( 12 reviews )
-
Posted: Nov 3 2008
Martin Gardner more or less began the modern skeptical movement, with his 1957 book FADS AND FALLACIES IN THE NAME OF SCIENCE; he is one of the most influential skeptical thinkers of our time; and he is the author of literally hundreds of skeptical articles and dozens of skeptical books--and yet before picking up DID ADAM AND EVE HAVE NAVELS?, I don't think I had ever read anything he had written. After reading this book, however, I intend to read his entire canon. After reading this, I want to own every book he has ever written, because this book is a delight. It is. DID ADAM AND EVE HAVE NAVELS? features engaging essays on Intelligent Design and evolution, the Star of Bethlehem, urine therapy, Freud and psychotherapy, cannibalism, the Science Wars and the Sokal Hoax, suggestions of the Internet in early science fiction, Carlos Castaneda and New Age spirituality, the Heaven's Gate cult, the paranormal interests of Thomas Edison and Isaac Newton, the legend of the Wandering Jew, underground alien bases in New Mexico, and much more. Gardner's essay, "Science and the Unknowable," is a must for any deist wishing to argue his or her case, and very thought-provoking for everyone else; it is perhaps the most cogent argument I've ever read for the idea that all our existence is little more than metaphorical shadows on the walls of Plato's cave, and that outside that cave there might be something else. I can't say I totally agree with the guy on everything, but there's no denying his intelligence, his articulate gift for writing, or his ability to put together a sound defense of his conclusions. Gardner's style of skeptical analysis is interesting. He goes very easy on the attack and on the skeptical dissection, preferring instead to pile up and pile up the ridiculous details and claims of the people he discusses, until the very quantity and extremeness of those claims and details becomes more than enough to allow readers to draw a sound conclusion. He goes easy on his opponents, and yet, they are ultimately all left in a bloody heap; he makes it look effortless. I read this book months ago, but it has stayed with me. I've found myself thinking often of it, and recommending selections from it, and I'm sure I'll recommend it again to others. I'll recommend it to you, right now.... It's good. You should read it.
-
Posted: Aug 12 2008
Yep, there are alot of inane and archaic beliefs out there. And they sure could use debunking. I'm two thirds through this book and the author hasn't even attempted a head on debunking ... NOT ONE. This book is clearly a reissue of a previous book by the author. At the end of each chapter he offers an "addendum" to update things since his last writing. But in neither the chapters themselves, nor the addendums does he actually take on and refute the misconceptions and bizarre, patently absurd beliefs that he describes in detail. Instead, he continually, almost obsessively, references other books and past articles over the preceding three or four decades which one presumes refute the misconceptions in detail; but never once does he infact define the actual scientific objections, or provide any evidence in refutation. AND THATS WHAT I BOUGHT THE BOOK FOR!!! I found this book tiresome, not particularly amusing, of little entertainment value, and largely uninformative. Frankly, it comes across as a cheap attempt at an extra payday by just republishing his prior writings with an add-on update. Save your $3 - $4 plus shipping. If you want to be bored, I'd let you have my copy for free for $2.00 postage.
-
Posted: Aug 12 2008
Yep, there are alot of inane and archaic beliefs out there. And they sure could use debunking, but you won't find that debunking here. I'm two thirds through this book and the author hasn't even attempted a head on debunking of any of the foolish misconceptions ... NOT ONE. This book is clearly a reissue of a previous one by the author. At the end of each chapter he offers an "addendum" to update things since his last writing. But in neither the chapters themselves, nor the addendums, does he actually take on and refute the misconceptions and bizarre, patently absurd beliefs that he describes in repetitive droning detail. Instead, he continually, almost obsessively, references other books and past articles from the preceding three or four decades which one presumes refute the misconceptions in detail; but never once does he himself infact define the actual scientific objections, or provide any evidence in refutation. AND THATS WHAT I BOUGHT THE BOOK FOR!!! I didn't buy it as a bibliography of sources for refutation. I found this book tiresome, not particularly amusing, of little entertainment value, and largely uninformative. Frankly, it comes across as a cheap attempt at an extra payday by just republishing his prior writings with an add-on update. Save your $3 - $4 plus shipping. If you want to be bored, I'd let you have my copy for free for $2.00 postage.
