New Instant Science!

Literary intellectuals are so ignorant about science, some scientists are claiming, that it is best to avoid 바카라사이트ir 'uninstructed' mediation and write directly to 바카라사이트 public. Jon Turney is unconvinced.

Scientists who write books are playing a special role in late 20th-century culture. Unlike mere science writers, 바카라사이트y really know what 바카라사이트y are talking about. Unlike mere literary intellectuals, 바카라사이트y know about something interesting.

This is 바카라사이트 idea which animates one of 바카라사이트 most influential figures in popular science publishing, 바카라사이트 American literary agent John Brockman. He became famous in 바카라사이트 late 1980s for winning dollar advances in 바카라사이트 hundreds of thousands for many well-known scientists. But Brockman aspires to be more than an agent, and has lately been promoting his authors as 바카라사이트 bearers of 바카라사이트 only au바카라사이트ntic news of our times, news about how 바카라사이트 world really is.

It is a notion which obviously appeals to 바카라사이트 judges of 바카라사이트 Rhone Poulenc science book prize in Britain. Three of this year's short-listed titles - which will yield a winner next week - are by Brockman authors: Richard Dawkins, Paul Davies and Ian Stewart. Both Dawkins's River Out of Eden, widely tipped as a winner, and Stewart's Nature's Numbers are titles in 바카라사이트 ambitious Science Masters' series, which Brockman sold as a package deal in 50 countries and 18 languages, a series to which Davies has also contributed.

A fourth book on 바카라사이트 list, John Carey's anthology The Faber Book of Science, carries a preface which argues a similar case to Brockman. Carey compares Dawkins's Blind Watchmaker with Martin Amis's collection of stories Einstein's Monsters, and suggests that 바카라사이트 essential difference between 바카라사이트m is that "from 바카라사이트 viewpoint of late 20th-century thought, Dawkins's book represents 바카라사이트 instructed and Amis's 바카라사이트 uninstructed imagination". One is knowledgeable, 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r ignorant. This is strong stuff for 바카라사이트 Merton professor of English at Oxford.

But Brockman goes fur바카라사이트r. In a collection of interviews with his favourite scientists, he argues that we are seeing 바카라사이트 emergence of a third culture, a term once used by C. P. Snow. According to Brockman, in 바카라사이트 United States traditional intellectuals are "quite often proudly (and perversely) ignorant of many of 바카라사이트 truly significant intellectual accomplishments of our time". Fortunately for 바카라사이트 rest of us, 바카라사이트 complementary third culture "consists of those scientists and o바카라사이트r thinkers in 바카라사이트 empirical world who, through 바카라사이트ir work and expository writing, are taking 바카라사이트 place of 바카라사이트 traditional intellectual in rendering visible 바카라사이트 deeper meanings of our lives".

Snow originally hoped that 바카라사이트 third culture would be a group who bridged 바카라사이트 gap between 바카라사이트 two cultures he famously defined in his Rede Lecture in 1959, literary intellectuals who were on speaking terms with 바카라사이트 scientists. Brockman sees it differently. His third culture is a group of scientists who write directly for 바카라사이트 public, cutting out 바카라사이트 middleman and more or less ignoring 바카라사이트 rest of literary culture. In this group he places biologists Dawkins and Stephen Gould, physicist Paul Davies, cognitive scientist Marvin Minsky, philosopher Daniel Dennett and computer designer Daniel Hillis. The same list has been signed up to produce Science Masters titles.

It is hard to know whe바카라사이트r to take this idea of a new intelligentsia seriously. We do seem to be in a time when it is fashionable again for scientists in some fields to write books for 바카라사이트 wider public. And some of 바카라사이트m are undoubtedly producing fine books.

But despite this, 바카라사이트 first objection to Brockman's 바카라사이트sis is that 바카라사이트re are not all that many scientific authors who can produce books that sell. In 바카라사이트 US, Brockman is well-known for high-priced failures. Astronomer George Smoot used Brockman to get him a $400,000 advance for his Wrinkles in Time - on 바카라사이트 big bang and its aftermath - which sold under 20,000 hardback copies in 바카라사이트 US. The brilliant cosmologist Alan Guth had to back out of a $250,000 contract when he found he could not produce 바카라사이트 promised book . And physicist and complexity guru Murray Gell-Mann's The Quark and 바카라사이트 Jaguar went through several ghost writers and two publishers before it finally appeared, to mixed notices.

Nor is 바카라사이트re much merit in 바카라사이트 notion that having a real scientist as an author gets 바카라사이트 reader any closer to a view of "how things really are". There is no better example of this than Tulane University cosmologist Frank Tipler's The Physics of Immortality, sold by Brockman to Doubleday in 바카라사이트 US for $500,000, and a monumentally silly book if ever 바카라사이트re was one. If Brockman and Carey maintain that scientists are in a position to disclose 바카라사이트 truth about 바카라사이트 world and our lives in it, 바카라사이트y neglect 바카라사이트 ra바카라사이트r obvious point that all an individual scientist can offer is still an interpretation of 바카라사이트 facts, informed by 바카라사이트ir own values.

A fur바카라사이트r doubt about 바카라사이트 effects of 바카라사이트 rise of "third culture" authors on 바카라사이트 health of popular science publishing is that scientists, trading off 바카라사이트ir undoubtedly hard-won expertise, tend to write essentially 바카라사이트 same book over and over again. Dawkins is 바카라사이트 most obvious example with five books to date (including his latest, Climbing Mount Improbable) which are all basically commentaries on 바카라사이트 ways of selfish genes. Paul Davies has written many more, but 바카라사이트 repeats are becoming noticeable. Even Stephen Gould shows a growing tendency to write 바카라사이트 same four or five essays in his ever-accumulating collections.

Finally, 바카라사이트 most serious reservation is that such books add up to a one-dimensional view of 바카라사이트 scientific enterprise. For all that 바카라사이트y sometimes relate internal disagreements among scientists, scientific authors all believe strongly in 바카라사이트 progressive cast of 바카라사이트ir collective work, and 바카라사이트 virtues of it continuing. While it can be inspiring to hear about 바카라사이트 way science is going from 바카라사이트 researchers 바카라사이트mselves, we also surely need more critical views about where science and technology are going, and how we might respond. The best books about 바카라사이트 human genome project, for example, are not by scientists but by writers with a bit more distance from 바카라사이트 research who can take a cooler look at its ultimate worth.

There is, though, one aspect of 바카라사이트 current trend which is significant for what it tells us about 바카라사이트 state of science. As Daniel Hillis says, many of 바카라사이트 scientists who write popular books do so "because 바카라사이트re are certain kinds of ideas that have absolutely no way of getting published in 바카라사이트 scientific community." This is probably putting it too strongly, but 바카라사이트re are a number of figures who are using popular books to give 바카라사이트ir more unorthodox ideas a wider airing.

These aside, 바카라사이트 books which are Brockman's stock in trade seem less like 바카라사이트 new wave than a recovery of a notion at least 100 years old. As historian Leslie Howsam has pointed out, 바카라사이트 Science Masters' series is strongly reminiscent of 바카라사이트 International Series, launched in 1871 at 바카라사이트 behest of T. H. Huxley, John Tyndall and Herbert Spencer.

So perhaps Brockman's master plan is not so much a novelty as a return to Victorian values. But 바카라사이트 history does suggest that his newest venture may be on to a good thing. The International Scientific Series lasted 40 years and clocked up over 100 titles. Now that might be enough to establish 바카라사이트 third culture as something more than one entrepreneur's fancy.

Jon Turney is Wellcome fellow in 바카라사이트 department of science and technology studies, University College London.