Scan barcode
bluenote27's review against another edition
5.0
Dr. Shermer's Heavens on Earth is beatifully written, thoughtful, and very well-researched. This book is packed with thought-provoking insights and gedanken experiments, and it is peppered with both poignant and awe-inspiring quotes from literature and poetry. Do yourself a favor and read it!
patlanders's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
4.5
socraticgadfly's review against another edition
4.0
Solid overall but nothing spectacular.
As a secularist, I of course knew the arguments against religious-based afterlives, whether heavens as a one-time thing, or heavens via a process of reincarnation or something else.
The better part of the book comes after that.
Shermer shows that atheists’ hope for a secular afterlife, whether through mind downloading, Kurzweil’s singularity, or cryogenics, are all hogwash at this time. (The mind-downloading angle also applies to reincarnation in its traditional forms; how does a human soul map on to an animal brain?)
He also shows that medical claims we’re near the point of immortality through medical life extension are also hogwash.
There are a few errors. Most are minor, but still need noting.
First, not all ontological monists are materialist monists. Good Buddhists certainly are not.
Second, psilocybin is not LSD!
Third, the brain is probably not as modular as Shermer claims, and more recent actual neuroscience has refuted some of these claims. In addition, the idea of subselves is more complex than these ideas of brain modularity.
Nietzsche did not go mad. The best evidence indicates he has a brain tumor that changed his mind.
Fifth, the rhetoric is nice, but with the partial exception of Henrietta Lacks, our genes aren’t immortal, and even there, it’s as much rhetoric as reality. Per issues of mutability of a personal self, “our” genes aren’t ours after enough generations of offspring.
As a secularist, I of course knew the arguments against religious-based afterlives, whether heavens as a one-time thing, or heavens via a process of reincarnation or something else.
The better part of the book comes after that.
Shermer shows that atheists’ hope for a secular afterlife, whether through mind downloading, Kurzweil’s singularity, or cryogenics, are all hogwash at this time. (The mind-downloading angle also applies to reincarnation in its traditional forms; how does a human soul map on to an animal brain?)
He also shows that medical claims we’re near the point of immortality through medical life extension are also hogwash.
There are a few errors. Most are minor, but still need noting.
First, not all ontological monists are materialist monists. Good Buddhists certainly are not.
Second, psilocybin is not LSD!
Third, the brain is probably not as modular as Shermer claims, and more recent actual neuroscience has refuted some of these claims. In addition, the idea of subselves is more complex than these ideas of brain modularity.
Nietzsche did not go mad. The best evidence indicates he has a brain tumor that changed his mind.
Fifth, the rhetoric is nice, but with the partial exception of Henrietta Lacks, our genes aren’t immortal, and even there, it’s as much rhetoric as reality. Per issues of mutability of a personal self, “our” genes aren’t ours after enough generations of offspring.
dejunker's review against another edition
2.0
I selected this book because Seth MacFarlane mentioned it twice on his Twitter/Instagram feeds. I ended up needing to check it out twice from two different libraries. The first checkout: the introduction intrigued me as I have a BS in Computer Science and an MDiv - I am highly intellectual and enjoy data while also looking at all topics from multiple perspectives. But, the format for that checkout was not easy for highlighting or note taking. I waited for a hold and was able to get a Kindle version. The second checkout: I got through Chapter 1 and 2. I did not like his confrontational style, a patriarchal approach to proof, but found I enjoyed(? - inmates last words are not enjoyable) the other information. I realized I could skim it, read the last paragraphs, and still get his point. I knew from the review it was against many things I’ve studied (note: studied, not believed) but I wanted to spend time with the multiple perspectives. Alas, his tone is not a style I can read in three weeks time and I am not going to buy a copy anytime soon nor wait for another hold.
glj's review against another edition
4.0
If you're already a skeptic there is not much in this book that's surprising, but Shermer is always enjoyable. The end of the book was the most fun for me as he outlined all the things that provide meaning for life without the use of religion.
More...