What We Believe But Cannot Prove

Infobox Book
name = What We Believe But Cannot Prove: Today's Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty
title_orig =
translator =


image_caption =
author = John Brockman
cover_artist =
country = USA
language = English
series =
subject =
genre =
publisher = Harper Perennial
release_date = February 28 2006
media_type =
pages = 252
isbn = ISBN 0060841818
preceded_by =
followed_by =

"What We Believe But Cannot Prove: Today's Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty" is a non-fiction book edited by literary agent John Brockman with an introduction by novelist Ian McEwan and published by Harper Perennial. The book consists of various responses to a question posed by the Edge Foundation, with answers as short as one sentence or as long as a few pages. [Dizikes, Peter. (June 11 2006) [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE7DA1631F932A25755C0A9609C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2 Science Chronicle] "New York Times". Retrieved on 2008-05-24.] Among the 107 contributors are such notable scientists and philosophers as Richard Dawkins, Daniel C. Dennett, Jared Diamond, Rebecca Goldstein, Steven Pinker, Sir Martin Rees and Craig Venter.

Overview

Each year, the Edge Foundation poses a question on its website to members of the "third culture", defined by Brockman as "those scientists and other thinkers...who, through their work and expository writing, are taking the place of the traditional intellectual in rendering visible the deeper meanings of our lives, redefining who and what we are". [Brockman, John. (1991) [http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/ The Third Culture] Edge Foundation. Retrieved on 2008-05-24.] In 2005, the Edge foundation asked, "Great minds can sometimes guess the truth before they have either the evidence or arguments for it (Diderot called it having the "esprit de divination"). What do you believe is true even though you cannot prove it? [cite web
last =
first =
title = The Edge Foundation
url =http://www.edge.org/q2005/q05_print.html
accessdate = 2007-10-10 ] The essays and answers posted there make up the book. They are loosely grouped by subject area, though with no clear subject divisions.

Synopsis

The essays cover a broad range of topics, including evolution, the workings of the human mind, and science itself. A common focus of responders are the issue of extra-terrestrial life and the question of whether humanity has a supranatural element beyond flesh and blood. Among the more esoteric topics is the question of cockroach consciousness.

A pervasive theme, according to Publisher's Weekly, is the discomfort responders felt in professing unproven beliefs, which Publisher's Weekly declared "an interesting reflection of the state of science".cite web |url=http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/pfp.asp?ean=9780060841812&z=y|title=Publisher's Weekly review|date=2006|accessdate=2008-05-24] The question inspired implicit or explicit reflection in a number of responders about the scientific method's reliance on observable, empirical and measurable evidence, with a good many of what "The Observer" points out as largely American responders defending against "a return to an age of uncertainty in which creationism and intelligent design hold sway in the public mind".Adams, Tim. (December 11 2005) [http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/scienceandnature/0,,1664357,00.html#article_continue John Brockman persuaded 100 of the world's great thinkers to answer the same big question in What We Believe by Cannot Prove. And, yes, aliens are involved, says Tim Adams] "The Observer". Retrieved on 2008-05-24.] "What's really at stake here", "Wired" said in its review, "is the nature of 'proof' itself". [Hillner, Jennifer. (April 2006) [http://classweb.dctc.mnscu.edu/20065/VCOM269001/SELLJASM/wired/play.html Print: What We Believe But Cannot Prove] "Wired. Retrieved 2008-05-24.]

Reception

Reviews of "What We Believe But Cannot Prove" were primarily positive. "The Boston Globe" described the book as "astounding reading", stating that " [t] aken as a whole, this little compendium of essays will send you careening from mathematics to economics to the moral progress of the human race, and it is marvelous to watch this muddle of disciplines overlap". [Doerr, Anthony. (March 19 2006) [http://www.boston.com/ae/books/articles/2006/03/19/deeply_held_and_unverifiable_beliefs/ Deeply held (and unverifiable) beliefs] "The Boston Globe" Retrieved on 2008-05-24.] In "Paste Magazine"'s "Best Books of 2007" column, in which 13 notable authors were asked each to recommend a favorite book, "Esquire" columnist Tom Junod described it as "at once rigorous, exquisitely reasoned, untainted by mysticism, somewhat useless, and altogether mindblowing". ["Paste" Staff. (November 29 2007) [http://www.pastemagazine.com/action/article/5953/review/book/signs_of_life_2007_best_books Signs of Life 2007: Best Books] "Paste Magazine". Retrieved on 2008-05-24.] "The Skeptical Inquirer" stated that the book "offers an impressive array of insights and challenges that will surely delight curious readers, generalists, and specialists alike". [Krause, Kenneth. (January 5 2007) "Intellectual and creative magnificence.(What We Believe But Cannot Prove: Today's Leading Thinkers in the Age of Uncertainty)(Book review)" ( [http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-29795533_ITM abstract] ) "The Skeptical Inquirer", March 1 2007. [http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/789538/what_we_believe_but_cannot_prove_todays_leading_thinkers_on/index.html?source=r_health Full article hosted by redorbit.com] .]

Several reviews focused positively on the invitation to speculate afforded respondents and the insight their speculations may offer into the future of scientific discourse. "Science News" and "The Guardian" described the book respectively as "a tantalizing glimpse into the future of human inquiry" and " [s] cientific pipedreams at their very best". ["Science News" staff. (April 15 2006) [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_15_169/ai_n16347051 What We Believe But Cannot Prove: Today's Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty (Books: A selection of new and notable books of scientific interest)] "Science News". Retrieved on 2008-05-24.] [Smith, PD. (August 19 2006) [http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,1853136,00.html Truth believers] . "The Guardian". Retrieved on 2008-05-24.] "The Daily Telegraph" praised the book as "refreshing" and "intriguing and unexpected", noting that " [b] y unleashing scientists from the rigours of established method we gain fascinating glimpses into the future directions of arcane disciplines few fully understand".Osborne, Charles, Sally Cousins, Jeremy Jehu, Matt Warman and Victoria Lane. (August 28 2006) [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2006/08/27/bopb.xml&page=1 Paperbacks] "The Daily Telegraph". Retrieved 2008-05-24.]

While still generally positive, some reviewers did criticize certain aspects of the book, including redundancy and tone. "The Observer" described the essays as "compelling and repetitive by turns". Publisher's Weekly referred to the collection as "stimulating", but found it "unfortunate that the tone of most contributions isn't livelier and that there aren't explanations of some of the more esoteric concepts discussed", limitations which would "keep these adroit musings from finding a wider audience."

See also

*"The Third Culture"
*""

Notes

References

*Brockman, John (2006). "What We Believe But Cannot Prove: Today's Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty". New York: Harper Perennial. ISBN 978-0-06-084181-2.

Further reading

*cite news
title = Toeing the party line (What We Believe But Cannot Prove: Today's Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty)(Book Review)
work = Spectator
date = 12 November 2005
url =
accessdate =

External links

* [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5254203 Thinkers lay out the beliefs they can't prove] , NPR discussion.
* [http://www.edge.org/q2005/q05_print.html The World Question Center 2005] , where the original question was posed.