The Science of Discworld II: The Globe: 2 [Paperback]

What an enthralling and amazing book! My overall reaction is an incredible jealousy for the writing skills that allow the authors expound such deep understanding of the strengths and foibles of both physics and neuropsychobiology in such an accessible way. In my own way, paltry compared to their powers of exposition, I have been attempting to communicate the same information to my graduate students. I bow my head to them in respect for their ability to display and annihilate some of the myths of science without denigrating science.

The art of teaching is to capture the attention of the student, not, as some believe, to anesthetize them with droning recitation that at best transfers information from the notebook of the professor to the laptop of the student without passing through the brain of either. Pratchett, Stewart, and Cohen achieve their goal by contrasting our world with one that runs on magic (Pratchett's Diskworld series), a series with which the authors expect familiarity. If you do not have this familiarity, you have a treat in store. However, the alternate chapters that deal with the underlying science are well worth reading by themselves. The explain the science clearly and punctuate the exposition with hilarious one liners whose meaning
only deepens upon further introspection.

"We are proud we live in the Information Age. We do, and that is the trouble. If we ever get to the Meaning Age, we'll finally understand where we went wrong."

"Technology isn't science. The two are closely associated: technology helps advance science and science helps to advance technology. Technology is about making things work without understanding them; science is about understanding things without making them work." (This is a point that even the leaders of the American Optical Society failed to grasp a few years ago when they tried, mercifully unsuccessfully, to merge an Optical science society with an optics technology society.)

"Many elderly scientists go through what is sometimes called a 'philosopause'. They stop doing science and take up not very good philosophy instead." (Do I need to name names?)

On a different level, leaving aside the one-liners, the book presents a most accessible and cogent description of the human condition, emphasizing the role of pattern recognition and 'stories' in the daily affairs of man, concepts supported by the body of recent research in the neurosciences. Convincing examples from politics, religion, and social customs abound. Stories/patterns are what permit us to extrapolate into the future from present events.

The book concludes with: "The [stories] we've got have brought us a long way. Plenty of creatures are intelligent but only one tells stories. That's us Pan narrans. And what about Homo sapiens? Yes, we think that would be a very good idea ..."

To which I can only add, Amen, and urge you to read the book and allow yourself to be entertained while novel ideas infiltrate your mind.

Thomas P. Vogl, Ph.D. , 7/17/2002

In the original Science of the Discworld, Earth, or rather 'Roundworld' (but that's not possible, things would fall off the bottom), was created as an annomilous by-product of splitting the 'thaum' - the magical equivalent of the atom, understood by few, abused by many
(especially if it involves fireworks directed at other wizards).

The Science of the Discworld told the story of Roundworld, from creation to destruction, and the scientific princpals behind it. The narrative of Terry Prachett provided a witty medium through which Messieurs Stewart and Cohen could explain to the masses why things are as they are.

But wizards are wizards. Once the initial excitement wore off, the mini-universe got shunted out of the way. After all "It mostly had ice ages, and was less engrossing than an ant farm." But they missed something. Us. More to the point, the elves didn't.

The Discworldian story can be read pretty much as a self-contained novella, but a)that is not the point and b)you miss half the fun. While all the ingredients of Pratchett's humour and 'narrativium' remain, we are gently lead into the seemingly daunting world of science.

It is a world which many would have hoped to have left behind at school, but while we are not spoon-fed the 'children-lies' told at schools, we are not inundated with overly complicated description and jargon. The balance is very difficult to maintain, but Messieurs Stewart and Cohen manage admirably.

It is a study of humanity, from prehistoric origins to modern existence; from birth and through life; exploring why we are here (because a meteorite killed the crabs - see Science of the Discworld I) and why London still isn't a Neandathal encampment. It is the exploration of mind, intelligence, art and science. With gags.

Some previous knowledge of the Discworld setting is needed to give full weight to the book; the development of Hex, for example is covered in numerous novels. However, for the general purposes of the book, one can read it having only read the first Science of the Discworld.

To those who love the Discworld, I'd say that even just the story is worth it, but the sciency bits are not incomprehensible and makes the series better. If this is the first book on Discworld that you've read, I'd say wait until reading #1, or even a couple of the novels themselves (Lords and Ladies is particularly relevant to this one).

Over all, a brilliant read, definitely something to fill some of the gap before the next novel.

This is a book which through scientific and narrative tries to get the reader to think and to doubt just about anything he's been told. The primary point is that humans are top of the food chain because of *stories*.

The authors make many eye-opening points and whilst they dismiss several things without backing up with proper scientific data they tell the reader that yes, you should be critical of this book as well.

This is more of a philosophical work than a story, I love it.