Rating: 
Summary: Sagan: inoculating the mind to absurd thoughts
Review: The erosion of the bedrock certainties that used to be provided by the established churches has created a vacuum in peoples lives that is increasingly being filled with new age ideologies and faddish disciplines. Science itself has lost the respect of the public who see only the bad of science and seemingly forget that they are surrounded by innumerable examples of the good. Step forward Carl Sagan, to bring to peoples attention that the problems we face in this day and age, even though they may have been caused by science, are only likely to be resolved with science and not by feverish crystal rubbing and other quackery.Touching on several examples of pseudoscience - recovered memory syndrome and Satanic abuse, so-called alien abduction and others, Sagan calmly examines the claims and finds them to be built on a desire to see things as they are not. He argues that the only true method with which to examine these claims is by adoption of a healthily skeptical scientific method. In this regard he devotes a chapter of his book to his now-famous "Baloney Detection Kit" which informs the reader of the forms which pseudoscientific arguments take - tautologies, ad hominem attacks etc. And also what you should be looking for in an argument that should be taken seriously and what kind of proofs should be needed for it to be accpeted. Beyond this advice on pseudoscience and how to handle it, Sagan devotes the latter part of the book to a convincing argument that only through widespread scientific education can democracy survive and flourish. Though he bemoans the standard of scientific education in America Sagan was not an author without hope in humanity. Demon-Haunted World is a fitting testament to all that Sagan stood for and should serve to inspire in the reader at least a healthy respect for the scientific worldview as a richly satisfying one, if not enthusiasm to adopt what Sagan advocated into one's own perspective.
Rating:
Summary: An education in Skepticism
Review: Carl Sagan was one of the many champions of modern rational thought and it is a shame that he is no longer with us, but fortunately he left a very important document for the future generations to read; the mind changing book of skepticism and logical thinking. This astounding book deals with many important pseudo-sciences, their origins and modern myths around them, including: UFOs, ghosts, miracles, Alien abductions, blood thirsty Gods, etc. and all the logical fallacies contained within their inner dogmas. This is a very important tool for all rational individuals that want to have a clearer understanding of these modern (and ancient) myths. The only secure strategy to disprove a fallacy, is knowing it. If you like this book, read any non-fiction work by the brilliant Isaac Asimov (Asimov's Guide to the Bible is HIGLY recommended) and Michael Shermer.
Rating:
Summary: A method that works
Review: Many other favorable reviews have expressed my thoughts, and in most cases more eloquently, so I will address only the philosophical aspect of the book. Carl Sagan wrote at the beginning of chapter 24: "I do not wish to suggest that advocacy of science and skepticism necessarily leads to the all the political and social conclusions I draw." The negative reviewers all seem to miss that, but it still should be obvious that Sagan advocated not a philosophy, but a method, and one that works. As a matter of fact, three decades of using this method have lead me to conclusions quite different than Sagan's, in particular, more faith in God and less faith in government. The political and social sciences are not very predictable, so a wide range of ideas can be expected. Sagan's conclusions in the physical and life sciences were, in contrast, essentially identical to mine. What unites skeptics of all philosophies is the willingness to change one's mind in light of reasonable evidence. What unites pseudoscientists of the left (e.g. postmodernists) and right (e.g. creationists), however, is the willingness to distort the evidence to fit their agenda. Above all, Sagan noted that fraud and error in science is almost always detected and corrected by science, whereas fraud and error in pseudoscience is almost never detected and corrected by pseudoscience.
Rating:
Summary: A compelling social commentary, regardless of your views
Review: Regardless of how you feel about Sagan's political or religious views, this book remains a compelling social commentary. Even those who disagree with most of his views can still benefit greatly from reading this book. Sagan seems to be reaching out from the grave to try and warn us of the dangers of allowing others to do our thinking for us; the dangers of turning off our minds and ignoring problems; the dangers of taking our freedom and our intellect for granted. Most importantly, he warns of the danger of mixing high technology with a society that is apathetic about scientific pursuits; and the danger of allowing the government to control the people, instead of the people controlling the government. Sagan gives a stunning indictment of the current state of the educational system in the United States. I don't think anybody can argue with him here. We are raising our children without the tools they will need later in life, not just for survival, but in order to grow to their full potential. Too often, we leave them in danger of getting fleeced by every two-bit huckster that comes along. Is that really the future we want for them? Though it is an unlikely and unexpected source, Sagan provides some of the best parenting advice that has ever found its way into print. He rightly chastises us for making young children feel stupid when they ask what we feel are silly questions. He questions why our society places more emphasis on athletics than on academics, especially math and science, which are the tools of the future. Why do we make children who want to pursue these areas feel as though they are "weird", "nerds", or social outcasts? He gives pointers to parents on how to encourage your children, and how to help them learn, even in areas with which you are not familiar or have little interest. We could all use to do more questioning of the information that is spoon-fed to us by mass media: TV, newspapers, magazines, the Internet, etc. Are the people giving us this information really experts on it? How can we tell? Sagan gives great pointers to help us sift the good from the bad, and the fact from fiction. My only complaint, though a minor one, is that I felt the book was arranged almost backwards. I felt that many of the more important essays were in the second half of the book. But I suppose he had to do it that way, in order to build up to the bigger points he was trying to convey. Regardless, READ the whole book, THINK about it for yourself, and form YOUR OWN conclusions. That's exactly what he is telling us to do, anyway.
Rating:
Summary: Loved it!
Review: My science-loving, autistic self decided to write a review of this book now that I have finished the visceral experience of taking a hike (and, GASP!, analyzing my natural surroundings!). My comments are primarily about the book. Sorry, no ad hominem attacks or irrelevant information:(1) Well-written and clearly understandable general science books are rare, but this is one of them. Sagan's prose is terse and lovely. Not a lot of boring stuff in here either. (2) This book is not primarily an ethics book. It's about science. It doesn't offer a moral vision. And if it doesn't offer a moral vision, it can't very well promote nihilism (which is a moral vision). (3) Don't read this as a philosophical treatise on science. It ain't. (4) The book becomes dogmatic in certain places. This seems to be the very antithesis of the open-mindedness which leads to the scientific investigation that Sagan espouses. But, on a practical level, it's hard to see how anyone could go around not being dogmatic about something. (5) If nothing else, the book displays that lovely little dialectical loop that assails every skeptic: you say you want justified belief, but why is a scientific skeptic's belief any more justified than, say, religious, dogma? And if you give a reason, why is that reason any better than another reason?(6)Read the book. It gets you thinking. :)
Rating: 
Summary: Tiresome book by a self promoter
Review: It amazes me that this book is so extravagantly over praised. It really is a dull, creaky, moldy hymn to the belief that science can substitute for religion. Wrong. In a materialist universe, nihilism is the only point of view justified by the facts and the only objection to even crimes against humanity such as genocide is that you don't personally like it (as Bertrand Russell admitted). Every evil and every good become nothing but a matter of personal taste and the terms have no other meaning. Disapproving of murder has no more moral weight than preferrring relish to onions on your hot dogs. Sorry, Carl, we can't sustain any kind of humane world on what you have to offer.Besides, it seems to me that many of the things that science has brought us has actually made the world worse (bio-terrorism, nuclear weapons, the complete medicalization of human existence, the Tuskeegee syphillis experiments, etc). And don't give me that line about how science is pure and it is only when humans misuse it that it becomes evil. The same thing could be said about the religions that you so despise. The diference is that the great religions have a self correcting moral vision and are capable of reform. Science lacks, and can never have, a moral vision. It (and scientists) always sells itself out to the largest corporate bidder. Don't talk about science, Carl, talk about science, inc., since that is the only way it exists. Oh, and the reason why this review is anonymous is because I got tired of receiving hate filled, venom drenched email from all of the supposedly cool headed fans of this book.
Rating:
Summary: The Church of Science
Review: The fact that so many of Sagan's followers believe this book should be "required reading for the entire planet or in schools" illustrates the hypocrisy that is blatant here. I am no fan of the New Age and agree that some degree of skepticism is a healthy approach to any new idea but Mr. Sagan and his followers don't seem to realize that they are as dogmatic and exclusive in their worship of science as any fundamentalist religion and as dismissive and condescending towards those of us whose experience of life differs from their own. The belief here is not that Mr. Sagan and his followers hold a particular view but that anyone who does not subscribe to their belief system is either dangerous, misguided, or just plain wrong and in need of mandatory conversion. The belief that that this universal conversion is the only possible cure for the world's evils and ills is ironic. Does it sound familiar? It should. It is a mirror of the kind of thinking this book claims to "debunk" and discourage. The thinking person must realize that to replace one dogma or religion with another is pointless as well as misses the point. I'll pass on Carl's candle in the dark and use "whatever gets me through the night" on my own terms and although I belong to no religion I'll be tempted to pray just because I am thankful that I have the freedom to do so and so many different prayers and paths to choose from.
Rating: 
Summary: Science as Whistling in the Dark
Review: A scattered collection of essays, the best of the bunch being the 'Baloney Detection Kit' chapter. Which is a valuable rephrasing of the scientist's credo, all-too-often glossed over in science education. In my opinion, the fatal flaw of this book is Sagan's naive materialism. Surprising to me, since he was a life-long marijuana connoisseur, valuing it for giving him creative insights into scientific problems. Yet he appears to have gained no inkling of the transcendent possibilities of consciousness, and seems all-too-ready to fall into the old 19th century trap of dismissing it all as wish-fulfillment fantasy (which, granted, 99% of it is). Anyway, for a valuable antidote and/or complement to Sagan's somewhat antique formulation of the scientific worldview, check out Nobelist Kary Mullis' 'Dancing Naked in the Mind Field', and physics prof. Victor Mansfield's 'Science Synchronicity and Soul Making'. Both of these books provide excellent counter-arguments to Sagan's (at times) all-too-naive skeptical realism, from authors who are at least as scientifically qualified as Sagan, if not more so.
Rating:
Summary: Should be required reading for the planet
Review: This is an excellent discussion not only of many specific ludicrous but widely held beliefs in our culture, but also the psychological and sociological underpinnings and weaknesses of the human mind that enable their proliferation. Carl Sagan was a brilliant scientist with an unusual ability to communicate effectively with a mass audience. In "Demon-Haunted World" he shows how true science provides a powerful and rational means to illuminate the darkness of our limited understanding of our world. This message needs to reach the masses so that science can be a blazing beacon of truth rather than just a feeble candle in the dark. This should be required reading for the planet.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent scientist, Excellent writer, poor philosopher
Review: Loved all his books but this one. Be warned, this book not only deals with psuedo-science but also attempts to debunk religion. Most of Sagan's ardent followers may diagree, but there is some compelling evidence for this. I did some research on Sagan and found out some very little known things about him. 1. I always thought he had multiple degrees from some of the biographies about him, but found he has one legitamate one in astronomy from Cornell, the rest are 'honorary'. 2. Sagan was an active Secular Humanist. Secular humanists believe that the only way to achieve world peace is through the elimination of religion (don't take my word for it, check out the secular humanist manifesto posted on the web, very scary). No-one in my opinion can honestly believe that this book did't have some serious political and athiest underpinnings. If Sagan had simply stuck to pseudo-science, I would have given it 5 stars. In conclusion, this book is a handbook for secular humanist beliefs which so happens to be marketed by the publisher as objective science. Sagan attempts to equate science and reason with athiesm, and religion with irrationalism. pure philosophy.
|
