the book gave me a better understanding of the big picture and many small snippets of information, so it was definitely worth my time. I think the book is ok for beginners such as myself.

[maatorc]

I agree on both counts, the puns and the "poetic" style began to grow old quickly, going by this book she just doesn't have the talent / skill / vision to pull it through. Well, at least she tried, that's more than what can be said of many others. The acupuncture thing jumped out of the book in a bad way, even more so if she didn't offer any citations (I've only listened the audiobook).

Overall, the book gave me a better understanding of the big picture and many small snippets of information, so it was definitely worth my time. I think the book is ok for beginners such as myself.

Try 'The Western Canon' by Harold Bloom, which I think you will like.