Flatland by Edwin Abbott- 4c’s

You may want to read some of the other posts on Flatland as well.

Connection
I have pondered the idea of a two-dimensional world before, as it is mentioned in the book Albert Einstein and His Inflatable Universe (no plug intended :). It is an interesting idea that poses many logical problems that are sometimes un-answerable by one self’s pondering. Reading Flatland answered some of these questions- though sometimes in creative non-scientific ways. Some of these included how the 2d shapes see each other, because two dimensions is completely flat- which is answered in a creative way by Edwin Abbott- by “essence of vision”, they “just do”.

Challenge
One idea from the book that I did not agree with, and so in accordance with the sub title of this section must challenge (even though it is not a scientific concept I am challenging), is that our place is society is predetermined at birth by our parent’s actions. I am not sure whether the values held in flatland reflect those held by Edwin Abbot; however I do think it is a rather unfair idea. The narrator of the book expresses that in Flatland they believe each generation should automatically improve on his father’s class in society by one step (an added side), but cannot improve their own position no matter how hard they try. Also, if a shape does something despicable and has a side taken away, then his descendants will suffer and they can do nothing about it.

Concept
One of the most important concepts I took away from this book is one of knowledge. It is the idea that our understanding of something- physics, extra dimensions or the universe- possibly anything, could be wrong. It is the idea that we do not know which parts of science we don’t understand and that we should accept challenges to our understanding with grace and in a dignified manner. Not like the square, or the sphere or any of the shapes who met challenges with hostility.

Changes
The changes this book advocate stem from the section above. Although it does not directly state this idea, it is easy to pick up. By illustrating how not to act and the consequences for behaving that way, the book Flatland by Edwin Abbott presents a compelling argument to keep an open mind towards new ways of thinking.

The Science Delusion- 4c’s

The Science Delusion by Rupert Sheldrake.

What connections can you make between the text and your own life and learning?

What ideas, positions or assumptions do you want to challenge or ague with in the text?

What key concepts or ideas do you think are important and worth holding on to from the text?

What changes in attitudes, thinking or action are suggested by the text?

CONNECTIONS

I read only the introduction and first chapter. Rupert Sheldrake discussed how we should not take everything as truth, even if it is a widely accepted fact. I think most people have been told this before but I believe he intended us to not criticise ideas but ponder them instead. This was an expansion on what I previously thought.

CHALLENGE

When I read it, I didn’t like the idea that most scientists uncritically accept what he calls the ten dogmas. I think most people, especially scientific people, like to make their mind up on things after they have gathered facts about it. Maybe the idea that nature is mechanical seems logical to lots of people, even though they can’t describe it properly.

CONCEPTS

I think a good concept from chapter 1 is that ideas like mechanism are only theories and that other theories like vitalism are often just as valid. Some things may be facts but we should not start treating ideas that seem good like facts.

CHANGES

I think he wants us to stop accepting ideas as facts and to not swing to the other extreme of criticising everything, but to find the middle and ponder ideas and the facts behind them more.