<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Skeptic to the core
Review: Gardner is one of the leaders of the American Skeptic movement. (Skeptics (with the capital "S") are those who seriously consider but doubt paranormal phenomenon like UFO's, ESP, and religious faith healers. They want to see if there is good evidence for the stuff and never find it.)He makes the reader think. He considers the breath and width of human knowledge to all be worth talking and writing about. He is never unforthcoming with his opinions. Naturally, this makes for some controversal opinions coming out. But he lets you know when he blunders as well. This collection certainly lives up to a testiment that he has had a long life writing and making folks think about the world they live in. His greatest flaw, in my opinion, is his belief in a god. But then, nobody is ever perfect.
Rating:
Summary: A Journey to the Most Wonderful Places
Review: Gardner's scope is wide, of course. Obviously too wide for some. But for those who enjoy thinking, one finds a kaleidoscope of ideas. This volume is just a taste of a legendary career in journalism, a career filled with insights that challenge everything--especially small closed minds.
Rating:
Summary: A renaissance man in the third millennium
Review: I thoroughly enjoyed this, the definitive collection of Gardner's essays, and recommend it highly. My recommendation, however pales beside those that appear on the book jacket, including praise from Noam Chomsky, Carl Sagan, Stephen Jay Gould, Raymond Smullyan, Arthur C. Clarke, and Stefan Kanfer. Little more need be said about the value of this splendid book; but I would like to offer some observations. The first chapter, a review of four books on symmetry is easily the most informative and insightful ten pages I have ever read on the subject. Gardner's rare talent for making things clear is shown to such advantage here that I would recommend it as a must read for anyone wanting a career in science writing. It's almost magic, the way he evaporates the fog. The next nine chapters are on the physical sciences including chapters on relativity, quantum mechanics, time, superstrings, cosmology, etc., all good reads. The next five are on the social sciences, and it is here that I was introduced to a side of Gardner that I had not found in the other three collections of his that I have read. Chapter 11, "Why I Am Not a Smithian," is on economics and is primarily a dissection of the supply-siders who held forth during the Reagan years. It makes for lively reading even though, curiously it turns into a tribute to Norman Thomas as "the only notable American" to vigorously oppose the Japanese internment camps during WW II. In the next essay, "The Laffer Curve," Gardner continues his assault on the "voodoo economics" of the Reagan years as he presents his own satirical "neo-Laffer curve." Gardner is a sharp eyed and sharp-penned social critic, and, as he demonstrates in Chapter 21, "Close Encounters of the Third Kind," a pretty good movie critic as well. (Although here I think he underrated the magic of Spielberg's movie in order to better concentrate on zapping the usual Spielberg schmaltz and pseudoscience.) Politically speaking, Gardner reveals himself as a "social democrat." The chapter on "Newcomb's Paradox," which Gardner interprets as "related to the question of whether humans possess a genuine power to make free, unpredictable choices," has the effect of revealing Gardner's personality. You'll have to read it to see what I mean, but the choices he makes are psychological choices and reveal him as a man who is not afraid to stand by his beliefs. Herein and in the next chapter we encounter the question of whether we can have free will in the view of an omniscient God. Gardner's solution (with C. S. Lewis and others) is to put God outside time and avoid the contradictions. Incidentally, Gardner makes the very salient point that any language that allows sets to be members of themselves or evaluates the truth or falsity of its statements will run into contradictions (p. 419). It is here in the chapters on philosophy and religion that Gardner is at his most intriguing. He is a theist and a believer in free will, although he admits that "distinguishing free will from determinism" is something we are incapable of doing (p. 427). He equates free will with self-awareness and consciousness, and declares (p. 444) "I am not a vitalist who thinks there is...a soul distinct from the brain." Yet on page 438 he writes, "I cannot conceive of myself as existing without...a brain that has free will." Although none of this is contradictory, we can see that there is something Gardner believes in that is akin to Bishop Berkeley's idealism and beyond the rock of realism that Samuel Johnson gave a kick to in an attempt to refute Berkeley. I agree with Gardner that we are not about to find an answer to the conundrum of free will, although I think it's important to add that as a practical matter the illusion of free will is, for us, as good as the "real" thing. Readers may be surprised to learn that Gardner also identifies himself as a "fideist," a word I had to look up. It refers to someone who believes in God as a matter of faith. I would like to say (since Gardner doesn't) that consciousness as self-awareness should be made distinct from consciousness as self-identity. The former is a question of relative complexity, e.g., chimp consciousness versus flatworm consciousness. The latter is an illusion with great psychological power foisted on us by the evolutionary mechanism primarily to make us fear death. It is adaptive for long-lived creatures such as ourselves, but is otherwise empty. When the Buddhists (and the Vedas and yogic psychology) say the ego is an illusion, this is what they are talking about, this delusional self-identity that we sometimes refer to as consciousness. There are number of funny jokes and asides herein. One of my favorites identifies Ayn Rand (philosophically speaking of course) as "the ugly offspring of Milton Friedman and Madalyn Murray O'Hare" (p. 484).
Rating:
Summary: A renaissance man in the third millennium
Review: I thoroughly enjoyed this, the definitive collection of Gardner's essays, and recommend it highly. My recommendation, however pales beside those that appear on the book jacket, including praise from Noam Chomsky, Carl Sagan, Stephen Jay Gould, Raymond Smullyan, Arthur C. Clarke, and Stefan Kanfer. Little more need be said about the value of this splendid book; but I would like to offer some observations. The first chapter, a review of four books on symmetry is easily the most informative and insightful ten pages I have ever read on the subject. Gardner's rare talent for making things clear is shown to such advantage here that I would recommend it as a must read for anyone wanting a career in science writing. It's almost magic, the way he evaporates the fog. The next nine chapters are on the physical sciences including chapters on relativity, quantum mechanics, time, superstrings, cosmology, etc., all good reads. The next five are on the social sciences, and it is here that I was introduced to a side of Gardner that I had not found in the other three collections of his that I have read. Chapter 11, "Why I Am Not a Smithian," is on economics and is primarily a dissection of the supply-siders who held forth during the Reagan years. It makes for lively reading even though, curiously it turns into a tribute to Norman Thomas as "the only notable American" to vigorously oppose the Japanese internment camps during WW II. In the next essay, "The Laffer Curve," Gardner continues his assault on the "voodoo economics" of the Reagan years as he presents his own satirical "neo-Laffer curve." Gardner is a sharp eyed and sharp-penned social critic, and, as he demonstrates in Chapter 21, "Close Encounters of the Third Kind," a pretty good movie critic as well. (Although here I think he underrated the magic of Spielberg's movie in order to better concentrate on zapping the usual Spielberg schmaltz and pseudoscience.) Politically speaking, Gardner reveals himself as a "social democrat." The chapter on "Newcomb's Paradox," which Gardner interprets as "related to the question of whether humans possess a genuine power to make free, unpredictable choices," has the effect of revealing Gardner's personality. You'll have to read it to see what I mean, but the choices he makes are psychological choices and reveal him as a man who is not afraid to stand by his beliefs. Herein and in the next chapter we encounter the question of whether we can have free will in the view of an omniscient God. Gardner's solution (with C. S. Lewis and others) is to put God outside time and avoid the contradictions. Incidentally, Gardner makes the very salient point that any language that allows sets to be members of themselves or evaluates the truth or falsity of its statements will run into contradictions (p. 419). It is here in the chapters on philosophy and religion that Gardner is at his most intriguing. He is a theist and a believer in free will, although he admits that "distinguishing free will from determinism" is something we are incapable of doing (p. 427). He equates free will with self-awareness and consciousness, and declares (p. 444) "I am not a vitalist who thinks there is...a soul distinct from the brain." Yet on page 438 he writes, "I cannot conceive of myself as existing without...a brain that has free will." Although none of this is contradictory, we can see that there is something Gardner believes in that is akin to Bishop Berkeley's idealism and beyond the rock of realism that Samuel Johnson gave a kick to in an attempt to refute Berkeley. I agree with Gardner that we are not about to find an answer to the conundrum of free will, although I think it's important to add that as a practical matter the illusion of free will is, for us, as good as the "real" thing. Readers may be surprised to learn that Gardner also identifies himself as a "fideist," a word I had to look up. It refers to someone who believes in God as a matter of faith. I would like to say (since Gardner doesn't) that consciousness as self-awareness should be made distinct from consciousness as self-identity. The former is a question of relative complexity, e.g., chimp consciousness versus flatworm consciousness. The latter is an illusion with great psychological power foisted on us by the evolutionary mechanism primarily to make us fear death. It is adaptive for long-lived creatures such as ourselves, but is otherwise empty. When the Buddhists (and the Vedas and yogic psychology) say the ego is an illusion, this is what they are talking about, this delusional self-identity that we sometimes refer to as consciousness. There are number of funny jokes and asides herein. One of my favorites identifies Ayn Rand (philosophically speaking of course) as "the ugly offspring of Milton Friedman and Madalyn Murray O'Hare" (p. 484).
Rating:
Summary: Incredible Breadth of Interests
Review: Martin Gardner is a national treasure. His breadth of intellect is astounding. The only problem with reviewing a Gardner volume is deciding which of his collections of essays is the best place to start reading. This volume may represent the best intro to Gardner. While the subtitle is, "Collected Essays, 1938-1995," none of the essay shows any signs of age. Each essay is supplemented by a postscript which updates more recent developments, or more commonly, Gardner's recent thinking on the subject. Consider the section headings: Physical Science, Social Science, Pseudoscience, Mathematics, The Arts, Philosophy, Religion. Is Gardner the last Renaissance man or what? In short, a great introduction to an amazing thinker. By the way, if you already have one or several of Gardner's other collections, get this one as well. Gardner has lots more to say!
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating book on an astonishing variety of topics.
Review: One reviewer suggested that Gardner is often wrong. Among those who think he is right are Dr. Stephen Gould and the late Carl Sagen. Whether or not you agree with Gardner's opinions on Freud's early theories, William James' adventures with spiritualists, the existance of God (he is a believer incidentally), you will learn new facts and expand your intellectual horizons--a great book for the intellectually curious.
Rating: 
Summary: Too much for this humble reviewer.
Review: There are parts of this book that I liked. I think those are the ones about which I have some firsthand knowledge. It is good to see someone writing layman's articles about quantum physics and special relativity. But all that guff about 'The Wizard Of Oz'? Trying to cram so much erudition into one book leaves Mr.Gardner looking somewhat pompous and self-opinionated AND leaves the rest of us feeling just a little dumb. So, I suppose the question must be, who was this book written for? How many people can there be in North America who can understand and heaven forbid, critique the all-knowing Mr.Gardner?
Rating:
Summary: Gardner's best
Review: This book is made up of 47 fascinating chapters, which really are Gardner's best. If you liked Gardner in SciAm you'll love The Night Is Large.
Rating:
Summary: Versatile, Lucid, Entertaining!
Review: This diverse collection of forty-six essays written from 1938 to 1995 is a real eye-opener. Gardner is best-known for his mathematical columns in the Scientific American. But science and mathematics are the subject of fewer than half of the essays in this progidious collection. The bulk of them are in the area of the social sciences, the arts, philosophy, and religion. In these Gardner displays a depth and authority that is surprising. All essays are spiced up with introductory paragraphs and postscipts which reveal the author's changing (or unchanging) attitudes on the subject. The first ten essays on the physical sciences alone are worh the price of admission, covering such subjects as symmetry, the twin paradox, quantum mechanics and superstrings. He cannot help taking a swipe at the Anthropic Principles(s) in an essay titled "WAP, SAP, PAP, and FAP. He adds a fifth in the last line of this essay which did not get listed in the title, namely, the Completely Ridiculous Anthropic Principle. In the section on philosophy he discusses provocative people like Allan Bloom, Isaiah Berlin, Mortimer Adler, and Robert Maynard Hutchins. Did you know that Hutchins' think tank in Santa Barbara was funded by the profits of Alex Comfort's book, "The Joy of Sex"? This questionable arrangement started out amicably enough, providing income for the Institute and a tax haven for Comfort's profits, but it eventually ended in unfriendly counter lawsuits. Particular fun is provided by a critical review Gardner wrote under the pseudonym George Groth, debunking his own book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener." Only in the last line does he disclose his identity. You do not have to agree with everything Gardner says, but you cannot help but be intellectually informed and entertained by this remarkable modern intellect.
Rating:
Summary: The Best of the Best by one of the great modern scholars
Review: Truely the greatest of Gardner's views and essays, just open it up at any point and you will find a lucid, witty, and well thought out piece of writing. Gardner is one of America's great scholarly intellects of the 20th century, and this collection will secure his memory
<< 1 >>
| 
