Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast: The Evolutionary Origins of Belief | 
 enlarge | Author: Lewis Wolpert
Publisher: W. W. Norton
Category: Book
List Price: $15.95
Buy New: $8.91
You Save: $7.04 (44%)
New (34) Used (10) from $7.00
Avg. Customer Rating:  23 reviews
Sales Rank: 478341
Media: Paperback
Edition: Reprint
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 256
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.5
Dimensions (in): 8.2 x 5.5 x 0.8
ISBN: 0393332039
Dewey Decimal Number: 576
EAN: 9780393332032
ASIN: 0393332039
Publication Date: July 21, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: Brand new item. Over 3.5 million customers served. Order now. Selling online since 1995. Order with confidence. Code: B20081130225628T
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
"Marvelously funny and provocative."—Publishers Weekly
Why do 70 percent of Americans believe in angels, while others are convinced that they were abducted by aliens? What makes people believe in improbable things when all the evidence points to the contrary? And don't almost all of us, at some time or another, engage in magical thinking?
In Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast, evolutionary biologist Lewis Wolpert delves into the important and timely debate over the nature of belief, looking at its psychological foundations to discover just what evolutionary purpose it could serve. Wolpert takes us through all that science can tell us about the beliefs we feel are instinctive. He deftly explores different types of belief—those of children, of the religious, and of those suffering from psychiatric disorders—and he asks whether it is possible to live without belief, or whether it is a necessary component of a functioning society.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 18 more reviews...
 This is one of the worst-written books I've read in a long time November 19, 2008
It's a shame, too, because Wolpert has a really interesting idea -- that the fact that humans are driven to explain the causes of the things they see around them, even when they can't, is hard-wired into our brains by evolution. As one who has spent my professional career struggling with issues of causality in evaluating public programs, I can personally attest to this obsession -- and to the nonsense and drivel to which otherwise intelligent people will resort when no better explanation is available. So I struggled through to the end of Wolpert's treatise, hoping against hope that the next chapter would be clearer, better organized, and/or better supported than the one in front of me. In the end, I was left disappointed by the uniformly scatter-shot, poorly argued and supported presentation. As other reviewers have noted, paragraphs start and end willy-nilly, and the middle often has little to do with either end.
So should you bother to read this book? Well...it contains a number of neat factoids (e.g., that "twice as many children were killed in road accidents [in the U.K.?] in 1922 as today") and some great quotations. Of the many quotes in the book, perhaps my favorite is from the second century Roman playwright Terence ("You believe that which you hope for earnestly") -- if only because it is so closely echoed by my favorite 20th century songwriter Paul ("A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest"). And, as mentioned, his central idea is a really interesting one. But expect a long, slow, frustrating slog.
there are better ones... September 26, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Maybe I've read to many books of this type, but I just couldn't find anything major novel and interesting in this book. I just didn't "get" what he wanted to say -- other than speculate that tool use lead to believe systems. For anyone interested on the topic of faith/belief and science, I'd rather recommend some of Michael Shermer's books (whom he cites repeatedly), as well as Richard Dawkins and Francis Collins, which voice two sides of the faith/science debate rather well.
 Short on Evidence October 9, 2007
3 out of 10 found this review helpful
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?" October 7, 2007
3 out of 4 found this review helpful
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 September 21, 2007
4 out of 5 found this review helpful
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.
|
|
|
News 
