2 comments about Foucault.

1. I chose to read this book precisely because it did not include an extensive biography. In this book, Merquior traces the major developments in Foucault's thought, offering critical commentary and the opinions of many other historians, philosophers, and sociologists. In places, I was surprised by Merquior's frank wit, and at other times I was annoyed by the abundance of untranslated titles and quotations. All in all I would say that I benefited from reading this book, even though I would never say that it was all that insightful or well written. It is clear that Merquior is not all that sympathetic to Foucault's program, and he managed to convince me that Foucault is largely undeserving of the fame that his name has received. From what Merquior has said, it sounds like Foucault's adaptation of Nietzsche's will to power is an interesting idea. Though Merquior constantly points out that Foucault offers no argument for the idea that the will to truth is only thinly veiled will to power, I could not help but notice that Foucault's incessant reliance on his provocative reinterpretations of history were a case in point. As Merquior proceeded to point out error after error in Foucault's history, I could not help but think of the Orwell slogan "he who controls the present controls the past." It seems that Foucault has abandoned the correspondence theory of truth (as has most of modern philosophy) and the coherence theory as well. What he seems to end up with is an odd sort of will to power pragmatism where truth is simply what can get you the most followers. This idea is very close to what Merquior calls "intellectual machismo". He explains the phrase on p.157:

   In intellectual machismo, the strength of one's argument is not propped up by logical quality-rather, it is conveyed by the unflinching self-confidence of one's tone. Impressiveness, not cogency, is the thing. So it is with Shaw; so with Sartre-and so, too, with Foucault.




2. A must-read for any humanities graduate student, Merquior's book picks apart the major works of Foucault and finds, lo and behold, that the theorist failed in every major intellectual inquiry he ever made. Merquior does indeed "have an agenda"; to wit, he was asked to consider Foucault's writings in depth and write an analysis of them. He did exactly that and found an abundant amount of circular logic, shoddy history, and major concepts cribbed from Saussure, Nietzsche, Bachelard, and various other writers. Quite amusingly, Merquior begins every chapter with a few perfunctory words of praise and a thorough summary of a different book, and then explains in great detail why Foucault's arguments don't hold water. Merquior does not, in fact, have an agenda, nor is he in any sense a cultural conservative, but he does recognize the problems with nihilism as a pose, and he can smell a fraud when he sees one.

No comments about Curt Richter: A Life in the Laboratory.

1 comments about Neyman.

1. Constance Reid is a biographer who has specialized writing about the lives of mathematicians, statisticians and scientists. Besides Neyman's book she wrote one about Courant.
   
   Neyman had a very interesting life, from his early years in Europe where he grew up and did his fundamental work on mathematical statistics particularly the Neyman-Pearson theory fo hypothesis testing. Neyman met controversy head on as he like Karl Pearson before him had lively debates with Fisher as to what constitutes a test of significance. Neyman's approach was what is now called the frequentist approach which draws inference on the basis of what would happen by repeated sampling from an underlying probability distribution (the sampling distribution). Fisher on the other hand thought that what happens in other possible samples is irrelevant and that inference should be based solely on the data at hand. This led to what he called fiducial theory. Although during Fisher's lifetime the debate on this raged, the fiducial theory has largely been discredited. Differences in inference between the two approaches often did not occur and it wasn't until Neyman discovered the difference in results when nuisance parameters were involved, starting with the famous Behrens-Fisher problem of estimating the difference between the means of two normal distributions when the variances are unknown but must be assumed to be unequal.
   
   Besides his fundamental contributions, Neyman immigrated to the United States and founded the Statistics Department at the University of California. He turned Berkeley into a hotbed for statistics and created one of the top statistics departments in the world, rivaled by its neighbor across the San Francsico Bay Leland Stnaford Junior University. In his 80s Neyman was as vibrant and productive as ever and was able to fubction this way due to the nursing help of his colleague and Berkeley Professor Elizabeth Scott. Reid emphasizes the last three years of Neyman's life when she interviewed him and followed him around.
   
   I was a graduate student a Stanford during the period from 1974-1978. Each year Stanford and Berkeley would hold joint symposia that were commonly attended by the fraduate students and faculty from both schools, When the lectures were in Berkeley they were always followed by a dinner for the speaker at a nice Berkeley restaurant. It was on these occasions that I became acquainted with Neyman, Scott, Freedman, Bickel, LeCam, Blackwell and Lehmann. These were some of the top names in statistics at the time. Over at Stanford we had our own set of famous names with Efron, Miller, Moses, Diaconis, Olkin, Siegmund and Stein.
   
   The strong academic and social nature of Jerzy Neyman and the Berkeley group that I personally expereinced is very well portrayed by Constance Reid in this fine biography. Technical details about statistical matters are kept out of the book. So this book can be enjoyed by people without much mathematical or statistical knowledge.

No comments about Physician to the Gene Pool: Genetic Lessons and Other Stories.

5 comments about Mercator: The Man Who Mapped the Planet.

1. Mercator, by Nicholas Crane, is a first class story about Mercator, his work and the troubled times. Mercator's methods of mapmaking were major breakthroughs in layout but it is hard to understand why that was the case, considering that we have maps everywhere today, even on demand in our cars. But Crane carefully lays out the background of discovery and politics and printing and art work that shows you why Mercator's work was so breathtakingly advanced at the time. A truly fine read.



2. The man who figured out how to make maps of the globe flat and made us think Brazil was smaller than Greenland.
   A problem with reviewing a history book for a non-professional is that we can't be sure how accurate it is and we have to leave that kind of review to the historians. I enjoyed it but it is a long densely packed 320 pages. At that length I think he could have given us a little more technology and more lucid explanation of the mathematical problem involved. I would have liked more detail of how the globes were made. Since some of them survive this should be feasible. He describes some of Mercator's predecessors and might have explained more about Ptolemy's maps. But I quibble; it's a massive achievement, lucid and enjoyable.



3. There is no doubt that Mercator was a great geographer. Among his achievements were: the projection bearing his name, the first modern Atlas, and even the naming of North America. He played an important role in the amazing successes and adventures of the Age of Discovery. He truly was an amazing man.
   
   Having said this, I found Crane's book to be lacking. I thought that the book was well researched and well grounded, but the delivery was poor. When buying a popular history book, in addition to the facts I expect a gripping story, masterfully told. However, Crane's writing style is dry and while the book is filled with names, dates, facts and figures the story telling is simply not there. Crane often gets bogged down in minute details that are distracting, dry and are simply not important to the story he is trying to tell.
   
   In short, this may be a good history book, but it is not a book that I would recommend for the typical reader of POPULAR history.



4. Interesante y constructiva visión del hombre que dío las bases de la cartografía mundial, una muy buena y completa biografía de un geografo mundial



5. Gerard Mercator was one of history's great cartographers, and some of the contributions he made, in particular the "Mercator projection" method of representing a 3-dimensional planet on a 2-dimensional map, have stood the test of time and are still in use today. He was also a very respectable human being, with an unrelenting work ethic and incredibly high standards for his work. His strong personal convictions allowed the son of a cobbler to become something of a celebrity throughout Europe.
   
   In addition to being an extremely comprehensive biography of Gerard Mercator, Nicholas Crane's book proves equally interesting as a history lesson on 16th century Europe. The Reformation, and the efforts to quell it, influenced the work of Mercator and other scientists of the time, and were responsible for Mercator's uprooting and imprisonment and nearly saw him executed for heresy. The state of mapmaking is another intriguing subject, as it involved a surprising amount of guesswork and reliance on ancient sources.
   
   Readers of Mercator will not fail to notice the tremendous amount of research that Crane put into his book. Considering that the events recorded occurred more than 400 years ago, the level of detail is sometimes astonishing. Not only can Crane tell the reader about secret Protestant meetings, he can tell you where they were held, who attended, and even the occupation of each of the attendees. Unfortunately, the minutiae can become overwhelming and often make Mercator a difficult book to read.
   
   I would recommend this book primarily to those who have an interest in the history of cartography or who are generally interested in the history of Mercator's era. For more casual readers, myself included, the book is a challenge to read and the rewards are not quite commensurate with the effort.

5 comments about Richard Feynman: A Life in Science.

1. I can't remember ever reading a biography quite as enjoyable. The authors are to be congratulated for their perfect blend of scientific and personal anecdotes. You won't find any of Feynman's lectures here, but you will come to understand why Feynman is so revered. The author's write, "Does the world really need another book about Richard Feynman? We think so, or we wouldn't have written it." I agree with them, and I'm sure you will too. A wonderful book.



2. John and Mary Gribbin have done a splendid job in explaining the life and works of Richard Feynman. It is a short book of only about 300 pages, but it briefly explains every important part of Feynman's life. Starting with his childhood the book shows what influenced him to become a physicist and how in an early age he learned the meaning of knowing the name of something and actually knowing something.
   The book goes through Feynman's education, his career as a physicist and his contributions to science. Along with that the book gives explanations of what was going in the world of physics before, during and after Feynman. This is the part where anyone reading will have problems because there is so much physics explained that a person needs to have a prior knowledge of basic physics and an intermediate knowledge of the atom to actually understand what Feynman did that made him a legend. If one cannot understand Feynman's contribution, there is no point in reading the book. Other than this, I have no complaints about the book.
   The book explains one thing most impressively, i.e. it establishes how Feynman is an unusual physicist. Most usually do their best work by their early thirties, but Feynman made major contributions until he was middle aged. He received his Nobel Prize for his work on QED, but his other major contributions are in gravity, weak interactions, strong interactions, super fluidity, atomic bomb and he also led a major role in the investigation of the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. Feynman enjoyed life to its full extent; he made adventurous trips, played bongos, and actually had fun in doing what he was doing.
   The book establishes that Feynman was no ordinary genius. The most important thing about him was he was never too proud and never let his genius get to his head. He was one of the most down to earth and honest person. He didn't accept mistakes from others but was still willing to accept his own mistake. He was willing to share his knowledge with anyone who wanted to learn and had this `feel' about him that one could not help but get influenced by him.
   It looks like John and Mary Gribbin had to give the public a taste of the life of one of the most influential physicist who throughout his life was enthusiastic, adventurous and never backed down from a challenge. If you want a basic overview of Feynman's life with insights in quantum physics, I absolutely recommend this book. But if you are the type that cannot handle physics, this book is not for you.



3. This book, written by John and Mary Gribbin, gives a great insight into the life of a truly amazing genius who was told the importance of understanding the way things work from childhood. Melville Feynman, Richard Feynman's father, raised his son to be a scientist and succeeded. Richard was inquisitive throughout his life. It is clear that his curiosity led him to work on solving problems that were new to him, even if they had been solved before. Feynman was not a social outcast like many scientists are believed to be, and the Gribbins weave in some interesting personal stories about Feynman. Richard Feynman had a wonderful life from the standpoint that everything in his scientific life worked out well, and he rarely seemed to have any major obstacles in his work. The topics that Feynman studied were difficult to understand and may be impossible to understand without having him to explain. The Gribbins do an excellent job of explaining the difficult and sometimes abstract things that Feynman worked on or discovered. Feynman had a knack for problem solving ever since he was young and magically (by thinking) could fix radios. It is clear that Feynman enjoyed the area of study he was in, and "he never knew when he was working and when he was playing" (p 250). His sister Joan said of him. Feynman did enjoy what he did and was always ready for a challenge either from a teacher or from a colleague that was stuck. Feynman lived a very interesting life and not only worked on physics but took up painting, traveling, and playing the bongos. The renown of Feynman was amazing; he knew people from all over the world that were amazing and unique. The life of this man was full of incredible discoveries that continued through his old age. Feynman was thankful for every day he had, especially after he was diagnosed with cancer. Feynman's last words were, "This dying is boring" (p 258). He loved life, and he knew his legacy would continue saying, "I've kind of spread me around all over the place. So I'm probably not going to go away when I'm dead!" (p 258). Feynman was right about his legacy because he contributed so greatly to science and society.



4. I really enjoyed Richard Feynman - A Life in Science. The book is an interesting account of Feynman's life, and teaches a lot about physics as well. I feel that the author felt it was necessary to write about Feynman not only because of his scientific discoveries, but because of his view of the world, and how he brought that to science. The book is very interesting. It goes into detail about Feynman's career and life, and gives us details about all of his personality quirks. Richard Feynman is best known for his work in quantum electrodynamics, which he won a Nobel Prize for in 1965. He also worked on quark the theory of superfluidity and was a member of the Manhattan Project during World War Two. Feynman was famous for his lectures and teaching. He taught physics because he found it fun, and he conveyed this in his teachings. We should read this story because it teaches it about physics and the way the world works, but more importantly, because it presents us with Feynman's optimistic interesting view on life. I think that if we all learned a little of Feynman's philosophies, we would all be much happier and simpler people.



5. There have been multiple biographies and compendiums honoring the lovable supergenius Richard Feynman, and his mindboggling accomplishments. This one is mostly a collection of snippets and anecdotes from previous books, but it probably gives the most concise and comprehensive coverage of Feynman's life and his vast influence on science. Granted, this particular bio does have a few flaws, especially in its rather breathless idolization of Feynman and his brilliance, to the point where the reader wonders if the gentleman had any flaws at all. Also, this book keeps trying to glamorize how approachable and lovably eccentric Feynman was, but these aspects of his personality don't really come through here, as John Gribbin can't quite make Feynman's hobbies like playing drums, or his love of teaching and reaching out to the masses, seem that amazing. But in any case, this is still a perfectly enjoyable biography because Feynman's brilliance in physics, and all the other intellectual endeavors he tackled, really does shine through. Gribbin also fleshes things out with pretty good coverage of Feynman's extensive contributions to physics, such as almost single-handedly inventing quantum electrodynamics, with the necessary background knowledge into modern and historical science. Despite a few problems with the structure of the biography, the person it's about really makes an impact with the reader. That can't be said about too many Nobel-winning eccentric genius physicists. [~doomsdayer520~]

5 comments about The Roswell Legacy.

1. Now with release of The Roswell Legacy, Jesse Sr. will finally be vindicated and the world will learn the truth. With a forward written by the renowned Ufologist, Stanton Friedman, this book clears the air.



2. The hype about this book is overated.
   1 one quarter of each page in the book is blank,I cannot see any reason for this.
   2 Most of the book relates to his life story,his wifes life story,some people that he has met and a bit of their life story.
   3 I cannot for the life of me see where there is anything new in the book that has not already been revealed and stated in the past.
   4 The only reason, that I can see in this book, is his confirmation of what happened in the past was true, but this has already been written about by many other authors and video/dvd releases over the past many years and is what everybody already knows that had occured anyway.
   My expectations about the truth being revealed was let down dramatically.
   One last final comment is the expectation of having a hardback edition and personally signed by Jessie Jnr as promised by the promoters but typically, never eventuated.
   To me this book is a dead set ripoff for what you get.



3. 
   I though this book was poorly written and documented.
   
   1. What about Bessie Brazel? She saw the wreckage first hand too and reported it as a crashed weather balloon (of which others had previously crashed on the Brazel farm). She also described the printed symbols on the crash debris that Jess believes to be from another world.
   
   2. If the crash was so significant as reported why wasnt there anything on radar reported? Or sighted by others such as fire balls, etc.? Also in your own words the material was indestructible which begs the questions - well then how and why could something like that crash and break up? Does not add up.
   
   3. On one hand your father could not reveal top secret programs to your family but on the other hand could reveal something much more signifcant - a crashed saucer from another world? Is'nt this contradictory?
   
   4. Surely if your father was close to you as you suggest he would have told you more about what he knew - what he saw and heard concerning this event - but nothing more is reported in your book. Why?
   
   5. Is there the possiblity that this is a cover up of something totally unrelated to what we are being led to believe it is? Could it be your family was used in this regard to dissiminate disinformation?
   
   6. You selectively list sources in your book to back up what you say and leave out what does not support your thesis. For example - Mac Brazel reportedly hearing a large explosion - but leaving out Bessie Brazel's testimony. Suspect.
   
   7. The debris you mention in your book as "possibly from another world" by your own account is: plastic, foil, and metal beams. Hardly the stuff a saucer from "another world" would be constructed of AND very similar to what the MOGUL devices were constructed of. Bessie even describes tape and basal wood being among the wrekage as does Mac Brazel. Why did you leave this information out of your book and how do you explain their accounts?
   
   8. You talk about the possiblity of being threatened in your book. However the fact is that your book indicates you have never been threatened. Could it be that you are not a threat? After all seeing foil, plastic and tiny metal I-beams is not very significant is it?
   
   9. How do you jump to the conclusion that this material, which could also have easily been constructed here on earth is 100% from a flying disc or craft from another world. I don't see the connection. Please advise.
   
   These are just a few of my limited observations. If anyone can shed more light on this Id be very appreciative.
   
   Best Regards to All.



4. Jesse Marcel Jr. has written a touching vindication of his father, Jesse Marcel, the Security Officer the military asked to look over the debris field on Mac Brazel's farm back in June of 1947. The author was an 11 year-old boy living with his parents near the military base at Roswell New Mexico, and he personally saw and touched parts of the debris as his father excitedly told him it was "not of this world."
   
   The basic story is well known, and Jesse Jr does not provide anything beyond the known facts and research that anyone could do. But the book is a valuable contribution to the legacy of Roswell because the author, besides the fact that he was part of it, focuses on the elements that keep people from believing the debris was from a crashed space ship. Starting with what he sees as a denigration of his father. He shows us in great detail that his father, Jesse Marcel, was technologically astute and well-trained in all aspects of military radar and balloons. It is just not possible that he would not have recognized any kind of balloon in use by the military. The government has admitted that its first claim, that the debris was from a weather balloon, along with the infamous picture of Marcel with the "debris," was a falsehood and a cover-up.
   
   But their more recent report on the Rosell incident claims that the debris was from Project Mogul, which was balloons sent high in the atmosphere to "listen" for evidence of Soviet nuclear testing. However, the author thoroughly researched Project Mogul and shows how this simply does not fit the facts. He states with certainty that the Mogul materials were nothing like what he saw in the family kitchen that night in 1947. He had a chance to personally examine some of the Mogul materials, so his opinion here is based on real knowledge. Beyond that, he researched which Mogul balloons were aloft at the time that could have landed on Mac Brazel's farm, and none of them fit. And beyond that, the debris field was much larger than what you'd get from a Mogul balloon, and, since the Mogul materials were ordinary, the military usually didn't even bother to collect downed balloons. So why, in the Roswell incident, did they scrape up every last piece of debris and have it flown, with armed guards, to Wright-Patterson?
   
   The book is somewhat disorganized and unorthodox in its layout and organization, but I found the rather homespun approach an indication of its authenticity as the real thoughts of the author (and his wife too). No spin here, just an honest recounting of memories and what the incident did to the Marcel family. I was saddened to read that his father became more cynical and took up drinking excessively as he grew older, contemplating the years he had to keep quiet and listen to his government put out "facts" he knew to be false. In his later years, he did talk about it somewhat, including telling Linda Marcel (Jesse Jr's wife) that what he saw in 1947 was "not of this earth."
   
   Everyone has their opinion and debunkers will always be with us, but Jesse Marcel Jr has kept faith with his father's belief that both the father and the son held in their hands pieces of something that came from "out there."



5. The Roswell Legacy was a welcomed publication. It was nice to see a book by Major Marcel's son finally on the market. Though it did deal with family matters and family quite a bit, I found that it dealt with many of the personal problems with family members including the fact that both Major Marcel and his wife as Jesse states in the book - became alcoholics. He speaks also of the effect that the Roswell Incident and its many years of secrecy had on his entire family including his own children. He states that even to this day due to the Roswell Incident there are riffs in his family. My reading about the tragic family situations both with his own family and Major Marcel's touched my heart and I thought, "How sad this has happened to them." I immediately decided I would attempt to reach Jesse by phone and invite him for an interview on my Blog Talk Radio show. I wanted to help him reach out, tell his story, and also assist in vindicating his Father in some way. I was able to contact him and he agreed to do the interview on BlogTalk Radio along with his friend Stanton T. Friedman. I asked him if there was anything in his book he did not want to discuss. His repy was, "I don't think so." However, in the course of the interview, I found this not to be the case. There were several questions mentioned in the book that he chose either not to comment upon or just skirted the question completely. I let all that pass. For a few days after the show, I thought about 'Why did he answer the questions the way he did or not at all?, when his answers did not agree with the way they had been written in the book. I wound up doing a second show on BlogTalk addressing these concerns and reading from The Roswell Legacy the answers that should have been easy for him to give. I finally took both shows totally out of my archive section. If you would like to hear these shows, you can at BTR, Saturday, March 29th, 2008, 5 pm ET - The Charn Parker Show or download them from the archives anytime after the broadcast. I do think this was a good book, however, I question now the validity of what was written.

No comments about Memoirs of the Life, Writings, and Discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton: Volume 2.

No comments about Melvin Calvin: Following the Trail of Light: A Scientific Odyssey (Profiles, Pathways, and Dreams).

No comments about Fritz Muller: A Naturalist in Brazil.