SammyJean writes:
I'm going to have to wait but I do plan on reading it as soon as it's available.
That's what I thought I had to do when I saw it announced. But on a recent trip to Prague, I was astonished, after having walked into the first bookshop I encountered, to walk straight into it. It almost jumped from the shelf into my hands. Of course I didn't hesitate for one nanosecond to part with my money for the right of owning it.
I have just finished the first chapter. It really whetted my appetite for the rest of the book. The only thing I deplore is Dawkins' idea of using 'theorum' - rhyming with 'decorum' - as a new term for a theory in the sense of a scientific theory, as opposed to a theory in the sense of a "mere" hypothesis. I think we should not have to make concessions of this kind, just to avoid confusion. Anyone with a bit of brains and a working knowledge of scientific terminology can effortlessly use the two senses in context without having to resort to linguistic novelty. If I have my way, the confused will simply have to learn the trick themselves.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.
™ Version 4.2
