Show Book List  | More books by John Brockman
Reviews from Amazon
Amazon.com (0060841818) 23 reviews
Amazon.co.uk (1416522611) 7 reviews
Amazon.ca (0060841818) 2 reviews
A selection of these reviews is given below

Reviews elsewhere on the web:
Jeff Powell
Thomas Scarborough
Guardian Unlimited

John Brockman

What we believe but cannot prove

Every year the Edge Foundation asks a question of a selection of eminent intellectuals. In 2005 the question was 'What do you believe is true even though you cannot prove it', and this book lists the answers that were given. This gives them the opportunity to discuss those ideas which are important but haven't quite reached the stage of general acceptance. However, the replies are short - often less than a page - which doesn't give much of an opportunity to explain the details of the concepts mentioned. But it does make it easy to read, so it's just the sort of book to dip into at odd moments.

The book does get a bit samey after a while, when you get to the nth contributor telling you their ideas about the nature of consciousness, and it would certainly be better to have fewer but longer articles on the ideas which are on the borderline of acceptance. The cynic in me says that to some extent this book is an advertisement for the books which the contributors have written, although actually that isn't so bad - its useful to be able to get an idea of how authors think in order to decide whether to read more of their works.

Amazon.com info
Paperback 272 pages  
ISBN: 0060841818
Salesrank: 92570
Weight:0.4 lbs
Published: 2006 Harper Perennial
Amazon price $11.16
Marketplace:New from $5.52:Used from $2.94
Buy from Amazon.com
Amazon.co.uk info
Paperback 288 pages  
ISBN: 1416522611
Salesrank: 44385
Weight:0.44 lbs
Published: 2006 Pocket Books
Amazon price £5.84
Marketplace:New from £3.94:Used from £3.20
Buy from Amazon.co.uk
Amazon.ca info
Paperback 272 pages  
ISBN: 0060841818
Salesrank: 32012
Weight:0.4 lbs
Published: 2006 Harpercollins Trade Sales Dept
Amazon price CDN$ 11.32
Marketplace:New from CDN$ 5.57:Used from CDN$ 3.50
Buy from Amazon.ca

Product Description

More than one hundred of the world's leading thinkers write about things they believe in, despite the absence of concrete proof

Scientific theory, more often than not, is born of bold assumption, disparate bits of unconnected evidence, and educated leaps of faith. Some of the most potent beliefs among brilliant minds are based on supposition alone -- yet that is enough to push those minds toward making the theory viable.

Eminent cultural impresario, editor, and publisher of Edge (www.edge.org), John Brockman asked a group of leading scientists and thinkers to answer the question: What do you believe to be true even though you cannot prove it? This book brings together the very best answers from the most distinguished contributors.

Thought-provoking and hugely compelling, this collection of bite-size thought-experiments is a fascinating insight into the instinctive beliefs of some of the most brilliant minds today.

 
Good but not great ***
As a scientist I approached this book with a lot of expectations. I wanted to know what the greatest minds in science believe but cannot prove. I was expecting a lot of cutting edge topics and revolutionary ideas. Yes, there are some pieces that fulfilled and even exceeded my expectations, but there were also others that I couldn't even get past the first paragraph.
I guess it is always difficult to put together a book with so many contributors and the result is always going to be a mix of, in this case, brilliant ideas and not so surprising monologues.
 
I believe I like "What is your most dangerous idea" better ***
Some interesting ideas on the concept and philosophy of
"What we believe but Cannot Prove". Essays from top scientists on topics such as Consciousness (is there such a thing, does language bring it about?), quantum mechanics (is the electron composed of any smaller particles?), astronomy (is there more than one universe), time (is everything predetermined) just to name a few from memory. I had gotten this book because i enjoyed "What is your most dangerous idea" so much from the same "edge dot com" group/ editor. I wasn't as into this book I believe because "What is your most dangerous idea" was just more interesting and similar. Some topics overlap. For example this book may have the argument that they believe consciousness does not exist while "dangerous idea" will have the dangerous idea that the soul does not exist. (This book did come out before "what is your most dangerous idea"). Some great ideas in here regardless to ponder.
 
Interesting and erratic ***
A bit disappointing. I thought that this would be a really special book, and I found it quite erratic. Some of the thinkers seem to have taken this very seriously, while others have not spent more than 10 minutes in this (that is not necessarily a bad thing). There are many repetitions, and some answers do not fit well in the book. Anyway, there are some very interesting ideas and clever answers, such as those given by Seth Lloyd, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and others that made the book worth reading.
 
Proof! Belief! *****
What we believe but cannot prove once again hits the nail on the head for the many issues that we think we know the answer to, but can't quite put it all together. Along with its companion piece, Dangerous Ideas, this makes for very stimulating reading. Nice to know what puzzles some of the top scientific minds in the world...
 
'Third world uncertainties- and their incompletenesses' ****
The one - hundred scientists, educators, psychologists, linguists, and other professionals of the life of the mind who provide answers to the 'title- question' do so apparently with little knowledge of what other respondents are saying. Thus for instance when Martin Rees raises the possibility that mankind may be the only advanced intelligence that has yet come into the universe, Craig Ventner who supports a form of Crick's panspermic view( i.e. We got here by being seeded by more advanced intelligences from elsewhere in the universe) there is no opportunity for give and take between them. My sense is that is that this whole enterprise might have been more productively conducted had it involved a dialogue around several major questions now confronting humanity i.e. the extraterrestial life question, the artificial intelligence in place of humanity, question, the ' understanding everything' question.
Another problem I had with the book is that while John Brockman has truly created an impressive enterprise with his 'Edge ' world and Third Culture, the Third Culture is largely devoid of religious thinkers, and of thinkers whose fundamental background is in the Humanities.
Consider for instance the one great Idea the great majority of Humanity believes in without having Proof of i.e. the idea of a Creator Who is the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End,that Mankind has the purpose of in some way serving . Consider too some of the other beliefs most important to Mankind for which there is no proof i.e. the belief in an Afterlife, the belief that our loved ones have some kind of continuation beyond the life of earth.
These questions which burn in the heart of Humanity are by and large outside the consideration of those involved in 'The Third Culture'.
Here it is possible to point out that many of the respondents here give answers which come directly out of their own work. That is what interests them is beliefs they have related to their own special enterprise and skill. This makes sense, but it does not necessarily make for startling revelations.
Nonetheless, and here I come to what is truly praiseworthy in the enterprise this collection contains information on 'cutting edge' work now being done in various scientific areas. For instance on the whole question of ' extraterrestial intelligences' a number of respondents point to increasing evidence of a greater prevalence of earth- like planets, of conditions for life than was previously thought.
While many of the respondents give one or two - sentence brief answers a number like Martin Rees, Michael Shermer ,John Horgan, Rebecca Goldstein present positions which outline and justify their fundamental attitude to their own scientific enterprise.
Others like Ray Kurzweil who momentarily forgets about the 'Singularity' to seek out ways of abrograting the finite speed- of -laws, make speculative ventures . Stewart Kauffman for instance wonders if there will be a fourth- law of Thermodynamics, involving self- constructing non- equilibrium systems.
What emerges from reading through the whole discussion is a sense of how much Mankind has come to know and understand about the Universe, and yet how open the major questions relating to Mankind's near , and if it gets to this, distant future are. On so many levels it seems that the more answers we have the more questions we open up for ourselves. And this as if to suggest that the scientific enterprise, the whole enterprise of Man's knowing and learning about the world is a necessarily unfinishable one. There will be no unified- theory of 'everything' at any time in any foreseeable future.
What was encouraging was how , it seems to me, wise and humble many of the respondents were in acknowledging the limitations of understanding, while passionately engaging in their own efforts to know more.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
Fantastic and thought provoking *****
I loved this book. Because the essays are so short, I kept thinking "Oh, I'll just read another... and another... and another... and, oh dear, is that the time?!"

It is full of thought-provoking - and sometime contradictory - opinions on topics from the nature of matter, to economic theory, to consciousness. There were a few "D'oh! Of COURSE!" moments in there for me (e.g. you start dreaming before you are fully asleep), and I'm sure you will find a few of your own when reading it. I now have a burning urge to go track down more writings by several of the essayists!
 
Brilliant idea leading to a most fascinating and enlightening read *****
This seemingly modest little book with a cartoon like cover is in my (in this case clearly) humble opinion one of the best books of 2006. John Brockman, who is a man with a gift for editing the scientific mind and for getting the most from people who are not necessarily at their best when writing for a general readership, is the force behind the idea for this book. The idea is something close to a stroke of genius: get an all-star line up of today's leading scientists and cultural mavens to go on record about what they believe but cannot prove. Simple idea. Profound consequences.

Normally if you ask scientists to describe the future or what they think is really happening at the edge of their discipline, or what they think is going on scientifically in fields outside their area of expertise, you are liable to get some carefully worded, very guarded opinions. But free the scientists from the responsibility of scientific rigor for the moment and just let them tell us what they think based on their unique knowledge and long experience, and guess what? You are liable to get the kind of candor that otherwise would not be forthcoming. And what is more, you are going to get, as it happens, some very significant predictions about the future. That is what happened here.

Some highlights:

Anthropologist Scott Atran writes, "There is no God that has existence apart from people's thoughts of God. There is certainly no Being that can simply suspend the (nomological) laws of the universe in order to satisfy our personal or collective yearnings and whims--like a stage director called on to improve a play." But, he adds, we can suspend belief in what we "see and take for obvious fact." He calls this the quest for "nonapparent truth." (p. 47)

Independent scholar Judith Rich Harris adds to nature selection and sexual selection the intriguing possibility of "parental selection" in which in tough times parents select which infants to keep. Stir this factor into the mix and evolutionary changes can take place very quickly. She cites skin color and hairiness as examples of the kind of superficial changes that we would notice. (p. 66)

Psychologist Nicholas Humphrey writes, "I believe that human consciousness is conjuring trick, designed to fool us into thinking we are in the presence of an inexplicable mystery. Who is the conjuror, and what can be the point of such deception? The conjuror is the human mind itself, evolved by natural selection, and the point has been to bolster human self-confidence and self-importance--so as to increase the value we each place on our own and others' lives." (p. 111)

Cognitive scientist Alison Gopnik believes that "the problem of capital-C Consciousness will disappear in psychology just as the problem of life disappeared in biology...The vividness and intensity of our attentive awareness...may be completely divorced from our experience of a constant first-person I." (p. 139)

This reflects my belief that the so-called problem of consciousness is a problem of a confused conjoining of two or three aspects of awareness. Here Gopnik points to pure awareness AND self-identify, which are really separate phenomenon often thrown indiscriminately together as "consciousness."

Neurobiologist William H. Calvin in his essay beginning on page 142 makes a distinction between "our kind of consciousness" which depends heavily upon language, and other possible consciousnesses.

Psychology professor Robert R. Provine turns the consciousness question on its head with this: "Instead of wondering whether other animals are conscious, or have a different, or lesser, consciousness than ours, should we be wondering whether our behavior is under no more conscious control than theirs?" (p. 147)

Some of the essays by physicists are concerned with whether there are many universes instead of just one, or even if there are an infinite number of universes. Some of the other pieces by physicists concern the nature of time, string theory and quantum mechanics. Physicist Carolo Rovelli writes, "I am convinced, but cannot prove, that time does not exist..." (p. 229) This is consistent with an idea I got from one of my students some years ago: Time is a mathematical point.

I found some of the speculations not so agreeable. Philosopher Daniel Dennett's belief that "acquiring a human language...is a necessary precondition for consciousness..." seems almost silly, even in consideration of the qualifications that follow. (See page 124.)

I found philosophy professor Rebecca Goldstein's essay (pp. 84-85) on scientific theories mostly impenetrable, and I could not disagree more with neurobiologist Leo M. Chalupa's statement that "...we will eventually succeed in discovering all there is to discover about the physical world..." (p. 174) Science writer Margaret Wertheim shares what is clearly the majority opinion, writing, "...there will always be things we do not know--large things, small things, interesting things, and important things." (p. 176)

The essays are all short, the longest perhaps a thousand words, the shortest a sentence or two. They are arranged roughly by discipline or area of interest (the ones on consciousness, for example, are all more or less together, one after the other). It is evident that the contributors, before finalizing their essays, were able to read the other essays in the book because in some cases one writer would refer to something another wrote.

This is the kind of book that needs to be returned to after some serious thought and after further reading. Even though the essays are short they require deep reflection. Some of the essays are brilliant and reflective of some of best scientific and cultural thinking going on today.
 
Such a good idea, so bright minds...but so little substance **
I was quite dissapointed with this. Many prominent thinkers present their view on the title subject, but we get only around one-maybe-two pages from each 'contributor'. Even if there is a bit of insight in each short piece of text, I don't feel that this covers any ground at all, or that the book ever really tackles the question of provable science. This book is probably great for hunting for quotes without bothering with the proper work of the scientists, or for 5 minutes of toilet-reading once in a while, but don't expect to learn anything new on the subject. For the casual reader, however, this might offer a glimpse of many of the most important researchers, writers and thinkers of the 21th century, and thus the second star in my evaluation.

It is impressive how many important people from my bookshelf on neuroscience, psychology and cultural studies contributed to this, but ultimately the book seemed like a waste of money. Buy one book by Dan Dennett, steven Pinker, Scott Atran, Jared Diamond, Richard Dawkins or any other contributor instead.
 
If u have an i.q of 200, read this ***
I'm going to make this brief. Despite each essay being only two or three pages long, the book is of such an esoteric subject that its appeal is to te very few, scientists and those very interested in the specific areas covered by each essay. A brief history of time is like a childrens book in comparison.
 
Mundane question evokes stimulating responses *****
The question posed by John Brockman was "What do you believe but cannot prove?" It might be classed as one of those Mediaeval "angels on the head of a pin" queries. However, this is the 21st Century and what we know of Nature now stands in stark contrast to what was known then. The responses show that serious questions remain to be resolved. Not all of them can be, as the issue concerned lies either in the past or is too remote for close study. Some, of course, lie in the realm of what we deem "consciousness". A vague term in its own right, made even more difficult when the various respondents offer their own definitions. That tactic, however, makes the answers more stimulating by creating fresh questions. By selecting novelist Ian McEwan to write the introduction, Brockman shows he doesn't consider the question limited to scientific speculation. McEwan demonstrates his knowledge of the scientific issues [would that more fiction writers matched that capacity!] and how "inspiration" has advanced our understanding of Nature.

Although he doesn't describe the process, the reader will soon learn that the editor has placed the responses in some general categories. The first area of interest is cosmology - who is out there? How might we learn of them? Can we ever reach worlds light years away? More to the point, how is the universe put together and why in that way and not another? Are there other universes we can't see? Since many of these questions touch on what we call "values", the next grouping addresses that sort of reply. What is "morality" and what are its origins? In this collection, the "divine" is bypassed, leaving only humans to provide the answer to those "eternals". Yet humans, the responders acknowledge, are the product of natural selection. We have had a long time with even longer biological underpinnings to develop ideas of what is "moral". And moral issues are considered with other emotional aspects of our relations with others - including that favourite topic, "true love". As "love" is limited among humans without language, how we communicate and how language developed is another aspect of our evolutionary roots.

None of these behavioural characteristics of our species can be adequately explained until we have some notion of what drives them. Human consciousness is receiving greater attention through brain research. Cognitive science is revealing what is ticking over in our brains when we deal with such factors as "love" or "communication". A precise definition of consciousness has yet to emerge. The respondents here include one who feels consciousness doesn't even emerge until the language facility is fully developed. Others, using different criteria, even assign consciousness to the lowly cockroach. That consciousness may be at a different level, and operate in more constrained circumstances than that of our species, but consciousness it remains. It is in this segment of the collection where the respondents include the views of colleagues in their essays. That alone is enough to demonstrate the importance of the issues raised here. It may also portend deeper questions on wither the human species is bound. Will humans merge with computers as a means of enhancing their cognitive capacity?

Some more random responses to the "Edge" question conclude the collection. A few direct social issues are addressed, along with associated predictions. Is the human species "improving" and can that be directed are typical examples. Rounding out a fascinating collection, these last are wide-reaching and may be more immediate than the foregoing replies. With such a talented stable of commentators, Brockman's gathering is of immense importance. These are real questions under investigation by highly qualified thinkers. McEwan himself reappears in a thoughtful note all of us should consider. It has great impact on how we conduct our lives - and how novelists portray that behaviour. This is an enduring collection, and should be on every bookshelf. Add it to yours. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
 
A juicy-bit read! ****
This is a really good read to at last discover what some hardworking scientists & scientific interpreters really think about what they are doing & what is "really real". There's many authors, almost all of whom are names widely known, so the little book is perfect bedside or can-side. Sometimes it's a shock to discover that what you assumed someone really thought is nothing like his or her presumptions at all. Most times, it's pretty easy to guess where they're going to go. The weakness -- the one star penalty -- is that some of the scientists seem absolutely w/o imagination. "What I Believe But Cannot Prove" extends only as far as their immediate areas of research. Others, however, reach way out there, & that's where the contradictions in worldviews become blazingly apparent. Others, like Daniel Dennett, speak their beliefs straightforwardly w/o obfuscation for what may be the first time. I had thought I understood Dennett & disagreed profoundly with him. Now it seems I am in profound agreement. For anyone who likes to cut through the details & get to the underlying worldviews, this little book is -- if not a revelation -- at least great fun.
 
Mundane question, provocative responses *****
The question posed by John Brockman was "What do you believe but cannot prove?" It might be classed as one of those Mediaeval "angels on the head of a pin" queries. However, this is the 21st Century and what we know of Nature now stands in stark contrast to what was known then. The responses show that serious questions remain to be resolved. Not all of them can be, as the issue concerned lies either in the past or is too remote for close study. Some, of course, lie in the realm of what we deem "consciousness". A vague term in its own right, made even more difficult when the various respondents offer their own definitions. That tactic, however, makes the answers more stimulating by creating fresh questions. By selecting novelist Ian McEwan to write the introduction, Brockman shows he doesn't consider the question limited to scientific speculation. McEwan demonstrates his knowledge of the scientific issues [would that more fiction writers matched that capacity!] and how "inspiration" has advanced our understanding of Nature.

Although he doesn't describe the process, the reader will soon learn that the editor has placed the responses in some general categories. The first area of interest is cosmology - who is out there? How might we learn of them? Can we ever reach worlds light years away? More to the point, how is the universe put together and why in that way and not another? Are there other universes we can't see? Since many of these questions touch on what we call "values", the next grouping addresses that sort of reply. What is "morality" and what are its origins? In this collection, the "divine" is bypassed, leaving only humans to provide the answer to those "eternals". Yet humans, the responders acknowledge, are the product of natural selection. We have had a long time with even longer biological underpinnings to develop ideas of what is "moral". And moral issues are considered with other emotional aspects of our relations with others - including that favourite topic, "true love". As "love" is limited among humans without language, how we communicate and how language developed is another aspect of our evolutionary roots.

None of these behavioural characteristics of our species can be adequately explained until we have some notion of what drives them. Human consciousness is receiving greater attention through brain research. Cognitive science is revealing what is ticking over in our brains when we deal with such factors as "love" or "communication". A precise definition of consciousness has yet to emerge. The respondents here include one who feels consciousness doesn't even emerge until the language facility is fully developed. Others, using different criteria, even assign consciousness to the lowly cockroach. That consciousness may be at a different level, and operate in more constrained circumstances than that of our species, but consciousness it remains. It is in this segment of the collection where the respondents include the views of colleagues in their essays. That alone is enough to demonstrate the importance of the issues raised here. It may also portend deeper questions on wither the human species is bound. Will humans merge with computers as a means of enhancing their cognitive capacity?

Some more random responses to the "Edge" question conclude the collection. A few direct social issues are addressed, along with associated predictions. Is the human species "improving" and can that be directed are typical examples. Rounding out a fascinating collection, these last are wide-reaching and may be more immediate than the foregoing replies. With such a talented stable of commentators, Brockman's gathering is of immense importance. These are real questions under investigation by highly qualified thinkers. McEwan himself reappears in a thoughtful note all of us should consider. It has great impact on how we conduct our lives - and how novelists portray that behaviour. This is an enduring collection, and should be on every bookshelf. Add it to yours. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
Tachyos.org  |  Chronon Critical Points  |  Recent Science Book Reviews