|
|
4.0 out of 5 stars
A Pleasure to Read, A Little Hard to Describe, May 28 2002
As anyone who has read Martin Gardner knows, he is both a compelling writer and possessed of a great mind. He is best known as skeptic and debunker, usually in reviews for NY Review of Books, and in columns in various magazines, most notably Scientific American. Like Stephen Jay Gould, he has a tremendous intellectual range and can make anything interesting, including topics that you believe you could not possibly care about prior to reading Gardner on the subject.All of Gardner's compilations are worth reading and may represent a better introduction to Gardner's thought than the present volume. Nevertheless, this book has a charm that cannot be denied. The book is unlike anything else I have ever read. It is basically a series of musings about various philosophical issues: free will, evil, economics, politics and the nature of god. Gardner begins by giving a simple, understandable summary of the area, including the arguments of the great thinkers on the subject. Gardner then moves to a thorough analysis of the weight of the arguments, and concludes with his own position on the issue. In general reading this book has the feel of being included in the private musings of a great intellect. Gardner is careful to develop his arguments thoroughly and simply so that the neophyte philosopher will not be left behind. (Though in fairness, some terms are not defined, an a Dictionary of Philosophy would be useful in getting the casual reader up to speed.) Gardner's style is charming. He takes up a topic such as determinism versus free will and examines the philosophical arguments that have been raised against the existence of free will. Having admitted the power of the arguments arrayed against free will, Gardner confesses that he believes in free will anyway. And so it goes for arguments against the existence of God, immortality, prayer, etc., in every case confessing that the rational arguments favor positions contrary to his own, and then maintaining them anyway. Gardner is a "fideist," meaning that he acknowledges the impossibility of demonstrating rationally the existence of God and related issues, but insisting that faith is an appropriate mechanism for getting around these difficulties. Gardner is never heavy-handed or preachy in his positions, and he gives the arguments against him a fair hearing. The joy of reading this book is that the issues are so clearly presented that the reader can assess his own thoughts on the subject. I personally do not buy fideism as a justification for abandoning reason, but the book presented the alternative views so well that I felt comfortable disagreeing with Gardner in his conclusion. In the end, fideism is an interesting point of view. It does not require the destruction of arguments against one's belief in God. In fact, the fideist can revel in the irrationality of his position. While the reader may not be convinced to believe as Gardner does, I will bet you will come away with a better grasp of the issues involved.
|
