Reviews from Amazon

Six impossible things before breakfast

Beliefs are strange things - people tend to stick to them despite contrary evidence. In Six impossible things before breakfast Lewis Wolpert looks at how we come by our beliefs, and puts forward a theory that we naturally try to find a causal explanation for things, even when there is insufficient information to do so. He shows how tool use goes hand in hand with a causal view of the world. If you're interested in the nature of belief then you'll find plenty of useful information in this book. However, I did have severe misgivings about some of Wolpert's arguments.

Firstly Wolpert claims that he tries not to belittle other people's beliefs. I feel that he fails in this attempt. Clearly he is very knowledgeable, but rather than critically examining his own beliefs he gives the impression that he knows better than everyone else. Wolpert's breadth of knowledge brings me on to my second complaint - he doesn't always stick to the point in an argument, and sometimes a sentence seems to change tack in the middle. Another thing that irritated me was his comments on the difficulty people have in logical thinking, such as assessing the validity of syllogisms. I can't help feeling 'so what' - some things are difficult to work out and we shouldn't expect them to come naturally. They don't to me and they don't to Wolpert either it seems (as far as I can tell he gets the third example wrong)

Amazon.com info

Hardcover 256 pages
ISBN: 0393064492
Salesrank: 398299
Weight:0.7 lbs

Published: 2007 W. W. Norton

Amazon price $17.13

Marketplace:New from $5.95:Used from $5.60

Buy from Amazon.com

Amazon.co.uk info

Hardcover 288 pages
ISBN: 0571209203
Salesrank: 209937
Weight:0.66 lbs

Published: 2006 Faber and Faber

Amazon price £11.49

Marketplace:New from £6.22:Used from £2.95

Buy from Amazon.co.uk

Amazon.ca info

Hardcover 288 pages
ISBN: 0571209203
Salesrank: 143668
Weight:0.66 lbs

Published: 2006 Faber And Faber Ltd.

Amazon price CDN$ 15.75

Marketplace:New from CDN$ 13.06:Used from CDN$ 16.99

Buy from Amazon.ca

Product Description
A unique, scientific look into why we are all believers. In Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking-Glass, the White Queen tells Alice that to believe in a wildly improbable fact she simply needs to "draw a long breath and shut [her] eyes." Alice finds this advice ridiculous. But don't almost all of us, at some time or another, engage in magical thinking? Seventy percent of Americans believe in angels; 13 percent of British scientists "touch wood"; 40 percent of Americans believe that astrology is scientific. And that is only the beginning. In Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast, Lewis Wolpert tackles one of the most important causes on the horizon of public debate: the nature of belief. Looking at belief's psychological basis and its possible evolutionary origins in physical cause and effect, Wolpert expertly investigates what science can tell us about those concepts we are so sure of, covering everything from everyday beliefs that give coherence to our experiences, to religious beliefs, to paranormal beliefs for which there is no evidence.

Product Description

A unique, scientific look into why we are all believers.

In Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking-Glass, the White Queen tells Alice that to believe in a wildly improbable fact she simply needs to "draw a long breath and shut [her] eyes." Alice finds this advice ridiculous. But don't almost all of us, at some time or another, engage in magical thinking? Seventy percent of Americans believe in angels; 13 percent of British scientists "touch wood"; 40 percent of Americans believe that astrology is scientific. And that is only the beginning.

In Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast, Lewis Wolpert tackles one of the most important causes on the horizon of public debate: the nature of belief. Looking at belief's psychological basis and its possible evolutionary origins in physical cause and effect, Wolpert expertly investigates what science can tell us about those concepts we are so sure of, covering everything from everyday beliefs that give coherence to our experiences, to religious beliefs, to paranormal beliefs for which there is no evidence.

Short on Evidence *
Mr. (Dr?) Wolpert admittedly states, with all due candor, that his book has weak evidence (although he inconceivably suggests that this is only "at times"). How an honest scientist (even in the field of embryology, which is remarkably afield from evolutionary psychology) can write a book like this in the face of this fact is baffling. And it shows. The largest problem with this book is that the author himself has no idea what his causative explanation is. For example, pg. 67 "... I argue that it was causal thining that was a fundamental adaptation required for making complex tools, and that it was technology that drove human evolution". Despite this argument, he himself reverts to a different position later in the book. For example, pg. 117, "My suggestion is that [belief and religion] had their origin in the evolution of causal beliefs, which in turn had its origins in tool use" and also, pg. 79, "Thus causal thinking preceded and was an essential prerequisite for language development...Language would help enormously with the construction and use of new tools...". As this should illuminate, the author can't keep his explanation straight. Instead of choosing a theory and then looking for evidence confirming or disconfirming his theory, he simply accepts that it is true, and uses all manner of shady evidence to prop up this ridiculous contradictory theory. That said, he never does form a complete thought in the entire book, that I could detect at least. There are manifest evidences but none are convincing and many don't support the idea at all. A single sentence, however, can refute the entire thing. When the primitive tools of many societies are compared, there are remarkable similarities. These similarities disperse as the populations themselves, do, which is correlated, in turn, with the evolution of languages. Hrm... that does tend to destroy his hypothesis. And it isn't a very good one, either. Pass. Harkius

Short on Evidence *

Mr. (Dr?) Wolpert admittedly states, with all due candor, that his book has weak evidence (although he inconceivably suggests that this is only "at times"). How an honest scientist (even in the field of embryology, which is remarkably afield from evolutionary psychology) can write a book like this in the face of this fact is baffling.

And it shows.

The largest problem with this book is that the author himself has no idea what his causative explanation is. For example, pg. 67 "... I argue that it was causal thining that was a fundamental adaptation required for making complex tools, and that it was technology that drove human evolution". Despite this argument, he himself reverts to a different position later in the book. For example, pg. 117, "My suggestion is that [belief and religion] had their origin in the evolution of causal beliefs, which in turn had its origins in tool use" and also, pg. 79, "Thus causal thinking preceded and was an essential prerequisite for language development...Language would help enormously with the construction and use of new tools...".

As this should illuminate, the author can't keep his explanation straight. Instead of choosing a theory and then looking for evidence confirming or disconfirming his theory, he simply accepts that it is true, and uses all manner of shady evidence to prop up this ridiculous contradictory theory.

That said, he never does form a complete thought in the entire book, that I could detect at least. There are manifest evidences but none are convincing and many don't support the idea at all. A single sentence, however, can refute the entire thing. When the primitive tools of many societies are compared, there are remarkable similarities. These similarities disperse as the populations themselves, do, which is correlated, in turn, with the evolution of languages.

Hrm... that does tend to destroy his hypothesis. And it isn't a very good one, either.

Pass.

Harkius

The Great Ape that asked "Why?" *****
I read this book as the last of a group of books comprising the recent works of Daniel Dennett (whew!)(Breaking the Spell), Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion), Christopher Hitchens (God is not Great), and both of the works by Sam Harris (The End of Faith and Letter to a Christian Nation). For many reasons and particularly because of Wolpert's straightforward theme, I regret I ended rather than started with Wolpert's book in the group. As you are no doubt aware, the theme/proposition of Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast is that the cause-and-effect wiring that showed up in our brains to permit the competitive edge* of complex tool-making is the same wiring that causes our children to ask innumerable questions beginning with "why" too soon after learning to speak syntactically. It is this drive to model our world by causes and effects that competitively distinguishes us as a species. We are an anxious bunch when left with too many unanswered "whys" and turn to stories of causal links or assign temporally correlated events as causally linked in order to reassure ourselves all is well...things have always and will continue to happen for reasons that may be in our control or in the control of one or more benevolent supernatural entities. Just as the scientific method often tests hypotheses that are not immediately dispelled by common sense, these stories of causal links do not necessarily need a foundation in the natural world...they just need to satisfy the cause-effect craving. As you are aware, correlation may indicate but does not necessarily equate with causation and so scientific investigators are left determining, and re-determining, the causal mechanisms, if any, in nature underlying the correlation. Unlike the scientific method, once these stories of casual links take root, we are wired to hold them fast even in the face of independently corroborating facts to the contrary. *Sorry, I just couldn't help myself from punning. Combining Wolpert's book with the recent works of the above-cited authors, one takes away a broader theme (see Michael Shermer, Why Darwin Matters) that perhaps we humans got this far by the extra caution taken when seeing patterns where none exist, by immediately projecting intent and anticipated actions onto other beings or objects (irrespective of whether these beings were present or ever existed) and responding to those projections, and by developing both our technologies and our myths due to our insatiable quest for causal links. When contemplating an existence of our conscious self beyond the lifespan of our amazing, yet mortal, brain, we naturally feel a part of something bigger than ourselves. If this something involves or is orchestrated by one or more supernatural entities, we have no way of scientifically knowing. Wolpert ends his book in a fashion reminiscent of the late Stephen J. Gould (Rock of Ages) where religious beliefs and scientific beliefs are each given their own due respect/space (as you may recall Gould's nonoverlapping magisteria). To the extent scientific beliefs are nearly inaccessible to those without sufficient skills in critical analysis and mathematics and to the extent religious beliefs can take hold in the mind of a child in a day, the populating advantage appears to go to religious beliefs. Unlike Dawkins, Wolpert climbs no soapbox to cry for enhanced critical analysis, mathematics and scientific reasoning in American public schools. He shows little if any distaste for purposeful "scientific" misinformation fed children in home schools or schools supported by literalist religions. Perhaps Wolpert took the matter as far as he felt comfortable in his closing that religious belief systems should not abridge the rights of others.

The Great Ape that asked "Why?" *****

I read this book as the last of a group of books comprising the recent works of Daniel Dennett (whew!)(Breaking the Spell), Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion), Christopher Hitchens (God is not Great), and both of the works by Sam Harris (The End of Faith and Letter to a Christian Nation). For many reasons and particularly because of Wolpert's straightforward theme, I regret I ended rather than started with Wolpert's book in the group. As you are no doubt aware, the theme/proposition of Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast is that the cause-and-effect wiring that showed up in our brains to permit the competitive edge* of complex tool-making is the same wiring that causes our children to ask innumerable questions beginning with "why" too soon after learning to speak syntactically. It is this drive to model our world by causes and effects that competitively distinguishes us as a species. We are an anxious bunch when left with too many unanswered "whys" and turn to stories of causal links or assign temporally correlated events as causally linked in order to reassure ourselves all is well...things have always and will continue to happen for reasons that may be in our control or in the control of one or more benevolent supernatural entities. Just as the scientific method often tests hypotheses that are not immediately dispelled by common sense, these stories of causal links do not necessarily need a foundation in the natural world...they just need to satisfy the cause-effect craving. As you are aware, correlation may indicate but does not necessarily equate with causation and so scientific investigators are left determining, and re-determining, the causal mechanisms, if any, in nature underlying the correlation. Unlike the scientific method, once these stories of casual links take root, we are wired to hold them fast even in the face of independently corroborating facts to the contrary.

*Sorry, I just couldn't help myself from punning.

Combining Wolpert's book with the recent works of the above-cited authors, one takes away a broader theme (see Michael Shermer, Why Darwin Matters) that perhaps we humans got this far by the extra caution taken when seeing patterns where none exist, by immediately projecting intent and anticipated actions onto other beings or objects (irrespective of whether these beings were present or ever existed) and responding to those projections, and by developing both our technologies and our myths due to our insatiable quest for causal links. When contemplating an existence of our conscious self beyond the lifespan of our amazing, yet mortal, brain, we naturally feel a part of something bigger than ourselves. If this something involves or is orchestrated by one or more supernatural entities, we have no way of scientifically knowing.

Wolpert ends his book in a fashion reminiscent of the late Stephen J. Gould (Rock of Ages) where religious beliefs and scientific beliefs are each given their own due respect/space (as you may recall Gould's nonoverlapping magisteria). To the extent scientific beliefs are nearly inaccessible to those without sufficient skills in critical analysis and mathematics and to the extent religious beliefs can take hold in the mind of a child in a day, the populating advantage appears to go to religious beliefs. Unlike Dawkins, Wolpert climbs no soapbox to cry for enhanced critical analysis, mathematics and scientific reasoning in American public schools. He shows little if any distaste for purposeful "scientific" misinformation fed children in home schools or schools supported by literalist religions. Perhaps Wolpert took the matter as far as he felt comfortable in his closing that religious belief systems should not abridge the rights of others.

Nice Concept, Bad Execution **
Wolpert selected a very interesting topic for this book. And that's all the nice things I have to say about it. He makes a large number of claims that he doesn't bother to support with evidence or explanation. He does not cite his references, although they are listed in the back matter (helpful, but not terribly so, since a particular statement cannot be linked to its source). His paragraphs seem to start and stop willy-nilly and do not provide clear arguments to support his claims. It is unclear which of his claims he intends to support and which he intends to lob toward any ear that will listen. In short, this book seems like it was written in an ad-hoc, stream-of-consciousness manner. The book does not clearly present its arguments, define important terms like "understand" (this is very important when discussing this topic), or lend itself to detailed study of the subject matter. This book was not yet ripe for the printing, but it was printed nevertheless. Do us all a favor and don't support the publishing of bad books by purchasing them.

Nice Concept, Bad Execution **

Wolpert selected a very interesting topic for this book. And that's all the nice things I have to say about it. He makes a large number of claims that he doesn't bother to support with evidence or explanation. He does not cite his references, although they are listed in the back matter (helpful, but not terribly so, since a particular statement cannot be linked to its source). His paragraphs seem to start and stop willy-nilly and do not provide clear arguments to support his claims. It is unclear which of his claims he intends to support and which he intends to lob toward any ear that will listen.
In short, this book seems like it was written in an ad-hoc, stream-of-consciousness manner. The book does not clearly present its arguments, define important terms like "understand" (this is very important when discussing this topic), or lend itself to detailed study of the subject matter. This book was not yet ripe for the printing, but it was printed nevertheless. Do us all a favor and don't support the publishing of bad books by purchasing them.

A Good Summary of Complex New Evidence *****
Six Impossible Things before Breakfast, by Lewis Wolpert. This book was very interesting to me as an analysis of human understanding of causation and the importance of our understanding of causation in how we perform other intellectual functions. In particular, we formulate beliefs. One of the characteristics that separates us even from the closest animals is our ability to understand and rationalize cause and effect. Animals, even the great apes, have very limited understanding -- if any -- of causality. We know that from subjecting those animals to experiments in which they would be rewarded for exercising any intellectual capacity that they have. Human beings have a strong motive to understand causation. Sometimes the intellectual process by which we reach conclusions about causation is described as a "belief engine." There is no doubt that our belief engine is somewhat faulty. Our belief engine "prefers quick decisions, it is bad with numbers, loves representativeness, and sees patterns where often there is only randomness. It is too often influenced by authority, and it has a liking for mysticism." p. 220. We suffer from the "Pollyanna principle," being far more likely to focus on and remember positive rather than negative reports about ourselves. The "Lake Wobegon effect," explains why 94% of college professors believe that they are better than their average colleague at their jobs. The "interviewer illusion" guarantees that we will, as a rule, feel far more confident in our ability to predict the future of others than an objective retrospective analysis would justify. We are overconfident in the correctness of our own judgments. The "Barnum effect" means that we will see merit in vague and generalized descriptions. We tend to make up stories to explain what we have observed, and the stories often overcome the actual memories. We jump to conclusions on inadequate evidence and then hold to those conclusions with vigor. Placebos work. We are capable of internalizing "forced beliefs," manufactured beliefs forced on us by society or authority. These "forced beliefs" are often manufactured to support other beliefs "that are poorly supported by evidence." Page 88. We are pathetically bad at evaluating risks, fearing the airplane flight more than the automobile trip to the airport. We have no natural ability to infer what we learn from statistics. We are good at acquiring superstitious beliefs, and terrible at getting rid of them. We are vulnerable to both hypnotic and ordinary suggestion. Studies have shown just how susceptible we are to the implantation of false memories. We are subject to a strong confirmation bias, which means that once we have formed a belief, we are far more likely to credit new evidence that conforms to those beliefs then evidence that challenges them. It is difficult to understand the human mind because the instrument with which we must understand it is, of course, the human mind. Studies of animals, babies, children, and people with various kinds of brain damage can give us valuable clues. Carefully designed experiments, with adequate controls, can give us valuable hints. Studies of obviously false beliefs held by people with mental illnesses or under the influence of mind altering drugs can help us understand as well. Even this is difficult because "there are no sharp dividing lines between normal beliefs and delusional beliefs." Page 101. Still, susceptibility to delusions has a strong genetic component, suggesting that our susceptibility is somewhat hardwired into the brain. We are naturally resistant to scientific evidence because scientific results are frequently counterintuitive. "Almost without exception, any common-sense view of the world is scientifically false." Page 203. Wolpert proposes that some of the same pathways that developed because of our understanding of causality, particularly tool use, help us to understand our "belief engine." He contends that, "religion and causal beliefs in general had their evolutionary origin in toolmaking, which drove evolution." He admits that the evidence is limited but he could find little or no evidence to contradict this hypothesis. Our belief system is genetically programmed, by which Wolpert means, "that there are circuits in our brain that are set up by the genes that predispose us to have religious and mystical beliefs. It is hard to imagine that the religious and mystical beliefs found in every culture have some other origin." Page 217-18. This is a short book. It is a good introduction to the science of how the human mind works. I had heard of a lot of the studies discussed in this book before. The author does an excellent job of summarizing the significance of the studies. I enjoy books that explain the cutting edge of science to non-scientists. Wolpert goes into my short list of successful popularizers of complex science.

A Good Summary of Complex New Evidence *****

Six Impossible Things before Breakfast, by Lewis Wolpert.

This book was very interesting to me as an analysis of human understanding of causation and the importance of our understanding of causation in how we perform other intellectual functions. In particular, we formulate beliefs. One of the characteristics that separates us even from the closest animals is our ability to understand and rationalize cause and effect. Animals, even the great apes, have very limited understanding -- if any -- of causality. We know that from subjecting those animals to experiments in which they would be rewarded for exercising any intellectual capacity that they have.

Human beings have a strong motive to understand causation. Sometimes the intellectual process by which we reach conclusions about causation is described as a "belief engine." There is no doubt that our belief engine is somewhat faulty. Our belief engine "prefers quick decisions, it is bad with numbers, loves representativeness, and sees patterns where often there is only randomness. It is too often influenced by authority, and it has a liking for mysticism." p. 220. We suffer from the "Pollyanna principle," being far more likely to focus on and remember positive rather than negative reports about ourselves. The "Lake Wobegon effect," explains why 94% of college professors believe that they are better than their average colleague at their jobs. The "interviewer illusion" guarantees that we will, as a rule, feel far more confident in our ability to predict the future of others than an objective retrospective analysis would justify. We are overconfident in the correctness of our own judgments. The "Barnum effect" means that we will see merit in vague and generalized descriptions.

We tend to make up stories to explain what we have observed, and the stories often overcome the actual memories. We jump to conclusions on inadequate evidence and then hold to those conclusions with vigor. Placebos work. We are capable of internalizing "forced beliefs," manufactured beliefs forced on us by society or authority. These "forced beliefs" are often manufactured to support other beliefs "that are poorly supported by evidence." Page 88.

We are pathetically bad at evaluating risks, fearing the airplane flight more than the automobile trip to the airport. We have no natural ability to infer what we learn from statistics. We are good at acquiring superstitious beliefs, and terrible at getting rid of them. We are vulnerable to both hypnotic and ordinary suggestion. Studies have shown just how susceptible we are to the implantation of false memories.

We are subject to a strong confirmation bias, which means that once we have formed a belief, we are far more likely to credit new evidence that conforms to those beliefs then evidence that challenges them.

It is difficult to understand the human mind because the instrument with which we must understand it is, of course, the human mind. Studies of animals, babies, children, and people with various kinds of brain damage can give us valuable clues. Carefully designed experiments, with adequate controls, can give us valuable hints. Studies of obviously false beliefs held by people with mental illnesses or under the influence of mind altering drugs can help us understand as well. Even this is difficult because "there are no sharp dividing lines between normal beliefs and delusional beliefs." Page 101. Still, susceptibility to delusions has a strong genetic component, suggesting that our susceptibility is somewhat hardwired into the brain.

We are naturally resistant to scientific evidence because scientific results are frequently counterintuitive. "Almost without exception, any common-sense view of the world is scientifically false." Page 203.

Wolpert proposes that some of the same pathways that developed because of our understanding of causality, particularly tool use, help us to understand our "belief engine." He contends that, "religion and causal beliefs in general had their evolutionary origin in toolmaking, which drove evolution." He admits that the evidence is limited but he could find little or no evidence to contradict this hypothesis. Our belief system is genetically programmed, by which Wolpert means, "that there are circuits in our brain that are set up by the genes that predispose us to have religious and mystical beliefs. It is hard to imagine that the religious and mystical beliefs found in every culture have some other origin." Page 217-18.

This is a short book. It is a good introduction to the science of how the human mind works. I had heard of a lot of the studies discussed in this book before. The author does an excellent job of summarizing the significance of the studies. I enjoy books that explain the cutting edge of science to non-scientists. Wolpert goes into my short list of successful popularizers of complex science.

Fantastic *****
It is quite beautiful how Wolpert sets up the book to explain how some can reject his premise of a non-existent god. The facts contained in this book, and the occasional theory (though well-backed ones), are brilliant and come from a man with an extensive background in the field he writes about, taking special care to write in a way anyone, even an unscientific mind, can understand. It is fantastic how someone can understand, through this book, why they reject certain arguments (specifically that a god is irrational) yet walk away still denying everything, holding on to their old beliefs, knowing exactly how. Though that of course is only a mere portion of the book. Brilliant.

Fantastic *****

It is quite beautiful how Wolpert sets up the book to explain how some can reject his premise of a non-existent god. The facts contained in this book, and the occasional theory (though well-backed ones), are brilliant and come from a man with an extensive background in the field he writes about, taking special care to write in a way anyone, even an unscientific mind, can understand. It is fantastic how someone can understand, through this book, why they reject certain arguments (specifically that a god is irrational) yet walk away still denying everything, holding on to their old beliefs, knowing exactly how. Though that of course is only a mere portion of the book. Brilliant.

What and why we believe *****
It seems quirky, claiming to "imagine six impossible things" as Alice's White Queen did. Before breakfast or at any time. Wolpert shows, however, that most of us are firmly convinced of many things that aren't so: gods, unlikely events, strange medical practices - the list seems almost endless. The lack of tangible evidence supporting or even evidence countering, those things we have faith in seems to have little impact on our credulity. In a dozen illuminating chapters, this award-winning biologist examines this almost inexplicable facet of our lives. Written with precision and deep insight, Wolpert demonstrates his command of how belief is a fundamental aspect of our society. Why do we believe the things we do? As a biologist, Wolpert naturally turns to our evolutionary roots for clues to the origins of belief. That which sets us apart from the other animals - our oversized brain, our use of tools, and our ability to use language - as the indicators. The brain's capacity to store, retrieve and assemble information is tied to our abilities in technology and language. For Wolpert, the prime element is the making of tools. Making tools means envisioning the final product, and devising how to bring it about. Put more simply, understanding cause and effect - something even other primates have trouble with. From this beginning, he argues, come social relationships and a sense of values. Along the way, we also developed the idea of agency which we assigned to events or circumstances that were out of ordinary, everyday experience. If the process of flaking stone went wrong, why did that happen. The best-laid plans, etc. From this beginning, Wolpert shows how the panoply of modern beliefs has come into our lives. The onset of conceiving an agency either began or enhanced the mind's "belief engine". The belief engine demands an identifiable cause for circumstances. When that's not readily apparent, we extend our belief to things we must imagine. These explanations can, and are, passed around the community, establishing both a bond among its members and reinforcing the interpretation. Once the idea gains prominence, it resists challenge and is difficult to overturn. Religion, of course, is the ultimate organised form of belief, often touted as society's best glue. Wolpert accepts this situation without rancour, even admitting his disturbed son's conversion to a fundamentalist Christian sect has improved the boy's behaviour. That given, Wolpert cannot excuse rigid adherence to dogmas that have no basis in reality. Science has disproven so many religious and other belief systems that he insists the wider society examine their beliefs more critically. There are other facets than family relations to consider. Recent claims that religious folk, or even those with faith in such things as homeopathy or "crystal healing", actually feel or live better may have statistical substance. Wolpert wants these claims investigated fully, since the early results have little validity. Part of how these practices seem effective lies within the brain's dealings with the rest of the body. It is this aspect that suggests paths of study, since it 's clear the objects or methods have no curative power in themselves. Many of the methods are accompanied by common-sense recommendations regarding diet and abandonment of harmful habits such as smoking or lack of exercise. Although Wolpert is even-handed in his approach to the many common delusions of our times, he clearly wishes their validity be openly investigated and the results aired. Such an investigation, Wolpert concedes, will be [and has been] difficult to launch and sustain. Clearly, our minds, however powerful in certain talents, have a tendency to seek immediate answers. The validity of the cause need not be certain if an acceptable origin can be declared. We are willing to believe in ghosts or other paranormal phenomena simply because somebody forcefully declares them to be true. Similar views are firmly held about medical practices. As with other views of agency, we are uncomfortable with illness that we cannot understand. Any explanation, forcefully given with a promise of relief, finds easy acceptance. Hence, "alternative", or in Wolpert's Britain "complementary", healing methods are widespread. Whether they are a form of "placebo" medicine, which appears to cure remains to be determined. Wolpert's book comes at a time when examining our beliefs seems more crucial than ever. We maintain ideas about ourselves, but it becomes too easy to project them to others. When more reasonable ideas are put forward, we must not be too ready to reject them. This book should provide a basis for people willing to apply reason and science to accepted dogmas. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

What and why we believe *****

It seems quirky, claiming to "imagine six impossible things" as Alice's White Queen did. Before breakfast or at any time. Wolpert shows, however, that most of us are firmly convinced of many things that aren't so: gods, unlikely events, strange medical practices - the list seems almost endless. The lack of tangible evidence supporting or even evidence countering, those things we have faith in seems to have little impact on our credulity. In a dozen illuminating chapters, this award-winning biologist examines this almost inexplicable facet of our lives. Written with precision and deep insight, Wolpert demonstrates his command of how belief is a fundamental aspect of our society. Why do we believe the things we do?

As a biologist, Wolpert naturally turns to our evolutionary roots for clues to the origins of belief. That which sets us apart from the other animals - our oversized brain, our use of tools, and our ability to use language - as the indicators. The brain's capacity to store, retrieve and assemble information is tied to our abilities in technology and language. For Wolpert, the prime element is the making of tools. Making tools means envisioning the final product, and devising how to bring it about. Put more simply, understanding cause and effect - something even other primates have trouble with. From this beginning, he argues, come social relationships and a sense of values. Along the way, we also developed the idea of agency which we assigned to events or circumstances that were out of ordinary, everyday experience. If the process of flaking stone went wrong, why did that happen. The best-laid plans, etc.

From this beginning, Wolpert shows how the panoply of modern beliefs has come into our lives. The onset of conceiving an agency either began or enhanced the mind's "belief engine". The belief engine demands an identifiable cause for circumstances. When that's not readily apparent, we extend our belief to things we must imagine. These explanations can, and are, passed around the community, establishing both a bond among its members and reinforcing the interpretation. Once the idea gains prominence, it resists challenge and is difficult to overturn. Religion, of course, is the ultimate organised form of belief, often touted as society's best glue. Wolpert accepts this situation without rancour, even admitting his disturbed son's conversion to a fundamentalist Christian sect has improved the boy's behaviour. That given, Wolpert cannot excuse rigid adherence to dogmas that have no basis in reality. Science has disproven so many religious and other belief systems that he insists the wider society examine their beliefs more critically. There are other facets than family relations to consider.

Recent claims that religious folk, or even those with faith in such things as homeopathy or "crystal healing", actually feel or live better may have statistical substance. Wolpert wants these claims investigated fully, since the early results have little validity. Part of how these practices seem effective lies within the brain's dealings with the rest of the body. It is this aspect that suggests paths of study, since it 's clear the objects or methods have no curative power in themselves. Many of the methods are accompanied by common-sense recommendations regarding diet and abandonment of harmful habits such as smoking or lack of exercise. Although Wolpert is even-handed in his approach to the many common delusions of our times, he clearly wishes their validity be openly investigated and the results aired.

Such an investigation, Wolpert concedes, will be [and has been] difficult to launch and sustain. Clearly, our minds, however powerful in certain talents, have a tendency to seek immediate answers. The validity of the cause need not be certain if an acceptable origin can be declared. We are willing to believe in ghosts or other paranormal phenomena simply because somebody forcefully declares them to be true. Similar views are firmly held about medical practices. As with other views of agency, we are uncomfortable with illness that we cannot understand. Any explanation, forcefully given with a promise of relief, finds easy acceptance. Hence, "alternative", or in Wolpert's Britain "complementary", healing methods are widespread. Whether they are a form of "placebo" medicine, which appears to cure remains to be determined.

Wolpert's book comes at a time when examining our beliefs seems more crucial than ever. We maintain ideas about ourselves, but it becomes too easy to project them to others. When more reasonable ideas are put forward, we must not be too ready to reject them. This book should provide a basis for people willing to apply reason and science to accepted dogmas. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Well thought out, well collected, lacking in depth ****
Rather than putting forward any ground-breaking or revolutionary ideas, Lewis Wolpert here prefers to gather together a selection of scientific examples and quotes from other thinkers on the subject to form a straightforward explanation of why it is in human nature to believe, whether that means to believe that throwing a rock might hurt somebody or to believe that there are forces beyond what science has shown us to be fact. The sections about child development compared to the learning processes in other animals is interesting reading, as did the section about the effect religious hope has been seen to have on hospital patients and their health. The truly interesting parts of this book are often the results of the various experiments that Wolpert cites as examples, rather than Wolpert's collection opinion. However I'm an atheist and it is to this book's credit that I ended up feeling a little more sympathetic to people who have religious beliefs, not to say that I agree with them but at least I now have some reason to understand why they might be inclined to believe against the odds and against the evidence. Wolpert keeps things brief, covering a variety of different topics without exhausting any of them. This book might leave you wanting to find some more intensive reading into one particular aspect.

Well thought out, well collected, lacking in depth ****

Rather than putting forward any ground-breaking or revolutionary ideas, Lewis Wolpert here prefers to gather together a selection of scientific examples and quotes from other thinkers on the subject to form a straightforward explanation of why it is in human nature to believe, whether that means to believe that throwing a rock might hurt somebody or to believe that there are forces beyond what science has shown us to be fact.

The sections about child development compared to the learning processes in other animals is interesting reading, as did the section about the effect religious hope has been seen to have on hospital patients and their health.

The truly interesting parts of this book are often the results of the various experiments that Wolpert cites as examples, rather than Wolpert's collection opinion.

However I'm an atheist and it is to this book's credit that I ended up feeling a little more sympathetic to people who have religious beliefs, not to say that I agree with them but at least I now have some reason to understand *why* they might be inclined to believe against the odds and against the evidence.

Wolpert keeps things brief, covering a variety of different topics without exhausting any of them. This book might leave you wanting to find some more intensive reading into one particular aspect.

Interesting but incomplete? **
Contains some interesting ideas regarding the origin of belief and the author's opinion that it is related to the evolution of the human grasp of 'causal interactions' and tool use. Opinions are one thing but unfortunately these ideas are never really devloped or truly substantiated in any way. In one sense this might not a bad thing as it limits the length of the book and keeps it within the realm laymen like myself but overall I found it a tad frustrating and came away feeling somewhat short changed.

Interesting but incomplete? **

Contains some interesting ideas regarding the origin of belief and the author's opinion that it is related to the evolution of the human grasp of 'causal interactions' and tool use. Opinions are one thing but unfortunately these ideas are never really devloped or truly substantiated in any way. In one sense this might not a bad thing as it limits the length of the book and keeps it within the realm laymen like myself but overall I found it a tad frustrating and came away feeling somewhat short changed.

Overview of Belief Systems. *****
Lewis Wolpert is preaching to the converted in my case but I was still interested, nay alarmed, to read many of the quoted statistics relating to what people think/believe about cause and effect in the world at large. It's true that everyday cause and effect belief is hard-wired in humans but we didn't know where to stop. We ascribed the Why? question to effects that had no why answer, not unless one subscribes to the supernatural. The case is made for the special belief that has allowed science to progress in spite of our own human intuition which is completely geared up for counting Gazelles not Molecules or Galaxies... However Prof. Wolpert stops short of putting the boot in to Religion and all the other phoneys, unlike our friend Prof Dawkins.

Overview of Belief Systems. *****

Lewis Wolpert is preaching to the converted in my case but I was still interested, nay alarmed, to read many of the quoted statistics relating to what people think/believe about cause and effect in the world at large.
It's true that everyday cause and effect belief is hard-wired in humans but we didn't know where to stop. We ascribed the Why? question to effects that had no why answer, not unless one subscribes to the supernatural.

The case is made for the special belief that has allowed science to progress in spite of our own human intuition which is completely geared up for counting Gazelles not Molecules or Galaxies... However Prof. Wolpert stops short of putting the boot in to Religion and all the other phoneys, unlike our friend Prof Dawkins.

Easy to believe, hard to digest ***
"Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast" is a disappointing book. Disappointing because the topic is so well chosen: the evolutionary origins of beliefs, with attention to everyday common sense as well as the high end temptations of religion and alternative medicine. Disappointing because the author's previous mapping of related territory - in "The Unnatural Nature of Science" - promised much. And disappointing, too, because stating (twice, with variations) in the Introduction that "I admit I am a reductionist materialist atheist" is such a great start. Wolpert throws in any number of intriguing ideas, but the argument is simply difficult to follow, making reading a chore and a good case less convincing than it should be. The material is not inherently that difficult - if not easy - but the writing makes it an uphill struggle. Take just four sentences from the chapter "Believing": "Beliefs are held in one's memory and can be recalled. We express beliefs even when, all too often, we do not have the evidence, knowledge, or facts to support them. Moreover, emotions can undoubtedly influence our beliefs. In addition, the distinction between knowledge and belief becomes less clear in relation to memory." The sentences are pithy, but lurch here and there, with "in addition" piled on "moreover" but no pause to demonstrate, for example, how it is that emotions can influence beliefs. The distinction between "knowledge" and "belief" in the last sentence is referenced as if it was obvious, or previously explained. But it isn't and the distinction is never defined. Just a page before Wolpert was conflating "ideas" and "beliefs" - "15% of our day-to-day conversations contain ideas, that is, beliefs, about causes." The problems aren't just in the detail. The sensibly short chapters ought to make the architecture of the book clear, but it isn't. Wolpert argues that early humans' adoption of tools - making and using them - was critical to the origin of belief. This has been controversial (see Marek Kohn's review for the Independent,) but then nothing that follows seems to depend on it. Again, at the outset of the book we're told it will concentrate on causal beliefs (though the definition here is again hard to grasp) but nestling at the end is a chapter titled "Moral". How moral beliefs relate to causal beliefs, and what's already been said about their origin, is unclear. The best material reprises key ideas from "The Unnatural Nature of Science". The challenging proposition is that our instinctive ways of understanding causes are at odds with the reality of the physical and biological world, as science reveals it. We struggle with probabilities, preferring to over-interpret chance; we employ common sense models of physical causes which struggle with volumes and Newton's laws of motion, let alone particle physics. This leads to an interesting aside on how we respond to possible global warming: it's a key question for everyone, but few of us are equipped to assess the science - of necessity that leaves us guided by our flawed beliefs. Unfortunately, the occasional opaqueness of "The Unnatural Nature of Science" is here the dominant quality.

Easy to believe, hard to digest ***

"Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast" is a disappointing book. Disappointing because the topic is so well chosen: the evolutionary origins of beliefs, with attention to everyday common sense as well as the high end temptations of religion and alternative medicine. Disappointing because the author's previous mapping of related territory - in "The Unnatural Nature of Science" - promised much. And disappointing, too, because stating (twice, with variations) in the Introduction that "I admit I am a reductionist materialist atheist" is such a great start.

Wolpert throws in any number of intriguing ideas, but the argument is simply difficult to follow, making reading a chore and a good case less convincing than it should be. The material is not inherently that difficult - if not easy - but the writing makes it an uphill struggle.

Take just four sentences from the chapter "Believing": "Beliefs are held in one's memory and can be recalled. We express beliefs even when, all too often, we do not have the evidence, knowledge, or facts to support them. Moreover, emotions can undoubtedly influence our beliefs. In addition, the distinction between knowledge and belief becomes less clear in relation to memory." The sentences are pithy, but lurch here and there, with "in addition" piled on "moreover" but no pause to demonstrate, for example, how it is that emotions can influence beliefs. The distinction between "knowledge" and "belief" in the last sentence is referenced as if it was obvious, or previously explained. But it isn't and the distinction is never defined. Just a page before Wolpert was conflating "ideas" and "beliefs" - "15% of our day-to-day conversations contain ideas, that is, beliefs, about causes."

The problems aren't just in the detail. The sensibly short chapters ought to make the architecture of the book clear, but it isn't. Wolpert argues that early humans' adoption of tools - making and using them - was critical to the origin of belief. This has been controversial (see Marek Kohn's review for the Independent,) but then nothing that follows seems to depend on it. Again, at the outset of the book we're told it will concentrate on causal beliefs (though the definition here is again hard to grasp) but nestling at the end is a chapter titled "Moral". How moral beliefs relate to causal beliefs, and what's already been said about their origin, is unclear.

The best material reprises key ideas from "The Unnatural Nature of Science". The challenging proposition is that our instinctive ways of understanding causes are at odds with the reality of the physical and biological world, as science reveals it. We struggle with probabilities, preferring to over-interpret chance; we employ common sense models of physical causes which struggle with volumes and Newton's laws of motion, let alone particle physics. This leads to an interesting aside on how we respond to possible global warming: it's a key question for everyone, but few of us are equipped to assess the science - of necessity that leaves us guided by our flawed beliefs.

Unfortunately, the occasional opaqueness of "The Unnatural Nature of Science" is here the dominant quality.

What we believe and why we believe it *****
It seems quirky, claiming to "imagine six impossible things" as Alice's White Queen did. Before breakfast or at any time. Wolpert shows, however, that most of us are firmly convinced of many things that aren't so: gods, unlikely events, strange medical practices - the list seems almost endless. The lack of tangible evidence supporting or even evidence countering, those things we have faith in seems to have little impact on our credulity. In a dozen illuminating chapters, this award-winning biologist examines this almost inexplicable facet of our lives. Written with precision and deep insight, Wolpert demonstrates his command of how belief is a fundamental aspect of our society. Why do we believe the things we do? As a biologist, Wolpert naturally turns to our evolutionary roots for clues to the origins of belief. That which sets us apart from the other animals - our oversized brain, our use of tools, and our ability to use language - as the indicators. The brain's capacity to store, retrieve and assemble information is tied to our abilities in technology and language. For Wolpert, the prime element is the making of tools. Making tools means envisioning the final product, and devising how to bring it about. Put more simply, understanding cause and effect - something even other primates have trouble with. From this beginning, he argues, come social relationships and a sense of values. Along the way, we also developed the idea of agency which we assigned to events or circumstances that were out of ordinary, everyday experience. If the process of flaking stone went wrong, why did that happen. The best-laid plans, etc. From this beginning, Wolpert shows how the panoply of modern beliefs has come into our lives. The onset of conceiving an agency either began or enhanced the mind's "belief engine". The belief engine demands an identifiable cause for circumstances. When that's not readily apparent, we extend our belief to things we must imagine. These explanations can, and are, passed around the community, establishing both a bond among its members and reinforcing the interpretation. Once the idea gains prominence, it resists challenge and is difficult to overturn. Religion, of course, is the ultimate organised form of belief, often touted as society's best glue. Wolpert accepts this situation without rancour, even admitting his disturbed son's conversion to a fundamentalist Christian sect has improved the boy's behaviour. That given, Wolpert cannot excuse rigid adherence to dogmas that have no basis in reality. Science has disproven so many religious and other belief systems that he insists the wider society examine their beliefs more critically. There are other facets than family relations to consider. Recent claims that religious folk, or even those with faith in such things as homeopathy or "crystal healing", actually feel or live better may have statistical substance. Wolpert wants these claims investigated fully, since the early results have little validity. Part of how these practices seem effective lies within the brain's dealings with the rest of the body. It is this aspect that suggests paths of study, since it 's clear the objects or methods have no curative power in themselves. Many of the methods are accompanied by common-sense recommendations regarding diet and abandonment of harmful habits such as smoking or lack of exercise. Although Wolpert is even-handed in his approach to the many common delusions of our times, he clearly wishes their validity be openly investigated and the results aired. Such an investigation, Wolpert concedes, will be [and has been] difficult to launch and sustain. Clearly, our minds, however powerful in certain talents, have a tendency to seek immediate answers. The validity of the cause need not be certain if an acceptable origin can be declared. We are willing to believe in ghosts or other paranormal phenomena simply because somebody forcefully declares them to be true. Similar views are firmly held about medical practices. As with other views of agency, we are uncomfortable with illness that we cannot understand. Any explanation, forcefully given with a promise of relief, finds easy acceptance. Hence, "alternative", or in Wolpert's Britain "complementary", healing methods are widespread. Whether they are a form of "placebo" medicine, which appears to cure remains to be determined. Wolpert's book comes at a time when examining our beliefs seems more crucial than ever. We maintain ideas about ourselves, but it becomes too easy to project them to others. When more reasonable ideas are put forward, we must not be too ready to reject them. This book should provide a basis for people willing to apply reason and science to accepted dogmas. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

What we believe and why we believe it *****