Sunday, December 17, 2006

Why do I read popular science books?

I'm interested in the truth.

For several years I have read many books on Evolution, Cosmology etc (my library). They satisfy my thirst for truth and knowledge. I annotate my books with vertical lines indicating the most interesting or significant points. Then I go on to read other related books. But a month or a year later how much do I remember of what I have read? I feel I should do more with these books to extend my understanding. And somehow communicate my understanding to others.

A couple of months ago i summarised The Periodic Table. I felt happy, even strangely elated for a few weeks even though i never got around to adding by review to Amazon.co.uk. The process of summarising gave me a deeper understanding of the subject.

  1. Why not review the significant books i've read and publish my reviews on Amazon or this blog?
  2. Why not read the bibliographies in these book and read the original scripts?
  3. Why not choose a sub topic and summarise the book and its bibliographies?

Maybe someday, even write and publish a book of my own!

I want to think more about the books i read. The process of summarising and reviewing should help. Otherwise sometimes I feel the books I read pass me by like ships passing each other in the night.

How can I communicate to others what I have read? Katie Geary, a work colleague asked me yesterday - what is "The Selfish Gene" book about? I mumbled something about evolution and genes and dont think of "selfish" in its normal meaning.

With the knowledge & understanding I have at the time I read these wonderful popular science books, how can I contribute, in even a miniscule way, to advancing science or knowledge? That seems a very grand and lofty aim. But reading the Preface to the 1989 edition of The Selfish Gene by (my all time favourite author) Richard Dawkins, gives me some hope. Richard Dawkins talks about (page ix) the Necker Cube and says:

"Rather than propose a new theory or unearth a new fact, often the most
important original contribution a scientist can make is to discover a new way of
seeing old theories or facts."

No comments: