My favorite form of writing (to read) is the essay. Books on single themes, no matter how well-written, invariably lapse into sections or passages that are redundant, plodding, or pedantic. The essay form is brief enough to be rich and scintillating from beginning to end, in the hands of a good craftsman.
All this to say, that even though it’s only June I think I have already found my favorite book-of-the-year in Jim Holt’s “When Einstein Walked with Gödel,” a compendium of 20-years-worth of Holt essays. I don’t expect anything I see the rest of the year (though I could be wrong) to surpass the joy I’m getting from these beautiful pieces on physics, philosophy, culture, and abundant math. At 3/4 of the way through there hasn’t been a bad, boring, or weak essay yet, nor expected in the final 1/4. I’ve been marking my very favorite essays as I go along, but so many are now thusly-marked it’s not even worth noting them all. Wonderful descriptions of and anecdotes about great figures in the history of math/science; wonderful discussion of debates/controversies in the scientific/philosophical realm; wonderful, thought-provoking, often novel, commentaries and overviews. I’ve already touted this volume in various places, and can’t recommend it enough; readable and enjoyable by professionals and laypersons alike.
Here are some more formal review links:
https://bookmarks.reviews/reviews/when-einstein-walked-with-godel-excursions-to-the-edge-of-thought/
…and also a review and interview with Holt here:
*************************
Received an uncorrected review copy of Eugenia Cheng’s forthcoming (September?), “The Art of Logic In an Illogical World” awhile back. It’s Dr. Cheng’s third book and again an attempt to present somewhat abstract topics (previously category theory and infinity) to a general audience. Oddly, in each instance I’ve enjoyed one half of each of her books better than the other half; in this case it was the second half I enjoyed most — I won’t dwell on that, since your ‘mileage may vary,’ but mention it just so you know that if the first half doesn’t grab you, persevere, and the second half may be more rewarding.
Dr. Cheng’s topic this go-around is very timely and important, as it has to do with how people think, reason, form opinions, argue, etc. in this highly-polarized world we inhabit. Important to note that there is very little technical logic/symbolism in the volume, even when she is discussing elements of formal logic. Her tone/presentation is much more informal/casual, almost conversational — that has always been her writing style as she strives to reach a broad audience. In fact I would almost say that the title of the book could equally well be “The Art of Common Sense” because she is dealing with logic in such an informal, introductory way that it will often seem like just formalized common sense.
One of the main strengths of the book is that she employs very current issues or examples (often related to equality or feminism) to illustrate her points throughout, making what could have been abstract or stodgy material, rather more pertinent and interesting.
Early in the book Dr. Cheng notes that she has sometimes been described as “pedantic” for her previous writing, and I think that is a fair warning of how some will view passages here as well (again, more-so the first half of the book). But then she consistently takes on subjects (like category theory, infinity, and now logic) that lend themselves to pedantry (despite her constant attempt at casualness… which I find a bit annoying at times, but may well appeal to her intended audience).
Dr. Cheng’s enthusiasm for her topics is unmistakeable; she already has a large fan-base and 3 books (and many articles and videos) under her belt — each of those volumes are good, but I suspect the most excellent works from this energetic, relatively young writer are yet to come, as she endeavors to spread the good news of mathematics AND logical thinking far and wide.
No comments:
Post a Comment