What do you think?
Rate this book


144 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2011
Here is a book that had so much potential and fell just a bit flat, perhaps due to the fact that each chapter is a reworked lecture, meant to appeal to a listening audience. The book discusses topics that include the future and limits of science, the politics of science, and the global nature of science. Martin Rees, somewhat of a celebrity to the curious layman, admits in his introduction that none of the topics could be covered in depth due to the nature of the format. This is unfortunate, as he is engaging and informative, leaving me wanting more.
The chapters can be occasionally repetitive, again because of their beginnings as individual lectures. This isn't annoying, but it can be tiresome. More tiresome, though, is the slight sensationalism Rees employs, presumably to keep the attention of those attending the lectures. The subject material is interesting enough without hyping it, especially technology. To be fair, whatever is sensationalized is only slightly so, but that is still more than it needs to be. Rees can also be contradictory. In one chapter, he stated that although manned space exploration was unnecessary, as a human he wanted the opportunity to be open for those willing to take the involved risks. In the next chapter, he derided manned space flight, implying NASA would "squander its far larger [than a future European space program] budget on a manned program that is neither useful nor inspiring."
Another complaint I have is the lack of notes in the back. I realize these are lectures, but I would have liked to have seen where some of the research came from. Statistics usually were not cited in-text. However, summaries of studies were credited during the lecture. I find it comforting to know that I can Google a specific poll or study to find the statistics used in the book and make sure the author isn't leaving out crucial information or making undue assumptions, though I'm sure Rees would not.
I don't want to sound as though I didn't enjoy the book, though--I did. I already knew quite a bit of what was being said, but I was occasionally enlightened, and although I did not always agree with the author's ideas, I always found them to be sound and respectable, even interesting. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in science or politics, and especially to someone interested in both, keeping the faults I mentioned in mind. I think this book might be the one that encourages politicians to better understand science, and scientists to better understand politics. The points in that area of the book were especially well made, and palatable to both groups of people. While the other essays were interesting, the slight sensationalism detracted from the author's sensible, practical viewpoints--the real joy of the book.