[ExI] Martin Gardner

[Michael LaTorra]

My Dad subscribed to SciAm so I started reading it before I hit my teens.
Gardner's column was my favorite part. Oh, and you're right about The
Amateur Scientist section, Rex. I bought a hard-cover collection of that
column at a used book store a few years ago. I was surprised to find
instructions for building a synchrotron. The caution about
the--ahem--possible danger of exposure to errant x-rays was totally
insufficient in prominence and emphasis, based on today's standards for
technical manuals.

Back to the review of Gardner's most recent book. To understand Teller's
"uneasiness" in the final paragraph of the NYT book review regarding
Gardner's belief in God, read Gardner's book "The Whys of a Philosophical
Scrivener" where he also explains why he believes in prayer and in an
afterlife. That's the smallest part of the book, by the way, so don't be
put off. Gardner is always an intelligent and information-packed guide to
whatever topic he chooses to write about, and he writes about a lot. Check
out the table of contents for the ebook at the link below. The man *always*
did his homework. Which characteristic is also displayed in his sole novel
"The Flight of Peter Fromm", the story of a young religious fundamentalist
who loses his religion after studying at a top school of theology. In the
course of the novel, Gardner provides excellent thumbnail summaries of
every major modern Christian theologian, summarizing their arguments, and
showing why said arguments ultimately fail. Plus, the book is chock-full of
Gardner's sparkling--often biting--wit.

http://www.amazon.com/Whys-Philosophical-Scrivener-Martin-Gardner-ebook/dp/B008KP33BU/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1389057357&sr=1-8&keywords=martin+gardner


On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 5:56 PM, rex <rex at nosyntax.net> wrote:

> spike <spike66 at att.net> [2014-01-06 16:46]:
> >
> > I discovered Gardner's work when I was in high school.  Later I went back
> > into a collection of old Scientific American bound volumes and read every
> > Mathematical Games column starting in 1956.  Excellent stuff!
>
> Me too, except I didn't have to go back as I was a subscriber in 1956.
>
> > If you go look in those old Scientific American issues, it is really
> > striking how much attention span they assumed back in those days.  It
> > required a lot more focus, drive and endurance to go through most of the
> > articles.
>
> Yep. SciAm used to be a real almost-journal for laymen, and The Amateur
> Scientist was seriously meaty with dangerous stuff (xray machines,
> etc). Now, it's more PopSi with a political slant. I no longer read it
> regularly.
>
> --
> Nostalgia is like a grammar lesson; you find the present tense and the
> past perfect.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20140106/03f9d399/attachment.html>