The Meaning of it All: Thoughts of a Citizen Scientist

  • Richard P. Feynman
Addison Wesley: 1998. Pp.122. £1299, $22<)
Feynman: surprisingly inarticulate.

A small volume has appeared that transcribes a lecture series given by Richard Feynman. This is not an unfamiliar happening; new bits of Feynmania appear quite frequently, and I suppose we should be as used to the cult of Feynman as we are to other celebrity cults. Then again, because Feynman is set up as a thinker and guru, even as a prophet, perhaps his status should be more carefully examined.

Here he sets out to tackle science's relations with politics, religion and everyday society. If Feynman was a prophet, I suppose this was his sermon on divine uncertainty — the uncertainty that allows the scientific process to work. Knowledge can progress, says Feynman, only if people have open minds and test their ideas. So far so good.

Not surprisingly, dogma comes in for a bashing. Feynman is relatively gentle with religion, only pointing out that it is hard to reconcile a culture of doubt (science) with one of faith. He is much fiercer with political dogma, especially with the communism of the former Soviet Union, so much less friendly to new ideas than the uncertainty-enshrining democracy of the United States. Although the words he uses are measured, he admits to becoming over-emotional at this point. Well, this was 1963, only months after the Cuban missile crisis, so perhaps it is understandable.

But then we hit a snag: in print, and unedited, Feynman doesn't always make sense. In one crucial passage he tries to argue that “ethical values lie outside the scientific realm”. This must be a comforting opinion for someone who worked on the bomb, but he is on controversial ground, and here most of all he reveals himself to be surprisingly inarticulate. Here is one whole argument for the separation of science and ethics: “First, in the past there were conflicts. The metaphysical positions have changed, and there have [sic] been practically no effect on the ethical views. So there must be a hint that there is an independence.” Eh? Well, I catch the drift, but one would hope for more than that. Ordinary people have this sort of vague insight all the time; what one wants from a guru is a little more intellectual clarity — or at least more memorable phrasing.

It does get better. In the last lecture, he has a go at the sort of everyday stupidity that comes of not thinking scientifically, especially from having a poor sense of probability. People justify their beliefs in flying saucers, astrology and faith healing, for example, because these things are “possible”. These may be soft targets but they always need attacking, and it is fun to watch them being hit so hard. Even Feynman's arrogance can be endearing here, and one can imagine his tone of exasperation when he said “the number of things that are possible is not fully appreciated by the average individual”.

The Feynman of these lectures is certainly sensible and amusing, but not inspirational. Don't visit him for sacred wisdom.