Awe and mystery

As a physicist, I have been seduced by the awe and mystery (to borrow from "The Outer Limits") of quantum mechanics for years. Still, the esoteric nature of subatomic physics was never adequate to convince me of an intelligent design of the universe. Schroeder, however, has succeeded in convincing me of an underlying wisdom in nature through his eloquent description of the mind-boggling complexity of molecular biology. I came away from this book with a perplexing and contradictory sense of calm and breathlessness.

Schroeder succeeds where others have failed; namely, he has convinced me that an honest and compelling argument can be made for the existence of God/Creator/universal intelligence without resorting to fundamentalist dogma or pseudo-science.

Be warned: parts of the book are tedious; Schroeder admits this. If you are unwilling to put some thought behind the subject matter, then this book isn't for you. But if you're not afraid to think, then by all means read his book; your soul will thank you.

A First Rate Teacher

Schroeder is a wonderful teacher. He sees the sublime in science and his prose is at times beautifully poetic. He delves in both the macrocosm as well as microcosm using both to show that there is an inherent design to the universe and the life within it. This is a book that is well suited to those who would run from the usual creationist palaver yet feel that all of the wonder we see in this universe has to be more than an accident.

Worth the Groundwork

As is hinted at by other reviews, the first 70% of the non-appendix material in this book is groundwork. I had to persevere in reading that groundwork because it is thick with details, many of which I was already familiar with. Perhaps I am over-stressing formality, but his constant and eventually predictable exclamations (essentially: "Isn't that amazing! Such wisdom!") following many explanations of complex natural phenomena were distracting. But it is important to note (despite the opinions of a reviewer below) that this is not his argument.

Despite these detractions, the book makes some excellent connections.

His argument carries a depth that recognizes the physical difficulties that lay to rest popular superstition about the nature of reality. It is grounded in reason with a silent recognition of realities that many of religious tenure are reluctant to adopt: the big bang, some form of evolution, the grounding of "self" in the physical brain, and the lack of Biblical commentary on the existance of an afterlife.

As in The Science of God, he still battles the Neo-Darwinian view of gradual evolution; his perspective on the issue (shared by other commendable researchers) offers important questions that gradualists have yet to answer: where are the transitional life forms in the fossil record and how can the mathematical improbability of random evolution be explained? The complexity in life that Schroeder highlights in his groundwork illustrates the difficult case for random evolution.

But an examination of the complexity and "wisdom" of the universe alone is not sufficient proof for God. So comes the final 30% of Schroeder's examination and he makes an interesting case.

According to the informed opinion based in empirical observation of the scientific community at large, the physical universe is based in the metaphysical. The basis for matter is energy and the basis for energy is what appears to be information. Schroeder argues that this information is the wisdom that pervades and unites the universe, you and I included. To come in touch with that unity is to come in touch with heaven.

His definition of (or attempt at understanding if you prefer) God is not simplistic (physicists are often accused having simplistic understandings of what they mean by God). Schroeder places God's metaphysical existance in both the non-thing that preceded this universe from which the physical was born and the wisdom that is inherent in nature.

While reading the first half of this book, I was, as a reviewer below warns against, psychologically precommitted. I was once vehemently on the side of existance but changed sides for the sake of objectivity. What I found was that I wasn't giving Schroeders arguments full consideration. To say "I am an atheist" or "I am a christian" or "I am a skeptic" and enter this argument with the intent to stagnantly keep his line of thought at arm's length, waiting to be convinced, rather than actively internalizing the argument, giving it the strongest defence, and THEN weighing its value (as anyone with intent for objectivity should do), is to discard this argument, likely unconvinced, without even understanding it. Don't ignore parts you don't understand because you don't think they have bearing on the question. If you have not internalized the scientific detail, how can you know whether it is relevant?

He is not looking for rabbits in spider holes: he is making an argument about the nature of reality and from an understanding of reality (the best scientific understanding we can have of it at present), he is making the inference that underlying wisdom is an inherent quality of reality. And he makes a strong case for it.