The Joy of Science

by Jim Al-Khalili

Quantum physicist, New York Times bestselling author, and BBC host Jim Al-Khalili reveals how 8 lessons from the core of science can help you get the most out of life



Today's world is unpredictable and full of contradictions, and navigating its complexities while trying to make the best decisions is far from easy. The Joy of Science presents 8 short lessons on how to unlock the clarity, empowerment, and joy of thinking and living a little more scientifically.

In this brief guide to leading a more rational life, acclaimed physicist Jim Al-Khalili invites readers to engage with the world as scientists have been trained to do. The scientific method has served humankind well in its quest to see things as they really are, and underpinning the scientific method are core principles that can help us all navigate modern life more confidently. Discussing the nature of truth and uncertainty, the role of doubt, the pros and cons of simplification, the value of guarding against bias, the importance of evidence-based thinking, and more, Al-Khalili shows how the powerful ideas at the heart of the scientific method are deeply relevant to the complicated times we live in and the difficult choices we make.

Read this book and discover the joy of science. It will empower you to think more objectively, see through the fog of your own preexisting beliefs, and lead a more fulfilling life.

Genres: Science, Nonfiction, Popular Science, Physics, Audiobook, Self Help

Audible Audio

Published April 5, 2022

About the author

Dr. Jameel Sadik "Jim" Al-Khalili is an Iraqi-British theoretical physicist, author and broadcaster. He is professor of theoretical physics and chair in the public engagement in science at the University of Surrey. He is a regular broadcaster and presenter of science programmes on BBC radio and television, and a frequent commentator about science in other British media.

In 2014, Al-Khalili was named as a RISE (Recognising Inspirational Scientists and Engineers) leader by the UK's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC). He was President of Humanists UK between January 2013 and January 2016.

Reviews

[Leo · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was trying to write a good review but felt it got to personal. Rather basic ideas and tips with some I already knew but sometimes it's good to have it repeated in a good way.

[Ryan Boissonneault · Rating 3 out of 5]

Since human stupidity seems to know no bounds, every now and then it’s necessary to release a book informing people of very basic principles. And so we have a quantum physicist—who could otherwise be writing about more interesting things—telling us that there are, in fact, objective truths about the world. This is a poor reflection on either the state of education or on human intelligence in general (or both). Nevertheless, this is the book we have, and for many of us, this is the book we probably need.

The title “The Joy of Science,” however, is somewhat misleading because it is unlikely to fill you with very much joy, as there is little in the way of interesting science or stories of discovery; rather, the book consists of eight short chapters that essentially amount to a brief textbook on critical thinking. Again, many people probably need this instruction, but for more seasoned readers, there’s not a whole lot of new material, particularly for those already familiar with the works of Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins, or Richard Feynman. These authors simply write in a more poetic and inspiring manner. (To be fair, I have not read Al-Khalili’s other works, and so I’m judging his writing style based solely on the present book.)

The book begins with a chapter titled “Something is either true, or it isn’t.” The content is reasonable, and I imagine that only the most ardent postmodernists or cultural relativists are going to disagree with it, at least as it relates to certain facts in the natural sciences.

The author uses the statement “nothing can travel faster than the speed of light” to demonstrate the principle. This fact of the universe is objectively true—not because we can prove it with 100 percent certainty—but because it has withstood so much scrutiny, and so many attempts at falsification, that we are warranted to call it an objective truth. While the statement is still provisional and subject to refinement in the face of new evidence, it has been so thoroughly tested that it makes sense to simply call it an established, universal truth.

Relativists, of course, have always contradicted themselves. You’ll notice that the statement “all truths are relative” refutes itself. If the statement is true—if it’s universally true that all truths are relative—then the statement itself cannot be universally true, and is therefore false. This clear contradiction tells us that there are objective facts about the world (albeit provisional ones), and anyone claiming otherwise probably has an ideology they’re trying to push.

The remainder of the book is standard fare critical thinking: learning how to properly evaluate the credibility of sources, recognizing your own biases, prioritizing evidence over anecdotes and opinion, and embracing a willingness to change your mind, etc.

The author does provide some good information, and uses some effective and thought-provoking analogies to drive home his points; for example, he compares climate change denial to receiving an unfavorable diagnosis from your doctor. It goes like this: Upon receiving the diagnosis, you decide to get a second, third, fourth, and fifth opinion from the best doctors in the world, who all confirm the original diagnosis, presenting to you all the evidence in its favor, including x-rays, lab tests, etc. You then receive a sixth, more favorable diagnosis from a less reputable doctor and conclude, based exclusively on that one assessment, that you’re perfectly healthy after all. This is the degree to which people will bend the truth and sift through evidence for the conclusion they want.

Science, or rather scientific thinking, as the author points out, is the process of guarding against such blatant self-delusion. Science is best thought of, not as a body of knowledge, but as a systematic method we can use to protect ourselves from oversimplified or false ideas. You probably don’t know as much about the world as you think you do, and that’s why institutions have been established (peer review, especially) that force theories to be tested under intense scrutiny. It would therefore be unwise for you to challenge the collective intelligence of the entire scientific community based on a few YouTube videos you just watched in under an hour, just like it would be unwise to disregard the opinions of five top physicians based on the opinion of one.

There are parts of the book that made me raise an eyebrow, however. At times, the author seems to disregard his own advice when it comes to critical thinking. Consider this excerpt:

“In fact, many scientists and philosophers argue, correctly, that it is impossible to know reality as it actually is, since we can only ever say how we perceive it: the way our minds interpret the signals from our senses. But the external world exists independently of us, and we should always try our best to find ways of understanding it that are not subjective—that are reference frame independent.”

I’m wondering if he noticed that he just said some scientists and philosophers argue correctly that it is impossible to know reality as it is but that we should always try to know reality as it is anyway. He seems to be saying that we both can and can’t describe the world in a way that is “reference frame independent,” seeing as the only reality we can perceive is dependent on the reference frame of our minds.

It gets worse. Later on in the book, the author writes:

“The answer to the question of how fast the passenger is really moving is that you on the train and the observer on the platform are both right, in your own frames of reference, for there is no single true value for the speed of the walker. All motion is relative.”

This sure seems to contradict the first chapter, which was titled “Something is either true, or it isn’t.” In the case of the passenger moving on the train, he’s moving at two different speeds depending on the frame of reference. In other words, there is no truth that is reference frame independent, even though the author just told us to “always try our best to find ways of understanding the world…that are reference frame independent.”

It seems that there are objective truths, insofar as we can know them with varying degrees of certainty via the scientific method, but that these truths are always reference frame dependent, which is what makes all knowledge provisional and uncertain. (Check out The Case Against Reality by Donald Hoffman for an excellent account of the mind-dependent nature of reality.)

It’s simply not helpful to tell people something is either true or it isn’t, and that we should always search for knowledge that is reference frame independent, and then explain that relativity tells us all motion is relative and that the speed of a person walking on a train is never only one true value.

We have limited perspectives, which is the reason we should keep an open mind to changing knowledge, with the caveat that it takes a lot of evidence to change established science (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence). This “critical rationalist” approach to science is the better way to put it, and I would recommend reading any of the works by the philosopher of science Karl Popper over this book.

The next issue is ironically captured in the title of the book's second chapter: “It’s more complicated than that.” It turns out that this is a good way to put the author’s understanding of political and moral philosophy. He advises the reader to never take anything for granted, and to never use absolute language to posit views regarding complex topics. He then proceeds to write this:

“Well, leaving aside the argument that had Einstein not discovered relativity [thus leading to the development of the atomic bomb] someone else would have, can it be better to ‘un-know’ something about the external world? Of course not.”

I agree with the author that there is certainly a good argument to be made that more knowledge of the external world is always or usually better. But there is a counter-argument that he is quick to dismiss—or rather to ignore entirely: If the human race ends up annihilating itself with nuclear weapons, in what sense could a case be made that discovering relativity was a good thing—and who would be around to make it?

Oversimplifications and trite observations abound in a book that’s supposed to be about thinking deeper. And there aren’t enough examples or interesting stories from the world of science to make up for it.

A final complaint is the author’s reticent stance on politics. He writes “I am the first to acknowledge that scientists are not elected, and it is therefore not our job as scientists to say what policies should be put in place.” While he’s correct that scientists are not elected, why shouldn’t it be their job to more forcibly recommend policy? Why is it preferable for a politician—who probably has no understanding of the relevant science—to advise us on what to do about, for example, climate change?

I want experts having more input into policy decisions, not less, and I want politicians to prioritize expert advice over the corporate interests they otherwise serve. If scientists timidly provide only the facts in a disinterested manner, it leaves a vacuum for less knowledgeable (and ethical) people to fill. I’m not saying scientists should have the final say—or that there aren’t competing interests, perspectives, or trade-offs—but scientists should certainly have a more prominent voice on policies directly relating to their work, and we should all hold our political representatives more accountable if they choose to ignore it.

For all these reasons, I have mixed feelings about the book. I agree with much of what the author says, I just don’t feel that he’s presented the material in a particularly compelling way. And I don’t really see much reason to pick this book over other, superior books on science, critical thinking, and philosophy, in particular the classic book on the topic by Carl Sagan—The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark.

[Brian Clegg · Rating 4 out of 5]

While some pocket-sized science hardbacks have been very thin on content (think Rovelli's Seven Brief Lessons), Jim Al-Khalili has demonstrated how it's possible to pack a feast for the mind into this compact form in The World According to Physics. He is, however, trying to do something very different with The Joy of Science, even though the format is similar.

The title gives nothing away (apart, possibly from a knowing reference to the work of Alex Comfort) - what Al-Khalili tries to do here is to explain how scientists look at the world and from this to draw lessons for all of us on topics such as how 'Mysteries are to be embraced, but also to be solved', 'If you don't understand something, it doesn't mean you can't if you try' and 'Don't value opinion over evidence' - that last a particularly difficult one at a time even academic institutions seem determined to rate feelings over reality in their effort to appeal to the cult of the individual.

Because of this topic, Al-Khalili doesn't have the same ability to pack in the approachable science. It can be easy when the author is a scientist, and is telling people how to avoid biases and how to be more like a scientist in their viewpoint, to come across as smug and arrogant. Thankfully, Al-Khalili avoids this - he makes it clear that he is aware of his own biases. This isn't just something the common people suffer from. Even so, there is a real difficulty in telling us anything that is practically useful here. For example, as we are told several times, you can argue with a conspiracy theorist as long as you like and you won't shift their opinion whatever approach you take.

It's interesting to compare the book with Lee McIntyre's How to Talk to a Science Denier. Unlike McIntyre, Al-Khalili doesn't tell much in the way of stories of dealing with those who struggle with scientific thinking (though, to be fair, McIntyre mostly fails to engage with real science deniers in his narrative sections) - but Al-Khalili does have a clearer picture of what the issues are and at least how the reader can take a viewpoint that is more likely to result in an appropriate analysis, even if this won't help persuade someone who simply isn't prepared to listen to the evidence.

The book's least successful part for me is where Al-Khalili explains what science does. He makes the odd statement that 'A physicist like me tries to uncover ultimate truths about how the world is.' Leaving aside the Kantian idea that we can never engage with true reality (Kant's 'Ding an sich') only phenomena, this is an oversimplified view of science. While it's true, as Al-Khalili says, that part of the job of science is collecting facts that are indisputable, such as the value of the acceleration due to gravity, that's not the interesting part. The best bits of science, particularly physics, are not about what happens, but why or how it happens. When that's the case, science isn't about reaching ultimate truths, but about establishing the best theory given the current evidence. It is only by recognising this that we can truly explain what science involves - and what drives and fascinates many scientists.

Similarly, despite claiming to be aware of his own biases, I don't think Al-Khalili is prepared to be detached enough from those biases when, for example, he remarks 'Is superstring theory... not proper science because we don't (yet) know how to test it and therefore cannot claim it to be falsifiable?' The answer to that, without the bias of a working physicist, is 'Yes'. It isn't proper science. It may become so, but it certainly isn't yet and may well never be.

There are some limitations, then, to this book - and it certainly isn't as engaging a read as Al-Khalili's The World According to Physics - but it is a worthwhile attempt at something important and well worth taking a look at.

[Uhtred · Rating 2 out of 5]

A book that can only make sense if you know nothing (absolutely nothing) about the scientific method. For everyone else, this is a useless book in the sense that it deals with the subject in a very superficial way, repeating the same well-known concepts over and over again. Basically it is a freehand writing by the author, who gives a kind of lesson to imaginary pupils who are at a very low level of knowledge (at the lower secondary level, I would say). The writing style is very simple and the book flows linear and bored. I really do not understand the point of publishing a book of this type, really trivial.

[Hamid · Rating 5 out of 5]

This pithy little book can teach you so much. I think in this day and age of conspiracy theories, anti-vax campaigns and pseudoscience peddlers and bullshiters, we need to understand how science works and why it matters. This book is a short introduction to that end.

Science is so much more than hard facts and lessons in critical thinking, just as a rainbow is so much more than just a pretty arc of color. Science gives us a way to see the world beyond our limited senses, beyond our prejudices and biases, beyond our fears and insecurities, beyond our ignorance and weaknesses. Science helps us to see through a lens of deeper understanding and be part of a world of light and color, of beauty and truth.

[Rosa · Rating 2 out of 5]

- this book reminded me of sitting in physics class and staring out into space
- jim is a bit annoying, especially when he is talking down to all of his readers. the audience for the book is definitely not undergrad STEM students, it was written for individuals who have never taken a high school science course, or have spent years away from school. i did not enjoy his lecturing and talking down to me.
- the content (when jim's narrative voice was not seeping through the pages) was solid. a good basis on the scientific method and importance of relieving personal biases.

- finally, a note to my fan base - do not read this book. it is a waste of time. i would be more than happy to talk down to you, rather than you reading this book and feeling bad about yourself and your education :)

[Marwa Habib · Rating 3 out of 5]

الكتاب ممتع، ولكن ليس في طريقة سرده لأشكال العلم الممتعة بشكل عام وما يخص الفيزياء -بما أنَّ الكاتب فيزيائي- بشكل خاص، شخصيًا اعتقدت أن الكتاب سيتحدّث عن الكيفية التي تجعل من العلم ممتعًا، أو على الأقل اكتشافات علمية ممتعة، ولكن لم أجد ضالتي إلا في صفحات قليلة وليست معلومات جديدة بالمناسبة على أي قارئ درس بعض العلوم حدَّ الثانوية. ولكني تيقنت من هذا الكتاب أن العلم سلاح.. ولكنه ذو حدّين حتمًا.
الكتاب قدم أطروحة مفادها أننا لا شيء لولا العلوم والمعرفة، وأن التكنولوجيا هي التطبيق العملي للمعرفة، وأننا نولد علماء، هذه ليست أفكارًا جديدة ولكنه قدمها بأسلوب مبسط وسلس وممتع.
وهذا بالتأكيد أحد الكتب الذي لا يعجب من يؤمن بنظريات المؤامرة، وعلى أنَّ الكاتب يؤكد مرارًا على أننا لإثبات فكرة علينا أن نجد لها دليلًا قاطعًا وعلميًا، لم أجده قدم دليلًا غير الدليل العقلي بأن نظرية المؤامرة مجرد مجموعة أوهام. هذا لا يعني أنّي أصطفُّ مع أي الطرفين ولكن مجرد تساؤل كما يطلبه الكاتب.
وأخيرًا كل شيء كان في مكانه، أحببت الأفكار والطرح، يناقشني الكاتب بشكلٍ عقلي ومنطقي، إلى أن شعرت في نهاية الصفحات أن العلم هو طريقته الوحيدة لاتّباع أي شيء في هذا العالم، وأنا لا أعبد العلم، أعبد الله.

[Illiterate · Rating 3 out of 5]

Although I have philosophical quibbles, this is a good introduction to scientific thinking/expertise.

[Heather Gildie · Rating 2 out of 5]

meh? science is cool yeh but physicists are boring

[Aysha Ross · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent book that everyone should read. It is a great reminder to those of us in science and a starting point for those who are just learning about science

[Mustakim · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5/5

[Anna · Rating 4 out of 5]

A well known scientist, focused on the public engagement with science does his little magic again!

[Bashayer · Rating 2 out of 5]

لغير العارف بمبادئ البحث العلمي قد يكون هذا الكتاب مفيدًا إذ يناقش أخطاء التفكير وبعض المغالطات المنطقية. ورغم هذا أظن أن غيره من الكتب تناولت الموضوع على نحو أفضل وقدمت محتوى أكثر رصانة. الكاتب من أنصار العلم على الدين وأي تفسيرات أخرى في نظره غير مقبولة. والعلم الذي يتحدث عنه هو العلم التطبيقي ولم يتطرق كثيرًا للعلوم الإنسانية وسماتها.

[Alma · Rating 3 out of 5]

Värikkään kannen ja kiinnostavan otsikon houkuttelemana sekä kirjailijan aiempaan kirjaan (The World According to Physics) tykästyneenä laitoin tämän äänikirjan pyörimään. Yllätyin hieman siitä, millaiseksi kirjan sisältö osoittautui. Kirja on pikemmin opas kriittiseen ajatteluun ja lähdekriittisyyteen sosiaalisen median aikakaudella kuin tieteen ilojen julistus. Al-Khalili pitää disinformaation ja salaliittoteorioiden sosiaalisen median myötä saamaa suhteettoman suurta näkyvyyttä ongelmana. Vastauksena ongelmaan hän tarjoaa tieteellistä ajattelutapaa ja tieteellistä kriittisyyttä. Al-Khalilille yksi tieteen iloista on se, että tiede antaa keinoja arvioida eteen tulevien väitteiden pätevyyttä myös arjessa.

Lähdekriittisyyttä opiskelleille kirjan ajatukset ovat todennäköisesti tuttuja. Luulen, että keskiverto suomalainen lukio-opiskelija ei saa tästä kirjasta paljoa uutta tietoa. Epäilenpä myös, että ne, jotka tästä kirjasta voisivat eniten oppia, eivät siihen tartu. Se on sääli, sillä kirja ajaa asiaansa pääsääntöisesti hyvin. Al-Khalili osaa huomioida tiedeskeptikoiden mahdollisia vasta-argumentteja ja vastata niihin. Lisäksi hän tiedostaa valitsemansa aiheen monimutkaisuuden; kaikkea ei ole helppoa kaataa “tosi” ja “epätosi” -luokkiin ja tiedon arviointi voi olla kokeneillekin vaikeaa.

Isoimman miinuksen kirja saa tietämättömyyttä tai puolueellisuutta kuvaavien käsitteiden löperöstä käytöstä. Käsitteitä – kuten ideologia, misinformaatio, salaliitot, epätietoisuus yms. – käytetään kirjassa rinnakkain ja sekaisin ilman tarkkaa erottelua tai käsitteiden avaamista. Tämä on mielestäni ongelma, kun tosielämässä näitä käsitteitä käyttävät hyvin erilaiset ihmiset. Esimerkiksi “sokeaa ideologisuutta” vastaan ovat puhuneet Suomessa Esko Valtaoja, mutta myös monet salaliittoteoreetikot. Myös se, mikä kustakin on ideologiaa, näyttää vaihtelevan; joillekin oma nationalismi voi edustaa puhdasta järkeä samaan aikaan kun "ideologian sokaisemat" syövät, pyöräilevät ja kaavoittavat ideologisesti. Al-Khalili näyttääkin käyttävän usein esimerkkeinä hyvin ilmeisiä harhaluuloja, kuten litteän maan teoriaa tai ilmastonmuutosskeptisismiä. Usein keskustelu ei kuitenkaan kohdistu näihin. Sen sijaan tieteen tosiasioista samaa mieltä olevat kiistelevät toimenpiteistä; perustuuko ydinenergiavastaisuus harhaluuloihin, onko kasvisruuan määrän lisääminen ideologiaa ja onko turpeen puolustaminen taloudellisilla perusteilla ideologisempaa kuin sen vastustaminen päästöjen perusteella. Al-Khalililla ei näytä oikein olevan tarjolla riittävästi tieteen iloja tällaisiin tilanteisiin...

Jos kellään on suositella tiedon käyttöä politiikassa käsittelevää kirjaa, joka pureutuu ideologian, disinformaation yms. eroihin niin otan suositukset mielelläni vastaan.

[Jessica · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is written at an elementary grade school level but I don't think it's for grade schoolers. It's a book about how science works with the author's social agenda tacked on to the end. I'm not really sure who the intended audience is. I kept listening because the author has a really pleasant voice and I needed something to listen to.

Unfortunately, the author misses the point as to why people don't trust science. We have been blatantly lied to over and over for the past 2 years. First we were told Covid was no big deal, but then we were locked down because it was. Then we were told we were being locked down for only a couple of weeks to "slow the spread", but then we were locked down indefinitely with the only reasoning being that we should just "trust the science" (because we were too stupid to understand the reasoning we should just blindly trust science). Then scientists told us Covid couldn't possibly have been created in the lab, but then we learned that it was. Then our head scientist in the US told us not to wear masks, but later we were told we might possibly die if we didn't wear masks. Then we were told by scientists that a trustworthy vaccine couldn't possibly be developed in only a year, but then a new President takes office and all of a sudden that vaccine is trustworthy.

Is it any wonder that people are cooking up conspiracy theories to try to explain these lies? The human mind will always try to create a story to explain the unexplainable. That's just how the brain works. The author kindly says these conspiracy theory people are stupid (my word, not his, but I can read between the lines). I'm pretty sure those people won't be listening to this book anyway.

[Kiril Valchev · Rating 4 out of 5]

" The Joy of Science " събира осем кратки урока от прекрасния британски физик и популяризатор на науката, Джим Ал-Халили. Съветите и посланията, умело изложени от автора, са част от така нужния ни инструментариум, за навигиране през информационната джунгла на съвремието и капаните, които собственото ни съзнание поставя.
Чудесна книга, в защита на рационалното и простичкия здрав разум, който често ни убягва.

[lily · Rating 2 out of 5]

Here's a summary of the book (to save u reading 200 pages of high school essay-esque ramblings):

1. Cheesy preamble about rainbows
2. Science good, politics and social media bad
3. Countless, shameless plugs for his other book abt physics

[Rasika Mahabal · Rating 4 out of 5]

Short and sweet, unfortunately it is hard for these essential books to reach or be read by the intended audience - that would be people who do not think rationally.

[Arabella · Rating 3 out of 5]

i really like the philosophies in this book but i didnt understand certain lessons purely because i have absolutely no idea about anything to do with physics LOL

[Fatima Mb · Rating 1 out of 5]

كتاب علمي لعالم يعاني برأيي من "وهم الفوقية" وهي ك��ا أشار" حالة من التحيز المعرفي حيث يبالغ الشخص في تقدير كفاءته وقدرته فيما يتعلق بنفس الصفات لدى الآخرين"

محتوى مخالف لكل ما افكر وآمن به بزعم الدلائل والبراهين
يدعو باستمرار إلى التفحص والبحث وتطوير المهارات التحليلية والتفصيل بالأمور وأقتبس " عليك أن تهز إحساسك باليقين"

يكرر وباستمرار بأنه لايوجد عيب بتغير رأيك وافكارك ومعتقداتك
لان تبني موقف واحد لن يجعلك تتقدم في العلم

وأنا باعتقادي وكما أشار مشكورًا اعاني بما يسمى
"المثابرة على المعتقد"
وهو الميل إلى التمسك بعناد بالمعتقد الأولي للفرد.
لأن الله أعطى الإنسان من البصيرة مايؤهله لمعرفة الحقيقة بقليل من البحث والمعرفه سيعلم حقيقةً الامور والاشياء من حولة
وبقليل من هذا وذاك تتضح لديه الصورة الكبرى للأمور

كتاب علمي بحت ليس موجه للعامه برأي بل لفئه معينه من محبي العلوم والفيزياء وغيرهم من العلماء

⭐️ النجمة من أجل الغلاف

تم💥

[Bob · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is extremely relevant to today's misinformation, conspiracy theories, and confirmation bias, which are found in abundance on social media and in mainstream media. It covers topics such as cognitive dissonance and various forms of denial, as well as the scientific method.

If I looked at the average rating, I probably would never have read the book. Don't be put off by the more snarky reviews. It's a small book. Read it for yourself and make up your own mind.

[Jonathan Ragucci · Rating 2 out of 5]

What the actual ... This book was utterly and absolutely horrible. How can a book be so short and express such basic concepts?
Like: You need to use critical thinking to know the truth.
If you want to eliminate bias, or reduce it you, need to search for information from different sources and weigh the different sources (trusted sources will have more weight over less trusted ones).
Ok, that's cute.
But... WOW... in a world where everyone believes in the magic of 5g that can spread viruses, I believe this book has a raison d'etre, but otherwise, for people that already have at least a basic common sense to not believe utterly trash ideas, this book is pretty much useless.
I thought this book would have dug deeper into the concept, not only just teaching me the obvious like "the sky is blue and sometimes dark".
Yeah, maybe I could suggest this book to everyone that believes in 5g=viruses, conspiracy theories (the incredible ones like the fake landing on the moon or the flat earth) and other "waste of intelligence" theories, just to build that little bit of common sense and critical thinking that elevate you over a 6 years old.
Otherwise, it's just a waste of time and money. A better investment of your time would be reading road signs.

[Stefanie · Rating 2 out of 5]

I really love the BBC documentaries with Jim Al-Kalili however this book is really just an appeal to common sense and the scientific method brought about by the author's disbelief and general fed-up-ness of the last few years. The pandemic is real, scientists are experts who have spent many years studying their fields and we should trust them, critical thinking is a thing but not everyone who claims to be thinking critically is, and confirmation bias, echo chambers, and cognitive dissonance are gaining traction. Also, climate change is real and it is being exponentially increased beyond all doubt by humankind. I've summed it up for you. Use the scientific method in your real life and don't get sucked into conspiracy theories you find on the internet. Not exactly what I was expecting and really preaching to the choir. Especially since the book cover is rainbow colored, the group he's trying to reach would never really pick this book up.

[Jeevan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very short and informative book. I had no idea that now two people see the same rainbow until I read this book! The chapter titles server as a good checklist to keep bias at bay. Falsifiability is also explained very well.

Something is either true, or it isn't
It's more complicated than that
Mysteries are to be embraced, but also to be solved
If you don't understand something, it doesn't mean you can't if you try
Don't value opinion over evidence
Recognize your own biases before judging the views of others
Don't be afraid to change your mind
Stand up for Reality

[Ian Lea · Rating 3 out of 5]

Small and OK. Nothing special.

[JayP · Rating 2 out of 5]

Predictable, nothing new here.

[Book O Latte · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jim Al-Khalili adalah fisikawan kuantum Inggris yang aktif mengomunikasikan sains melalui buku-buku yang ditulisnya, dan juga membawakan acara dan siaran sains di TV dan radio.
Jadi kalau Amerika punya Neil deGrasse-Tyson dan Michio Kaku, Inggris punya Jim Al Khalili (dan Brian Cox) sebagai science popularizer bidang fisika.
Kalau di Indonesia siapa?

Buku ini kecil mungil dan isinya pendek. Di luar kata pengantar, glossary, dan bibliography, isinya cuma 162 halaman. Ukurannya juga cuma 12x18 cm.

Setelah saya baca ternyata isinya banyak kesamaan dengan buku Making Sense of Science dari Cornelia Dean yang pernah saya review.
Kalau buku Dean ditulis menanggapi sikap anti sains yang memuncak jaman Trump, buku ini berisi keprihatinan Khalili setelah melihat reaksi masyarakat terhadap pandemi (dan isu climate change). Masyarakat yang science & information-illiterate mudah sekali terpapar hoax dan teori konspirasi, yang bisa membahayakan dirinya dan orang lain.

Karena itu menurut Khalili, mengomunikasikan sains ke masyarakat itu sangat penting, karena masyarakat yang paham (paling tidak tentang basic science) dapat ikut serta dalam usaha yang perlu dilakukan bagi kebaikan bersama, seperti misalnya dalam mengatasi pandemi, perubahan iklim, atau menerapkan teknologi baru. Kita lihat sendiri polemik2 akibat masyarakat yang buta sains: hoax dan teori konspirasi di mana-mana, menghambat kemajuan.

Jadi buku ini berbagi pelajaran yang bisa diambil dari cara ilmuwan bersains dan mengajak pembaca mengapresiasi keindahan sains: memahami apa itu sains dan mengenali mana yang bukan (karena sains harus memenuhi syarat-syarat tertentu), menerapkan sikap-sikap yang baik dalam mencari informasi dan 'making sense of the world' seperti jujur pada diri sendiri, mau mengakui kesalahan, mengenali bias pandangan pribadi (jangan mudah menuduh orang lain bias padahal sendirinya juga sama), tidak mengutamakan pendapat pribadi di atas bukti sains, dll.
Buku ini juga menekankan pentingnya pengajaran critical thinking dalam sistem pendidikan, selain juga literasi informasi, dan sopan santun.

"Kita tidak bisa mengubah pemikiran semua orang, tapi sebagai masyarakat kita wajib berusaha supaya orang-orang yang suka menyebar kebohongan tidak memegang kekuasaan, karena konsekuensinya sangat besar bagi kemanusiaan" (saya yakin pernyataan ini nyepet Amerika, hehe).

Meskipun isinya mirip buku Making Sense of Science, Khalili berhasil menjejalkan hal-hal pentingnya ke dalam buku yang pendek ini, sehingga (mudah-mudahan) lebih gampang dibaca dan dipahami umum.

-dydy-

[Adrian Manea · Rating 2 out of 5]

We live in times where such a book must exist. Whoever denies this has lost contact with society.

It's definitely not the author's fault that there are people who've never heard of the scientific method, of deduction, induction, experiments, falsifiability, hypothesis testing, etc. Quite the contrary is true, as Dr. Al-Khalili is a renowned science advocate.

The bad rating I gave to this book, however, is a result of its structure. Note that although I'm not in the intended target audience in some sense, as a professional mathematician with a degree in Physics, but I am a professor, which kinda makes me interested in learning how to discuss my scientific stuff with various people.

I do appreciate that the book goes way beyond science into discussing political and social issues of our times (note that it was written during the Covid pandemic), but in my reading, it's yet another book which barely scratches some surfaces. The main issue is that it scratches too many and too shallow. It has the appearance of a serious study, with footnotes and citations, but it basically covers topics such as post-truth, confirmation bias, falsifiability, complexity, and more in less than three pages.

So it made me think who is this book for? Clearly not anyone who has the faintest idea of how science works, any science. Also clearly not for those for whom science is merely an opinion. Who are we left with? Some hypothetical readers who are looking for a Science 101 material. But would such a reader appreciate all sorts of technical terms (not all of them explained), and academic citations? My bet is in the negative.

Last but not least, no joy reached me, although science is my career. It's only in the conclusion that the author details a bit the "sharing is caring" part of science, which could bring joy.

My conclusion is this: the idea of a "What is Science/How does it work" book is great. But please stop publishing books of a bit over 100 pages for such topics. Is the attention span of readers really so low? And if so, do you think they care for such a topic anyway?

[Pi]

RADOŚĆ NAUKI Jim Al-Khalili napisał zdaje się z potrzeby serca. Kocha naukę i stara się zarazić nią innych. Chce także pokazać, że nie trzeba być "wielkim" umysłem, by naukę uprawiać, doceniać, rozumieć i się nią wspomagać w życiu codziennym. Muszę przyznać, że tą retoryką do mnie trafił, choć tak, jak jasno zaznacza w swojej książce - nie uchronił się od stronniczości, pomimo swego naukowego podejścia.
Przede wszystkim warto wiedzieć, że ta książka jest dla każdego. Została napisana bardzo prostym językiem. dostajemy właściwie taką luźną pogadankę na temat metod naukowych, które mogą pomóc nam w ocenie tego, co jest prawdą, a co fałszem. Jim Al-Khalili przytacza różne zdarzenia ze swojego życia, jak i wprowadza anegdoty z przeszłości. To wyjątkowo dobry sposób na pokazanie czytelnikowi, że nie ma co się bać nauki, bo ona nie tylko nie gryzie, ale i faktycznie potrafi zmienić nas świat i zredukować z niego kłamstwo (a przynajmniej sprawić, że kłamstw będzie mniej, a my będziemy je w stanie dostrzec).
To nie jest długo książka i czyta się ją szybko. Rozdziały są przejrzyście podzielone, mądrze zatytułowane i ogólnie, pozycja ta jest łatwa do przyswojenia. RADOŚĆ NAUKI daje do myślenia i uważam, że dobrze by było, gdyby ludzie właśnie w tak prosty sposób polubili naukę. Dla mnie nauka, to frajda (nie zawsze tak było, bo edukacja w Polsce jest do kitu i zdania nie zmienię... a zdaje się, że im dalej w las, tym gorzej) - zwłaszcza nauka ścisła, fizyka, matematyka, chemia, biologia (choć i tam mącą ile mogą, bo ze wszystkiego można zrobić ideologiczny bełkot. Jednak prawda zawsze jest jedna - nie ma wielu prawd - żyjemy na Ziemi, w tym akwarium, i w tym akwarium prawda ma jedną twarz, jeśli ktoś mówi inaczej, to albo się myli, albo kłamie.

nauka, to frajda
Wydawnictwo Zysk i S-ka
egzemplarz recenzencki

[Aeham · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Joy of Science is a thought-provoking book that aims to show how scientific thinking can enrich our daily lives not just by providing facts, but by offering a powerful way to see and understand the world ..
Al-Khalili structures the book around eight key lessons drawn from the heart of science, such as embracing uncertainty, recognizing biases, valuing evidence over opinion, and appreciating the beauty and wonder that scientific understanding brings ..

Al-Khalili’s writing is clear and approachable, making complex ideas understandable for readers without a scientific background .. He argues that science isn’t just for experts, anyone can benefit from thinking a bit more scientifically, especially in a world full of misinformation and polarized opinions ..
Each chapter stands alone as a practical message, such as “ Mysteries are to be embraced, but also to be solved ” or “ If you don’t understand something, it doesn’t mean you can’t if you try ” ..

One of the book’s main strengths is how it connects the scientific method “ curiosity, skepticism, evidence, and self-correction ” to everyday decision-making and personal growth .. Al-Khalili insists that understanding the world scientifically doesn’t kill its magic, instead it deepens our sense of wonder, making things like rainbows or the night sky even more beautiful once we know how they work, He also stresses the importance of humility and skepticism, showing that they are not weaknesses, but rather essential to building critical thinking ..

In summary, The Joy of Science is an excellent introduction for anyone curious about how science can improve not just what we know, but how we think and live, It’s perfect for those new to scientific ideas and is an invitation to see the world with more clarity, wonder, and joy through the lens of science ..