How this Book Shaped My Opinions

This could be important in terms of reviewing my positionality statement, with regards to the point about knowledge acquisition being independent of profession. The use of humour and the examples stated are also very applicable for my book.

◦This book has freed me of the bias that textbooks are always accurate and has also removed the very prominent bias for theories that are popularly accepted. It showed me that even these widely accepted theories may not be proven or their proof may contain multiple fallacies. Unless proven correctly, anything can be questioned and changed. Copernicus and Galileo showed the world the accuracy of the heliocentric model and the wrongness of the popularly accepted geocentric model despite the fact that there was severe opposition that they faced in doing the same. Descartes showed that being modern actually means the ability to question the past and present and to reshape the future.

◦I also was relieved of my bias against philosophy as a useful subject. Many around the world think philosophy is a redundant subject and that the scientists and mathematicians are superior to all of them. Much of Indian society particularly values engineering and medicine and looks down upon philosophy. However, the fact that philosophy, in some ways, gave rise to mathematics and to the scientific method of reasoning, showed me that philosophy may be the key to further evolving the sciences, mathematics and many other subjects. I am thankful of this book to remove this socially dogmatic perspective from my judgement of philosophy.

◦While maybe this book was not primarily written to show that knowledge is gained irrespective of one’s profession, the examples of John Graunt being a shopkeeper, but initiating the study of statistics through his observations and of George Boole being interested in linguistics and languages like Greek and Latin and even translating a poem by the Greek poet Meleager but still pioneering Boolean algebra and the study of logic, show how specialization in one field is not needed to study another. This showed me that a biologist is not inept to formulate a theory explaining planetary motion, and that unless proven, a theory about quantum physics formulated by a bus driver is as correct as that of a renowned physicist, if both are proven right or wrong. It removed my bias for theories formulated only by those specialized in the subject of that field. It specifically removed my bias against philosophers who wished to explain mathematics. In other words, I learnt that credibility and knowledge are independent of status.

Humour/ Relatable examples:

◦I found Archimedes’ stories to be the most interesting part of the book. As Plutarch mentioned, Archimedes looked down upon anything dedicated to profit and practical uses and devoted himself to things that were beyond practical uses. He found these things to be splendid and beautiful. This shows his exemplary love for mathematics and knowledge and his contempt for greed.

◦The story of him leaving his bath and running out on the street shouting, “Eureka,” the legends of his ability to move large weights with little force, his inventions like the hydraulic screw and a planetarium for demonstrating the motion of heavenly bodies, along with the legendary wartime machines that invented by Archimedes to defend Syracuse during a Roman siege by the Roman general Marcus Claudius Marcellus, are not only intriguing, but also show his command over knowledge.

◦How he invented things but said that the practicality of such things was incomparable to the abstract beauty of mathematics showed his unfaltering conviction, lack of complacency and his pure desire for knowledge.

◦Another part of the book I particularly enjoyed was the story of Kurt Godel applying for his American citizenship. This story exemplified the power of observations and of thinking.

◦Godel, a mathematician and physicist, clearly took interest in the task of studying for his citizenship interview, a task considered boring by most people. However, he studied more than that was required of him and even noticed a flaw in the democratic system of America that could lead to autocracy or dictatorship.

◦It is amazing to see how a person took interest in doing a thing well even though it was not a thing nearly as important to him as his major professions. It showed how observation could reveal facts about things even the most learned of people in the concerned field could not notice. This also showed how curiosity alone can give such insights that learned people could not imagine. It shows that true knowledge is not acquaintance and remembrance of facts, but is the insights that come only out of inquisitiveness and a dedication to whatever one does. Aside from learning this, it was also slightly amusing to see Albert Einstein explaining a joke of Godel stepping into his grave as Godel thought of it technically.

◦Another thing I found intriguing was Rene Descartes’ that education increased perplexity and made him increasingly aware of the ignorance of mankind. This shows that he was a truly modern person not afraid to question anything that he found to be ignorant or thought to be wrong.