1 of 1 members found this review helpful.
“This book is just too wordy. It would have been a much better read if 50% of the words are cut. Perhaps this was okay back in 1991/2 when it was written. But in the 21st century, when time is a premium (due to the many distractions from internet, ebooks etc), such a book would be better off judiciously edited.
I don't like Davies writing because he seems to be rambling on and on. And very disorganised. Each subsequent chapter doesn't seem to follow on from the previous.
And, so, so, so many words... And they are dry and boring. Too many philosophical contemplation written out (a.k.a navel gazing) about science. Davies should have been teaching, but he comes out as droning.
Interestingly, Davies would refer to some scientists as atheist scientist and agnostic scientist etc, and use that to give some perspective on those scientists thinking. However, Davies own belief system is never clarified. Even after reading the book, one will still not know where Davies is coming from. Is he atheistic, agnostic, pantheistic (I think he is not theistic in the traditional Judeo-Christian stance, but even that is never clearly specified). Even after reading the final chapter, we still don't know what kind of "God" Davies believes in. So why bother to write such a long book on this? He should have titled this book "The Mind of the Universe". He shouldn't use the word "God" if he needs to redefine its meaning.
I am surprised this book was nominated for a prize (shortlisted for 1993 Science Book Prize). I am not surprised it didn't win.”
NJ Wong wrote this review Thursday, March 31, 2011.
(
reply |
permalink )
