Buy new:
$40.00$40.00
Delivery Wednesday, April 17
Ships from: Amazon.com Sold by: Amazon.com
Buy used: $29.98
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Follow the author
OK
Facing Up: Science and Its Cultural Adversaries Paperback – April 30, 2003
Purchase options and add-ons
- Print length299 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherHarvard University Press
- Publication dateApril 30, 2003
- Dimensions6.14 x 0.68 x 9.21 inches
- ISBN-100674011201
- ISBN-13978-0674011205
Popular titles by this author
Lectures on Quantum MechanicsSteven WeinbergHardcover$9.49 shippingOnly 18 left in stock (more on the way).
Dreams of a Final Theory: The Scientist's Search for the Ultimate Laws of NatureSteven WeinbergPaperback$8.43 shipping

Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and Applications of the General Theory of RelativitySteven WeinbergHardcover$9.46 shippingGet it as soon as Thursday, Apr 18Only 2 left in stock - order soon.
Editorial Reviews
Review
“In this wonderful and compelling collection of essays, Steven Weinberg--one of the greatest and most influential of physicists--convincingly argues that the more we discover about the laws governing the cosmos, the less it seems that we have any special status or role to play. While Weinberg may well be right regarding the absence of a divine plan for human beings, you cannot help leaving these finely written essays feeling uplifted by the boundless curiosity and ingenuity of the human spirit.”―Brian Greene, author of The Elegant Universe
“In 23 previously published articles and miscellaneous speeches, which span 15 years, the Nobel Prize-winning particle physicist takes up arms against a sea of post-modernists, religionists, mystics, and even some liberal critics of modern science...However, interspersed with the arguments, counterarguments, and rebuttals of adversaries are two quieter gems: a tour-de-force summary of 20th-century physics' accomplishments and a brief description of the moment of inspiration for his development of the theory unifying the weak and electromagnetic force.”―Kirkus Reviews
“Winner of the Nobel Prize for physics in 1979, Weinberg will be well known to science buffs for his book The First Three Minutes and to a wider readership for his frequent essays in the New York Review of Books. He is one of the foremost proponents of reductionism, 'the explanation of a wide range of scientific principles in terms of simpler, more universal ones.' He has also been a major figure in the so-called science wars, arguing against writers like Derrida and Latour who question the objective character of scientific knowledge and maintain that cultural factors influence the nature of scientific discoveries...Yet he is quite adept at explaining complex concepts clearly to the general public.”―Publishers Weekly
“Cogent and lucid, this collection of essays helps general readers understand both why the so-called science wars have aroused such passions within the academy and how these wars have affected sociopolitical events far beyond university campuses.”―Bryce Christensen, Booklist
“The essays in Facing Up are illuminating and entertaining. They range across many subjects where Mr. Weinberg has points to make or turf to defend. There are excursions into quantum physics, cosmology, the history of science, and science's relationships with politics and religion.”―The Economist
“[Facing Up is] lucidly written as ever, with a gentle humor that does not hide [Weinberg's] strong convictions on science, philosophy and religion. I unreservedly recommend it, not only to scientists but to all who share his beliefs in the contribution that science has made, and will continue to make, to the way we see ourselves and our world.”―Brian Pippard, Times Literary Supplement
“Anyone who has read Weinberg's essays in The New York Review of Books over the years knows that, in addition to being a superb popular expositor of science...the distinguished Nobel Prize physicist has not shied away from polemically treating more controversial matters as well...Weinberg's writing is a joy. Difficult ideas are explained in a language that is learned, unpretentious, elegant, and persuasive all at once--it is the quality of the ideas that comes through, ideas needing no embellishing obfuscation of style. Much, much to be learned here...A valuable, important book. Highly recommended.”―M. Schiff, Choice
“People interested in the role of science and technology in our culture and everyday life, and in its preservation and strengthening, will find stimulating arguments to compare to their viewpoints. I have found a reassuring confidence on the universal standing of science in the shaping of human culture and also an amusing unifying thread in the fortuitous fact that [these] books share the rejection of intellectual smokiness as enacted in the famous Sokal's hoax, a must in any humanity and science curricula of university classes all over the world.”―Vittorio Sgaramella, History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences
“Weinberg writes well and his clear style and strong opinions hold the reader's attention. He says he has "a taste for controversy", and this punchy and provocative writing certainly bears this out...This is an interesting book, with a lot to question and (I believe) disagree with, but is well worth reading.”―John Polkinghorne, Nature
“Steven Weinberg inhabits a bleak world infested with adversaries that he is impelled to combat. He faces up to them with scientific rigour and lawyerly precision, as readers of this fascinating book of essays will discover with pleasure...Weinberg is a noble warrior in the science wars...Read this book.”―John Ellis, Physics World
About the Author
Product details
- Publisher : Harvard University Press; Trade Paperback Edition (April 30, 2003)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 299 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0674011201
- ISBN-13 : 978-0674011205
- Item Weight : 1.01 pounds
- Dimensions : 6.14 x 0.68 x 9.21 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #3,782,517 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #1,359 in Science Essays & Commentary (Books)
- #12,936 in History & Philosophy of Science (Books)
- #30,519 in Physics (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Steven Weinberg (born May 3, 1933) is an American theoretical physicist and Nobel laureate in Physics for his contributions with Abdus Salam and Sheldon Glashow to the unification of the weak force and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles.
He holds the Josey Regental Chair in Science at the University of Texas at Austin, where he is a member of the Physics and Astronomy Departments. His research on elementary particles and cosmology has been honored with numerous prizes and awards, including in 1979 the Nobel Prize in Physics and in 1991 the National Medal of Science. In 2004 he received the Benjamin Franklin Medal of the American Philosophical Society, with a citation that said he is "considered by many to be the preeminent theoretical physicist alive in the world today." He has been elected to the US National Academy of Sciences and Britain's Royal Society, as well as to the American Philosophical Society and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Weinberg's articles on various subjects occasionally appear in The New York Review of Books and other periodicals. He has served as consultant at the U. S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, President of the Philosophical Society of Texas, and member of the Board of Editors of Daedalus magazine, the Council of Scholars of the Library of Congress, the JASON group of defence consultants, and many other boards and committees.
Bio from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Photo by Larry D. Moore [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons.
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
In the essay, "Confronting O'Brien" (that's the O'Brien of Orwell's 1984), Weinberg makes it clear where he stands on the possibility of two plus two equaling five, or on the so-called "strong" social constructionist view of scientific knowledge. He writes that while "there is no such thing as a clear and universal scientific method", nonetheless, "under the general heading of scientific method" there is "a commitment to reason...and a deference to observation and experiment," and "Above all...a respect for reality as something outside ourselves, that we explore but do not create." (p. 43)
In the chapter, "The Non-Revolution of Thomas Kuhn," Weinberg writes that "the task of science is to bring us closer and closer to objective truth." It is here that I demur. I think it would be better to say that science more and more allows us to better manipulate the environment to our advantage (or disadvantage!) and to see further into that environment--to smaller phenomena, more distant objects, and more clearly into the past and the present--rather than to speak of "objective truth," which in this context is little different from "ultimate truth," or a "final theory of everything." The dream of "objective truth" is the dream of religion and is anathema to Weinberg's sentiments elsewhere in the book. Note, however, that he carefully writes, "closer and closer to objective truth." That's a nice qualification, but I think he should have qualified the notion of "objective truth" as well.
But Prof. Weinberg is not without the means for having fun with his listeners and readers. He writes on page 87 from a talk to the National Association of Scholars about the scientific method, that "There is one philosophic principle that I find of use here...[that] there is a kind of zing--to use the best word I can think of--that is quite unmistakable when real scientific progress is being made." Clearly he is playing with the notion of a "philosophic" principle. Indeed, on the last page of the book he confesses, "I don't believe it is actually possible to prove anything about most of the things (apart from mathematical logic) that they [philosophers] argue about."
Proving that he is not hopelessly locked into a finite but unbounded universe, he notes several times in the book that the universe may be infinite; indeed one of the chapters is entitled, "Before the Big Bang." He also writes, "Chaotic inflation has in a sense revived the idea of a steady state theory in a grander form; our own Big Bang may be just one episode in a much larger universe that on average never changes." (pp. 176-177)
Weinberg's sense of humor is rather dry. While scolding journalists for writing that the Big Bang theory is unraveling, he observes (p. 175), "Journalists generally have no bias toward one cosmological theory or another, but many have a natural preference for excitement." Or, his take off on Kuhn's repeated and grandiose use of the word "paradigm" (after noting a paradigm shift from Aristotelian to Newtonian physics): "Now that really <was> a paradigm shift. For Kuhn it seems to have been the paradigm of paradigm shifts..." (p. 204)
Also: "Any possible universe could be explained as the work of some sort of designer. Even a universe that is completely chaotic...could be supposed to have been designed by an idiot." (p. 232) Or (same page), "The human mind remains extraordinarily difficult to understand, but so is the weather."
Weinberg's critique of religion takes no prisoners. He writes (p. 241), "...on balance the moral influence of religion has been awful." He adds, "With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil--that takes religion." (p. 242) He got a lot of flak for that, but considering the situation in the Middle East, his words seem prescient, although he was merely glancing back at history.
My favorite essays are the ones on the argument from design, the critique of Thomas Kuhn's thought, and the chapter on utopias. In the first he makes a neat distinction between anthropic reasoning that is "mystical mumbo jumbo," and that which is "just common sense." (p. 238) In the latter, while denigrating the prospect of a technological utopia, he writes that a world without work, a world in which people instead pursue the arts, science, etc., would be unsatisfactory (actually he mentions "general misery") because "there is only so much new literature...only so much new music," etc. to see and hear, and with so much competition, our work would get but scant notice. I really didn't understand this because people will make work where there is none, even if it is only working on their psyches and those of their friends, their bodies, etc. And besides, where is the end of exploring and of learning? Furthermore, the real joy is in the doing, not in the being noticed.
Perhaps this reveals part of Steven Weinberg's personality to us. He is a man who has done the very best work while being noticed at the highest level. What he writes is very much worth our time and consideration.
--Dennis Littrell, author of "Hard Science and the Unknowable"
But I don't agree with his sentiment in that paragraph that it is not "actually possible to prove anything about most of the things (apart from mathematical logic) that they [philosophers] argue about". Aristotle's syllogisms, also complained about in that paragraph, are an achievement in logic independent of mathematics, and occasionally thinkers like Descartes ( Discourse on Method and Meditations on First Philosophy ) or the British empiricists contributed insights into epistemology, into how knowledge is acquired. Modern philosophers, I agree, contribute no insights outside those of science (to which they are subservient, if not its "adversaries"), notwithstanding their voluminous writings.
However, this doesn't mean it isn't possible to logically demonstrate facts about the world without the aid of science, and without contradicting most of its tenets. Although it appears quite bold, I do just that in On Proof for Existence of God, and Other Reflective Inquiries . The title may suggest some of the areas in which I question the contentions of the book reviewed. The author often states such as: "no biologist today would be content with an axiom about biological behavior that could not...have an explanation at a more fundamental level of physics and chemistry..." (pp.22-3); "the forces that act within atoms...produce all the rich variety of chemical behavior which...produced the phenomenon of life" (p.31); "If we ask any question about nature...and keep asking why...we will get a series of answers that generally takes us down to the very small" (p.40); "life emerges from biochemistry; biochemistry emerges from atomic physics; and atomic physics emerges from the properties of elementary particles..." (p.58); "and vitalism, the belief in autonomous biological laws is safely dead" (p.59).
The author here engages in the classical "not seeing the forest for the trees". As a particle physicist he is intensely involved in the reductionist efforts of finding the elementary building blocks of matter, the "final theory" as he puts it, simultaneously assuming that with that finding there can be no other basic principle producing worldly events.
One can only consider human volition, which utilizes those elementary physical forces for its own purposes, not for purposes of those forces, understood to be purposeless. But this goes much farther. Animal volition is only part of the property in all organisms to function purposely, in general toward their survival. There is accordingly indeed more that determines physical events than their microscopic functions. This leads to other, macroscopic, issues, in particular to theistic ones, also dealt with by the author.
He argues variously against theism, one of his points being: "Either you mean something definite by God, a designer, or you don't. If you don't, then what are we talking about?" (p.234), he seeking a meaning like "a deity more or less like those of traditional monotheistic religions" (p.232). His complaint about meaning "something definite by 'God' or 'design'" doesn't accord with his views on meaning elsewhere, saying (p.206) that though "it is terribly hard to say precisely what we mean [by] words like 'real' and 'true'", and he respects "the efforts of philosophers to clarify these concepts, [he is] sure that even [they] have used words like 'truth' and 'reality' in everyday life, and had no trouble with them".
While a deity meant by traditional religions may be easier to dispute, it is more justified to consider a supreme being in a universal sense of indeed basic attributes like of a designer. Design can be equated with purpose, which is the crux of the recent disputes between Darwinism and its opponents: Is there a God of purpose? Specifically, is there a higher power with purpose for the living?
An answer has been given by the preceding observation of purpose in all organisms.
Top reviews from other countries
About Newtoanism, Reductionism, Zionism, Galileo, Thomas Kuhn, ...
Written by a great scientist

