Customer Reviews

Mormon Scientist: The Life and Faith of Henry Eyring

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Henry Eyring fused science and religion. He never felt that his faith and profession were at odds. On the contrary, he felt that science enhanced his faith, and vice versa. I was impressed not only with Dr. Eyring's profession of faith and science, but I was amazed at his level of active involvement in each of them. He led Mormon congregations and scientific organizations, gave faith-promoting talks and wrote ground-breaking scientific papers.

The organization of the book is refreshing for a biography. As the author says in the Introduction, "Rather than proceeding chronologically through his life, we'll look first at the things he accomplished (his Legacy), then at the family experiences that shaped him (Heritage), and then at the unusual way he thought (Paradoxes). We will close with a section called Testament, in which Henry bears witness to those things of greatest importance."

This book not only gives insight into the life and mind of a world-renonwned scientist, but proves that a person does not have to choose science or religion -- both "disciplines" can be embraced.

In response to "science?" I'd like to respectfully point out that Dr. Henry Eyring was nominated several times for the Nobel Prize due to his scientific work which is still included in current scientific textbooks due to its relevancy and usefulness.

This book is about an incredible scientist and how he not only contributed to our world scientifically, but how he also believed strongly in God and Christ and remained true to, and active in, his religious beliefs as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

For those who read this book, I hope you do so to see how a person can believe in the importance of science and that this world was created by a loving God who wants us to learn to understand it. If evolution was used to create all life on earth, or not, is really only known to the Creator of us all, Who also knows the truthfulness, or falseness, of statements made by each of us about ourselves and others.

Henry Eyring was a hero of mine as a kid growing up in Utah. He was the greatest scientist Utah or Mormonism had ever produced, and he influenced my decision to go into science. In fact, I went to the University of Utah in the late 70's and early 80's and took many undergraduate chemistry classes in the then newly named Eyring building. I never met him personally, but heard a lot of stories about him.

I was excited to read this book and was not disappointed. The true value of this book is the story of how he mixed his faith with science. This is a subject that I have spent a lot of time on recently - meeting with several fellow engineers of various religious persuasions discussing religion, science, and truth. The bottom line is that all truth is from God, and we are encouraged and free to discover it. Revealed religion tends to focus on the plan of salvation, and the scriptures are not meant to be a science textbook.

The book was organized differently than a traditional biography. Part 1 is a summary of his legacy. Part 2 goes into his heritage. Part 3 discusses the many paradoxes in his life. Part 4 is a final testament to his life.

The detail is not as great as many people would like to see for a biography, but I thought the format useful and taught me many important lessons from his life that I could apply to my own. It also gave me a desire to look into more of his writings.

I highly recommend this book, especially for someone who wants a good example of one who successfully reconciled science with religion.

Mormon Scientist is a book about the life and faith of Dr. Henry Eyring. He was a renowned scientist and the father of Henry B. Eyring, who is one of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. During his time, most people believed that science and religion were not consistent and would never get along together. Dr. Eyring was a very devoted believer of Jesus Christ. In this book, he shared his unique view of science, his religious beliefs, and the unity and harmony that anyone can find if we open our eyes and minds.
In the book he says, "I have been announced as a student of science. But I also like to think of myself as one who loves the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For me there has been no serious difficulty in reconciling the principles of true science with the principles of true religion, for both are concerned with the eternal verities of the universe." His biggest desire was to find and discover more truth, and he believed that all truth comes from God.
The strength of the book is that it is so easy and simple to read, but at the same time so rich with new ideas and wisdoms. However, as I read the book, I notice that in order to explain his characteristics and attributes, many pages are used to introduce his ancestors. This is not as interesting as Henry Eyring's life and contributions.
Overall, this book is well written and will provide new ways of seeing things in your life. Dr. Henry Eyring was truly a man of diligence, humility, and love. In our life, it is so important to open our minds; however, as we gain more worldly recognitions and positions, it becomes harder to listen to others. Dr. Henry Eyring was a professor of Princeton University and still willing to learn from others and recognize his imperfection. There are many things that we can learn from his examples and his accomplishments. In this book, you will enjoy reading his love and passion to learn something new every day.

Henry J. Eyring weaves stories of his grandfathers' (Henry Eyring) youth, education, and lifetime experiences with quotes by Henry Eyring himself, as well as colleagues, friends, and family to create a framework of the scientific and spiritual mind of this renowned scientist. Humorous, heartfelt, faith-promoting and motivating.

This book was a light and easy memoir of the life of Henry Eyring. I found it entertaining and informative and would recommend it for those interested in topics of Science, Religion, Friendship, Family.

While the book seems a little too nostalgic at times for my taste, I found that it did a good job explaining the world as Henry would have seen it.

Unfortunately, that's about all there is to this kindly but shallow tribute to the beloved Mormon chemist. I wish I could give the book a better rating, but as biography, it disappoints.

Here's some of what's missing:
How did Henry Eyring relate to the women in his life (besides his two mothers)?
To what extent did Church responsibilities influence Eyring's transition from a scientist to an administrator, and how did he manage the change?
There are scant allusions to Eyring's parenting style; given his dedication to the role, more detail is in order.
Did Eyring play a role in moderating the doctrinal conflicts between General Authorities (i.e. David O. McKay and Joseph Fielding Smith)?
What was Eyring's essential invention in conceptualizing the reaction complex and to what classes of problems did he apply it? It is reasonable to expect more technical insight from the biography of a great scientist.

Prof. Eyring left a trove of personal and professional documentation. So someday a definitive biography will answer these questions - without in the least diminishing his legacy.

I got this for my husband's birthday (he's a Mormon physicist) and he's really enjoying it.

NOTE: This book is not about the member of the First Presidency, but his father. Notice the name of the author, and you see that "Henry" is a common family name.

It is more than nice to read a non-general authority biography. We see how a normal person goes about living, especially how they spend their wintry days. If anything, Dr. Eyring's life is a good career model to follow. If you are like me, you grow up with the idea (already outdated) that you get a degree in one area, and then you are set for life. Eyring's life shows otherwise. You zigzag, and as his stint at Princeton shows, sometimes life throws you a curveball. Life planning needs to be flexible enough to capitalize on such opportunities.

So how does one go about writing an interesting biography of a scientist, without swamping the reader with a morass of arcane symbols and computations? Henry J. does this by writing around the issue. He mentions in passing about ART, and the 500+ publications (fourteen of which were published posthumously), but he focuses more on the man, his faith. *This is not so much a biography, but a character study.*

For the general Mormon audience, this is sufficient. However, scientific popularizers, such as Carl Sagan (Cosmos) and Stephen Hawking (A Brief History of Time) show that he could have done more. Truman Madsen's slim volume ETERNAL MAN shows that members can, and when presented with the opportunity, want to learn more. A supplementary biography that focuses on his scientific career could be written.

As the title indicates, this biography focuses on the dynamics of "Mormon" and "Scientist." I find it interesting that the question is still being debated, since Church Higher Education goes back to the University of Nauvoo. For us to proceed in academe, we must have some sense of resolution on the issue.

Part of the problem is that most people focus on the divergences. This goes back to Galileo, and even earlier with Socrates. Furthermore, people tend to focus on one, and only one, scientific theory--Evolution. No one asks how DNA affects testimony, or how Genesis 2:20, with Adam naming all animals, affects germ theory (i.e. did he name germs?). So we get bogged down in mud, when we have the sky.

There really is no such thing as "science." There are just various theories in various states of verification. Likewise, there are various religions, with various strengths. When we ask if science conflicts with religion, which apples are we comparing? The question itself needs to be questioned.

This book is mot sequential. As Henry J. makes clear, this is intentional. It is also unfortunate, since it makes for awkward reading. (Remember "Citizen Kane (Two-Disc Special Edition)"?) In loosing sequentiality, we lose casualty, or Time's Arrow. For example, how did Dr. Eyring's competitiveness (Chapter 5) affect his discussions with Elder Joseph Fielding Smith? (Chapter 2) This may explain what Elder Smith said they could talk when Dr. Eyring was not so excited (p. 63, 175, cf. 206-207).

Speaking of which--, Henry J. does a great job of presenting Dr. Eyring's views on the subject of Earth-age, but does not explain Elder Smith's views on the subject. A page or two could have been devoted to his views, which can be found in the appendix material to BYU's edition of B. H. Roberts's "The truth, the way, the life: An elementary treatise on theology (BYU Studies monographs)" and in "Doctrines of Salvation. Complete Three-Volume Work [3-in-1]. Sermons & Writings of Joseph Fielding Smith.," and in the out-of-print "MAN HIS ORIGIN AND DESTINY." Balance would have been helpful.

Additionally, Henry J. does not evaluate the two ideas. For example, how well does Dr. Eyring's views take Elder Smith's data into account, and vice versa? Christ's turning the water into well-aged wine suggests that something can be miraculously created with an "artificial" aging process. The earth could appear older than it really is, as the wine appeared to be aged when it was in reality just a few minutes old.

And, if the elements are eternal, what exactly are we talking about when we talk about the age of the earth? Again, the question the question.

On the positive side, Henry J. presents how a faithful member and scientist can have a disagreement with the president of the Church on a non-essential. Elder of the Twelve Joseph Fielding Smith became President of the Church Joseph Fielding Smith, who said in the October 1970 conference that what he had "taught and written in the past [he] would teach and write again in the same circumstances." (i.e. He had not changed his mind.) Both expounded their views, disagreed, and left it at that. That is a good model for us to follow.

In disusing this matter, it would have been helpful to point out that LDS scientists, such as Elder Talmage who was a geologist, and Elder Widtsoe who was a chemist, when asked about the age of the earth, would invariable fall back to their academic training. Read Elder Talmage's "The Earth And Man" (found in Mormonism and Evolution: The Authoritative LDS Statements). In it, he cites scientific authority for the bulk of the talk. Elder Smith, who had no background in science, would in turn answer the question by appealing to the scriptures. Keep in mind the significance of this--who is the proper authority in the matter? And how well the scriptures can account for scientific data, and how well science can account for scriptural data.

I heartily recommend the book. There is something in Dr. Eyring's life that can be helpful, to scientist and amateur alike.

The cover perfectly captures the man Henry Eyring. The atom-shaped "O" is pure googie, and the red-and-white color-splash honors Dr. Eyring's stint at the U.

PS--In regards to Dr. Eyring's conversation with Albert Einstein about dogs, read D&C 77:2-3, and Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 290ff. He grossly fumbled.

Dr. Henry Eyring was without a doubt one of the most capable and energetic teachers of science from the last century. He was well liked and regarded by all ages and this was no doubt due to his abundant equanimity. I will not bother to sing further praise to him here but one should note he was able to achieve this status primarily with his practice of the science of chemistry. Those of you who do not care much for science can better appreciate Dr. Eyring's achievement.

This book did have a few flaws that a prospective reader may want to know. None of these errors are show-stoppers in my opinion but they do speak of a general lack of thoroughness in the production of this book and so may prove helpful for the those working out whether or not this book is one to buy/read. Lastly, I will not list even half the ones I spotted and no doubt there are others that I missed - just trying to give enough examples to be helpful and not cross the line into "curmudgeon".

The forward is written by a former PhD student of Dr. Eyring and proclaims that Dr. Eyring's earned degrees - Baccalaureate in Mining Engineering (1923); Masters in Metallurgy (1925); PhD in Physical Chemistry(!927) - are "distinctly different". This plain error is unintendedly corrected by the book's author on page 13 but one wonders why neither the author nor the editor(s) caught it here in the forward. One further wonders how a man with a PhD in Physical Chemistry could make such a claim in the first place but since he wrote only the Forward to the book there is no need to go on.

On page 102 the claim is made that Mexican laborers who worked on the Eyring farm in Mexico were paid "five times what they could make working for local `patrons'". Anyone who owns a business, or especially a farm, can see that this statement cannot be taken at face value. Nor can it be read as hyperbole in the context of the book. A family farm in those days (like now) produced commodities and that simple fact severely limits the wages of all involved in the enterprise. A well run farm whose owner is generous could perhaps give wages at 50% over the going rate and give another 50% equivalent pay in-kind (free room to bunk, e.g.) but to pay out wages 500% over the standard is not possible unless the farm produces black-market goods ("hemp farm", e.g.) and I do not suspect the Later Day Saints of being black marketeers. Though they did seemingly run guns for their own protection.

On page 165 the author helps the reader to get a grip on Dr. Eyring's work of Absolute Rate Theory (ART) and how the (then new) Quantum Mechanics fit in to the theory. We are told that in Quantum Theory "very small particles can also act in wave fashion, much like light". This mode of explanation makes it seem as if light is not itself a quantum particle.

I would put this down to bad editing except that later on (page 233) we are presented with (what must be) some of Dr. Eyring's early speculations of the chemistry of the Sun's power. Dr. Eyring is esteemed to be a "profound scholar of the physical sciences" and quoting Dr. Eyring the book says; "We suppose that in order to become hot the sun must accumulate an amount of heat equal to that is gives off in its lifetime. This must be accumulated from its surroundings. . .".

This quote seems to be taken from Dr. Eyring's 1967 autobiography. By the time Dr. Eyring earned his PhD, theoretical physicists had been working on nuclear fission ideas for powering the stars for a couple of decades. Hydrogen-fusion models for the sun were commonplace by the late 1940's and well accepted by the early 1960's. Given his breadth of interest I am not sure why Dr. Eyring was unaware of these newer ideas but I bring this example up because it shows clearly that the books author and editor(s) generally drop the ball on many sorts of issues involving science. . . yet the title for the book is Mormon Scientist. They seem to get the Mormon part largely right. Perhaps Deseret Book should have used a science editor for this project.

On page 232 it says; "Henry spent his lifetime experimenting according to the Savior's direction in John. He lived the principles of the gospel, and he enjoyed the fruits thereof - not only personal peace and happiness, but also personal conviction that the gospel must be true because [as Dr. Eyring said] `it works'".

Funny testimony that. "True because it works". By that measure it sure looks like Islam works better - does that make it truer?

Enough said.

Regards,
JS