Oliver Sacks,M.D.writes that hallucinations are “percepts arising in the absence of any external reality – seeing things or hearing things that are not there.”  They tend to be startling, mostly beyond conscious control; often detailed, colorful, bizarre, exotic, and meaningless.  Some hallucinations are fleeting and some people live with hallucinations all their lives.  People experiencing continuing hallucinations can usually accommodate them and differentiate them from reality, though hallucinations can interfere with activities such as driving.

The book excludes schizophrenia; that is a separate topic.  These hallucinations are commonly associated with sensory deprivation (loss of sight or hearing) or monotony (long-distance truck drivers, sailors, and pilots; or marathon athletes); “mystagogic” drugs; or with illnesses Continue reading →

I found this book by Anthony Pagden to be disappointing.  From the title, “The Enlightenment, And Why it Still Matters”, I expected Pagden would include discussions of the modern world.  For example, I have read that the Enlightenment, with its emphasis on the individuals breaking free of past dogma, has led to women’s rights; but also to the rise of single-mother families as the old reasons for marriage fade.  But Pagden’s book has no discussion of modern society.  The book is a scholarly work about Enlightenment philosophers and their opponents.  There is a lot of “this philosopher said this, but that philosopher said that” sort of detail.  If you know that going in, you may be happier with the book than I was. Continue reading →

The Science Delusion by Curtis White, begins by referring to the “clash” between evangelicals and scientists which is characterized by “New Atheist” authors like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.  White finds the New Atheists to be arrogant and self-satisfied, and I don’t think he is alone in his opinion.  But his complaints about science go farther than these authors.

White’s main complaint seems to be that scientists are trying to explain phenomena that used to be the exclusive domain of philosophers.  He seems particularly annoyed that scientists find science delightful and amazing even as they proclaim that there is no “meaning of life”.  He insists science writers could only be consistent if they deny feeling emotional reactions to their work, which seems bizarre to me.  White claims science says we are “just” matter and “mere congeries of meat”, even while quoting physicist Richard Feynman as saying “nothing is ‘mere'”.  White is particularly annoyed with Feynman, who plays bongos and says living things can be understood as atoms acting according to the laws of physics; as if juxtaposing the two things is insulting.  He faults scientists for failing to be curious about what their own “feeling of awe” means. Continue reading →