Customer Reviews

The Wonder of the World: A Journey from Modern Science to the Mind of God

5 star:		(12)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

The author states he is not a scientist, but an ontologist. This undoubtedly is true, but he also has an excellent grasp of science from cosmology to quantum physics. I have read many books looking for a scientific perspective on the nature of the Creator and this is clearly the best so far. He avoids the pitfalls of simple anthropic arguments and cuts to the very core of this issue with razor sharp philisophical, ontological, scientific insight. This is a true monumental work of art on the subject of understanding the nature and mind of God through science and ontology. I'd recommend it very highly.

If you're lookin for good, well thought out, arguments against the atheist world-view, this book is loaded with them. Varghese covers a lot of ground, here, and touches on almost every aspect of scientific and meta-scientific thought. In fact, one of my criticisms is that he may have tried to cover too much ground in one book. He almost could have used this material to write 3 books, here.

The book is based on written discourse between Professor Madhava Mitra - a.k.a. the Guru - founder of the Sakshi Hermitage in the Himalyas and Joseph Levin - a.k.a. the Geek - a post-doctoral research assistant at MIT. Levin's father died and, in consoling him, Mitra uses the opportunity to show how Levin's world-view falls far short of giving a reasonable explanation of our experiences.

I found myself getting lost in some of the logic but that didn't stop me from enjoying the book.

This author of this book asks questions about the existence of God that I have never thought of such as how do photons and electrons know what to do, how to bond and move, and have been doing so for hundreds of trillions of years. It provides a scientific way of understanding how the universe and life are based on intelligence that existed before the Big Bang. Presenting the information as a dialogue between the "Geek (the author)" and the "Guru (scientist, Madhva Mitra)" is the author's way of asking questions and responses from both sides of every issue in the book. It is fascinating and easy enough reading for the non-science person to understand and enjoy. I have come to more fully appreciate the wonder of the world and life more as result of reading Varghese's engaging and studied treatment of subject.

Roy Abraham Varghese authored Cosmos, Bios, Theos, which was a collection of short interviews with scientists about their worldviews. He was also co-author of Antony Flew's book There is a God; I understand that it was Flew's admiration for A Wonder of the World that led to their collaboration. This is an exceptionally well researched and presented book on ontology, which is the philosophical study of the nature of being, existence or reality in general, as well as of the basic categories of being and their relations. As Varghese puts it: "Ontology, which is the domain of meta-scientific questions, is concerned with principles, insights and truths that by their nature transcend scientific theory and practice. These include self-evident truths presupposed by science and issues that cannot be addressed with any scientific methodology. If we ask what are the laws that govern the universe, we are asking a scientific question. If we ask why does a structure of laws exist, we are asking an ontological question." Varghese presents in the book a devastating argument against materialism, culminating in what he calls a hundred wonders of the world, none of which fits the materialist paradigm.

According to Varghese: "The intellectual foundation of atheism and skepticism, understood as a rejection of belief in the supernatural, is a doctrine or ideology of materialism, the materialist monism of which we spoke [earlier in the book]. So much so, the whole enterprise of modern skepticism depends on the viability of materialism as a cogent and compelling belief-system. But to be intellectually viable, materialism must address and explain the three primordial brute facts of human experience ... The first is the existence of intelligent systems that cannot have arisen out of inert matter. The second is our experience of consciousness and thought, and we have seen [earlier in the book] how this leads ineluctably to the recognition and affirmation of an infinite Intelligence that grounds life, consciousness and intellect. The third brute fact is the human mind's inability to remain at the level of brute facts. We seek explanations for everything and it's the quest for explanation that drives and underlies most human enterprises, including the natural and social sciences. In all three areas, materialism has proven to be helpless and so it's not a rationally viable ideology"

These are tough words, but Varghese backs them up with an exceptionally solid analysis that takes in not only conventional arguments such as (i)ntelligent (d)esign (as opposed to ID and its dogmas) and the fine-tuning of the universe, but also an in-depth examination of how information systems cannot logically be the product of inert matter. Varghese also makes a very interesting argument in favor of the idea that science owes its existence to what he calls the Matrix and the Four Masters of the Matrix: Avicenna of early Islam; Moses Maimonides of Judaism; Thomas Aquinas of Christianity; and Madhvacharya of Hinduism. He also brings in ideas such as the hidden variable theory of David Bohm. In discussions with materialists I have often found them stuck in the repeated asking of the question: "Where is the proof?" - by which they mean the kind of proof that results from scientific experimentation. Varghese explains: "Sapiential sense is the mind's ability to see the truths that constitute reality and grasp things as they are in themselves. The seeing of these truths transcends the scope of the scientific method, which is limited to unpacking the conclusions already contained in premises."

This is a tour-de-force in the materialism versus spirituality debate. I have read most of what has been written by the likes of Dennett, Dawkins, Stenger, Barker, Harrison, Harris, Hitchens et al and they do not even come close to undermining the case that Varghese presents. We know that reality is broader than the material and Varghese expresses clearly and brilliantly why that proves the failure of the explanatory power of materialism; to the extent that atheism depends upon materialism for its foundations, they are shown to be very weak indeed.

I am reading this book right now. I could not wait to write a response- the first "review" I have ever wanted to write. This book is too good to be missed, if you have ever been fascinated by the universe. It is a book for everyone and informed enough for the most informed. Roy Varghese generously offers us a stunning work of intellectual and fully human attention. Please read THE WONDER OF THE WORLD. You will never be the same.

I predict this book will be hailed, even by proponents of naturalism and atheism, as a turning point in the debate regarding the existence of a personal God. Readably and cogently, Varghese sorts through and untangles mental spaghetti using science's own methods. Never dodging awkward questions, but rather, exposing naturalism's illogic, we are led step-by-step to an inevitable conclusion. Perhaps in clearer fashion than other books, Varghese's Wonder of The World is a landmark in turning back the so-called "The Age Reason" that has seduced and poisoned the Western World for almost a century.

This book has been praised by Nobel Laureates and numerous scientists and has even caused a prominent atheist, Anthony Flew, to declare that he is now a deist, declaring that ". . . it is likely to be a very long time before such naturalistic [atheistic] explanations [for the origin of life and reproduction] are developed, if indeed there ever could be . . ." A highly cogent and inspiring book.

This is a book which may actually change your mind. It made me change mine, which is fairly unusual.

The book presents an argument for God which does not require you to check your brain at the door. Varghese does not ask you to take anything at all on faith. The tone of the book is casual, even conversational, but clearly it is the result of many years of dedicated study and hard work.

I suspect this book will take some time to attract public notice, if only because it slaughters so many sacred cows. The most important of these may be, "Well, belief in God may have worked for people in the olden days, but we moderns have advanced beyond that, and are now happily facing the future as `brights' (Dawkins' new term for atheists)."

Another endangered cow is the idea that disproving, or discrediting, Christianity (or Islam, or Judaism) automatically disproves the idea of God. A moment's thought will show anyone that this is absurd. Just for example, a Muslim rejects Christianity but does not reject the idea of God.

One last bovine living in fear might be the idea that modern philosophy is automatically better than older philosophy. Varghese's team consists of Avicenna, Maimonides, Thomas Aquinas, and an Indian philosopher named Madhvacharya. (I'll take them against Heidegger, Sartre, and Derrida any old day!) These four great philosophers agreed on a set of principles which Varghese calls "The Matrix." Not to be confused with the movie, the Matrix is a set of ideas which enabled the take-off of modern science. The set of ideas includes a creator of infinite intelligence, a world which is something different from the force which created it and sustains it, and the human mind. These three things are DIFFERENT. They do not collapse into one another at "higher levels" of thought. What is most striking is that this model explains why we can understand the world: we and the world have a common creator. (The Ancient Greeks knew this as the Doctrine of the Logos, and it went into Christianity with much other Greek philosophy.)

The God presented here is not the God of Christianity (or Islam, or Judaism). He might well be called "The God of the Philosophers" or "The God of the Scientists."

In any case, this book made me change my mind. I removed the letter "A" and now consider myself a Theist --- like many of America's Founding Fathers.

Suggested companion reading: The Devil's Delusion: Atheism and its Scientific Pretensions and The Hidden Face of God: Science Reveals the Ultimate Truth.

This book is a must read for any thinking person. While at times I found the formulaic approach a bit too pat, never-the-less, the underlying concepts that fundamentally sit in the background of all good science are invaluable. The broad perspective from multiple cultural and religious approaches was extremely helpful, as were the forthright responses to the many and varied scientific ideas being bandied about in current intellectual circles. Clearly the author was familiar with the many arguments, and their implications, and used this well in building the case.

I have often told my students that: "The most dangerous person in any field is the person who doesn't know what he or she doesn't know." For example, do you want an engineer building your bridges who does not know what he or she does not know about building bridges? Here, the author clearly points out that even some famous scientists show their own ignorance in demonstrating they do not know what they do not know. The danger for science in not understanding the very foundation of what makes the scientific method work, sets some down a dangerous pathway in pursuit of their antagonism to the religious foundations of science, and their wish to disassociate science from religion.

I am not so naïve as to suggest that to be a good scientist you must be religious, only that you must understand that the foundations of science are built on a religious understanding of the universe. Ultimate questions, are not in the purview of science, so must be left to the philosophers and theologians. At the same time the theologians must not interfere with the scientists doing good science. I believe this author lays this out in a very clear and forthright manner. This author says many of the things I have long thought, but not had the training or ability to put so nicely into words. I wish I could speak so coherently. Thank you for a great book!

Full disclosure time: I proofread this book, which is from my publisher, Tyr Publishing. I knew it intimately before it went to press. While, like Feyerabend's AGAINST METHOD, it's not always the easiest read, I eagerly devoured this whereas (more full disclosure) I just couldn't get through Feyerabend.

I particularly love the dialogues, which hearken back to the Phaedo, the Crito, the Symposium and the Apology. Galileo and Bill Moyers both use dialogues. Keep an open mind.