The Mind of God: The Scientific Basis for a Rational World (Paperback)

~ (Author) "HUMAN BEINGS HAVE all sorts of beliefs..." (more)
Key Phrases: cosmic initial conditions, uncomputable numbers, cosmic code, John Barrow, Stephen Hawking, John Wheeler (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

This time Davies (coauthor of The Matter Myth , LJ 3/1/92) takes on the big philosophical questions raised by our increasing understanding of how the universe works: How did it all start? Why is there a universe at all? Is there a God and, if so, has He/She any limitations? That is, could the laws of physics have been different? Who made the laws? Why are we here? Could there be a universe devoid of life? Many people feel that these issues fall into the realm of religion, not science. The message of Davies's book is that most of these questions are unanswerable but only people with an appreciation of modern science can understand how deep they really are. Davies is an excellent writer about science per se and its philosophical implications. A worthwhile acquisition for all science collections.
- Harold D. Shane, Baruch Coll., CUNY
Copyright 1992 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Kirkus Reviews

Are we but ideas in the mind of God? Platonic forms in one of many infinite universes? Davies (Theoretical Physics/Univ. of Adelaide, Australia; co-author, The Matter Myth, p. 1510, etc.) increasingly assumes the mantle of metaphysician as he probes once again theories of origin and destiny, space and time, and creation by design or chance. Some of this tracks familiar Davies ground: a reprise of Plato and Aristotle, Aquinas and Newton, Hoyle and Hawking. Quarks and GUT theories are revisited, as are chaos theory and quantum cosmology. But what makes this exercise different is the extent to which Davies probes computer science and mathematics to develop extraordinarily rich concepts of the nature of complexity. These chapters deal not only with the paradoxes inherent in self- reflecting systems and G”del's proofs of undecidability in mathematics but relate these famous theorems to Turing's universal machines and the nature of ``computable'' vs. ``noncomputable'' numbers. The upshot of all this lofty discourse is the idea that the laws of physics (or nature) are ``computable'' and that the universe lends itself to simulation, given a universal computer. The more enthusiastic mathematicians exploring these ideas are prepared to say that such computers reveal the organized complexity of the universe, are capable of self-replication, and are therefore alive. Davies concludes that maybe the ultimate answer cannot be obtained through reason but only through mysticism, and he again states his conviction that we are truly meant to be here.... That's not necessarily the conclusion all readers will reach, but the mathematical excursions make this latest Davies volume of more than passing interest. -- Copyright ©1991, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 256 pages
• Publisher: Simon & Schuster (March 5, 1993)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0671797182
• ISBN-13: 978-0671797188
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6.1 x 0.8 inches
• Shipping Weight: 9.6 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (56 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #41,559 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #55 in	Books > Nonfiction > Philosophy > Philosophy of Religion
  #58 in	Books > Religion & Spirituality > Religious Studies > Science & Religion

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

42 of 42 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Can one know the mind of God?, May 21, 2003

By	FrKurt Messick "FrKurt Messick" (Bloomington, IN USA) - See all my reviews (TOP 10 REVIEWER)

Paul Davies book, `The Mind of God', is a follow-up to is book, `God and the New Physics.'

Davies explores in more depth and detail the philosophical implications of modern physics and how the theories and ideas of modern physics can help in the understanding (and occasionally, deepen the confusion) of ideas that have been in the traditional purview of philosophy and theology. In this respect, science has a basic question that comes to the root of all systems of thought -- why?

`Scientists themselves normally take it for granted that we live in a rational, ordered cosmos subject to precise laws that can be uncovered by human reasoning. Yet why this should be so remains a tantalising mystery. Why should human beings have the ability to discover and understand the principles on which the universe runs?'

Davies discusses certain conceptual principles that are essential to the discussion. The division between rational and irrational, particularly in light of 'common sense' -- not too long ago science held itself to be rational because it more conformed to 'common sense' than did 'irrational' religion; as science edges toward the irrational (defined in common sense terms) it loses the ability to use that argument against religion.

`It is a fact of life that people hold beliefs, especially in the field of religion, which might be regarded as irrational. That they are held irrationally doesn't mean they are wrong.'

Davies admits his bias toward rationalism, but leaves room open for discussion. He discusses metaphysics in terms of Kant, Hume, and Descartes, drawing into question the very idea of rationality and the terms of existence in which the scientific universe operates.

`No attempt to explain the world, either scientifically or theologically, can be considered successful until it accounts for the paradoxical conjunction of the temporal and the atemporal.'

From this opening discussion, Davies proceeds to examine the creation of the universe, asking the interesting question in terms of quantum realities -- does the universe have to have had a creator? And, even if scientifically the universe can 'spontaneously' come into being (as some mathematical models and theories seem to allow), how do we account for the construct of laws of nature that permit such a spontaneous generation? Once again, the question 'where is God?' can still have meaning.

Davies spends a great deal of time looking at the nature and use of mathematics in understanding the 'real' world and 'virtual' worlds. Does mathematics exist independently of the universe, or independently of the human conscious construct of mathematics? At what points does mathematical meaning break down (for instance, in the very early universe, when the volume falls below the so-called Planck time, where the universe is theoretically too small for mathematics to be operative).

In the final chapter, Davies returns to the ideas of mysticism and the limits of science.

`Mysticism is no substitute for scientific inquiry and logical reasoning so long as this approach can be consistently applied. It is only in dealing with ultimate questions that science and logic fail us. I am not saying that science and logic are likely to provide the wrong answers, but they may be incapable of addressing the sort of 'why' (as opposed to 'how') questions we want to ask.'

While many scientists have mistrust of religion and mysticism, there are nonetheless notable exceptions, scientists who themselves are deeply religious or have a mystical turn of mind, such as Einstein, Pauli, Schrödinger and Heisenberg.

This is another fascinating trip through the realm of modern science with a particular emphasis on how we know what we know and what there really is to know, and what is in fact knowable.

71 of 75 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars a hard book to review, July 10, 2005

By	Wyote (Seoul) - See all my reviews (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)

I read about 20 science books each year, not only in physics or astronomy but biology and so on. I enjoy most of them, but I didn't enjoy this one very much. If you're considering buying this book or reading it, let me suggest that you check out The Whole Shebang: A State-of-the-Universe(s) Report before you make your decision.

Actually, I enjoyed Davies' discussions of Godel and incompleteness, and Turing and computability, and models of the universe as a computer. I haven't read much about these issues, and since I really love math I enjoyed his explanation of these things.

Also, I agree with his ultimate conclusion: that mysticism provides a way of knowing the universe, a kind of knowledge that can't be turned into thoughts or words. I agree that there will always be a mystery, a boundary to our knowledge, no matter how much our knowledge grows; and that the ultimate knowledge will be past that boundary. So I'm in broad agreement with his worldview, although for cultural reasons I'm a little more hesitant to give the name of "God" to whatever is beyond the boundary. And I agree with that it is astounding that the universe is so mathematical. Shocking even. I'm not sure how else it could be, but it seems to me to be the second biggest mystery of existence, only after why there is something rather than nothing.

And I too wonder what mathematics is, and how it manages to be written into the universe.

I hoped for a really good discussion of that last issue in particular, and the main reason I didn't enjoy the book is because his discussion of that issue was a disorganized, rambling mess. There is some great food for thought. But unfortunately he seems to be at the same point that I am: just wondering, with no insight in particular.

I'm cool with math and metaphysics, and I sympathize that writing a pop metaphysics book is a tough job. But it has been done better, and more recently, especially by Timothy Ferris in "The Whole Shebang." And that's why I recommend it over this book by Davies.

Ferris' book is wider in scope than this book, and Davies is more eager to dabble in truly exotic ideas. (For some of those, I recommend Davies' The Last Three Minutes: Conjectures About The Ultimate Fate Of The Universe (Science Masters Series) If you're really bent on a book by Davies, check out that one.) Davies does raise a few more questions than Ferris, but he doesn't handle them well. On the other hand, Ferris deals with a lot more actual physics and astronomy than Davies touches in this book. But the main reason I recommend Ferris over Davies is that his discussion of the philosophical issues is more lucid and well-organized. In fact, until astronomers and physicists make some breakthroughs on dark matter and dark energy, Ferris' book will probably remain the best in the field.

If you want something specifically on math, such as the work of Godel and Turing, my first recommendation would be Hofstadter's classic Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid or Keith Devlin's The Language of Mathematics: Making the Invisible Visible. As for the philosophy of math, I don't have any recommendations better than Lakoff's Where Mathematics Comes From: How the Embodied Mind Brings Mathematics into Being or a book by Stuart Shapiro, although they will not be accessible to many curious readers. Sorry about that. I don't know where to go for that; I was really hoping this book would be the place, but sadly it isn't. There's a great book waiting to be written...

65 of 70 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Top Quark discovery adds weight to his arguments, July 4, 2000

By	Karl Matsumoto (Tokyo Japan) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

When Paul Davies' book was published 1993, scientists had yet to discover the top quark, but Davies predicted that it would be found one day, and therefore add further evidence to his view of an ordered, symmetrical universe which seems to be designed on purpose. The "drama" for the search for the top quark, as the author called it, had not yet been completed. Well, he was absolutely right. The top quark was discovered in March1995 at Fermi Lab. It is this kind of accuracy that sets it apart from the less rigorous Creation Science-styled books. This book cannot be dismissed since the author's knowledge of mathematics, philosophy and physics seems so wide-ranging. Moreover, he is well aware of the skepticism to the designer Universe arguments, and they are presented in this volume at every turn. Davies' powers of prophetic vision and synthesis of information are amazing. The heart of the book are the chapters on his "deep feeling" that the inherently mathematical nature of the Universe, which he admits is hard to convey to the lay reader, must lead to the inescapable conclusion that the world as we know it could not have happened by sheer chance. Ironically, Davies says, by doing their work, scientists end up thinking about God more than theologians.