|
|
4.0 out of 5 stars
Potpourri of interesting ideas, but solid background needed!, 17 Aug 1999
By A Customer
"A glorious accident" is not an easy book... Five leading experts talking about some of the most profound subjects available(consciousness, evolution, the Brain...). It takes quite a lot of background to understand everything that is being said. The fact that these are just transcriptions of interviews and a discussion doesn't make it easier: compared to a normal "book", the ideas presented are not as structured and there's no room for background information to introduce readers in complex matters like Witgensteins philosophy or "orthogenesis" and "epistothisandthat". If Descartes, Newton, Heisenberg, Galileo, Montaigne, Darwin, Dirac, Kant, Turing, Aristoteles or Maxwell are completely unknown to you, this is not YOUR kind of book. :-)In 1991, I saw parts of the original television series. A few years later I read the Dutch printed version for the first time at the age of 20. Now (1999) I've read it again, and there are still quite a few passages where I'm totally lost in space <G>. Now I don't have a degree in philosophy or physics, but still I have a healthy interest in these issues. Not enough to constantly keep in touch with 5 leading experts discussing without holding back.. What is nice about this book, is that you can "grow with it". In around 2005, I'll read it for the 3th time and no doubt I'll conquer some more dark areas. The "interview" approach also gives quite a good impression of the personalities of these five extraordinary men. Sacks is still like a little child that has preserved his ability to wonder about all and everything. You just CAN'T bore this guy because he always finds an interesting approach! Gould is my absolute favourite. Because his ideas appeal to me, and because he is so totally "no-nonsense". Sheldrake is the rebellion with his heart in the right place. Dyson is the quiet one with the hidden powers. Dennett is so self-confident that it looks almost as if he can force reality to comply to his theories instead of the other way round. Toulmin is a bit too literate for my taste: he always gave me the feeling that I was a few steps behind. Not good for the ego <G> All in all I would say that the book lacks structure because of the interview approach, but there are still more than enough interesting bits of original ideas and insight to make it worthwile. Jo Helsen Antwerp, Belgium
|
