schoolyard subversion

Medusa and the Snail Reading Response

To the reader:

While it may seem at times like I am simply summarizing and paraphrasing the work that I have read, it is not so. Through this seeming summarization, I hope to best acquaint you with my view of the writing, and thus, my thoughts of the work. It is only in such a context that my comments will make sense, without the necessary framing that the summarization provides, my thoughts seem nonsensical. So I ask you, please do not skip over this seeming summarization, but instead attempt to soak it in and draw what information you can from it.

Chapters 1-5

Lewis Thomas has put together a series of thought-provoking and interesting essays. They seem rather different, but throughout them runs a common theme: humanity. It is not explicitly stated, but the message is clear: humans are social creatures and we need each other.

Despite the fact that they are labeled "more notes of a biology watcher", these essays have more universal meaning. However, being essays, they don't feel appropriate for a book form, instead they feel straining for another medium. Perhaps they would do best as a column in a magazine, published periodically. Or even as a website, with the essays hyperlinked together. However, as a book, they seem rather discontinuous, because they are all separate essays, despite the fact they are held together by a common theme.

In these essays, Lewis Thomas also begins to teach and enlighten. The first essay makes us think: What is self? which reminds me of one man's Proof that you Exist. The second asks whether we lose the whole, when we look only at the pieces. The question reminds me of Pirsig's deconstructions in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. It also asks whether masses of ants think, and if they do, what they think about, much as is done in Godel, Escher, Bach with its "Ant Fugue". The third muses on aliens, like Sagan's Contact as well as being amazed by human progress, which cannot help but remind me of the Singularity. The fourth speaks of medicine and reminds me of the statistics teacher who insistently reminds "correlation does not imply causation". And the fifth reminds us of the importance of errors, something to remind teachers of, along with Deming's "Drive Out Fear" policy.

Chapter 6-10

Lewis Thomas is beginning to stray slightly from the path, but continues on as purposefully as ever. At times he is the height of seriousness, at others he lets his brain drift away into almost nonsensical ramblings. However, the contrast is nice and keeps you on your toes.

He makes some good points, but they are hidden deep within the story, and I would not be surprised if many readers miss them. For example, he explains why artificial intelligence is so unlikely: computers cannot make mistakes. They are programmed by human beings, and follow their instructions exactly, without modification or change. The key to humans is their creativity -- the fact that they make mistakes. This is an ability computers will likely never have. (Although, one of my friends disagrees.)

However, there is no clear goal, message or purpose to the book, which may be a bit of a problem. It leaves the reader wondering: What's up here? What's he saying? However, you continue on, wondering what he'll say next.

All in all, it's not too bad, but not amazingly good either. It's somewhere in between: the thoughts, worries and musings of one man, neatly packaged for human consumption.

Chapters 11-14

In these chapters, Lewis Thomas seems to have a growing sense of sarcasm. He continually pokes fun at the many committees who always seem to be able to screw up a good thing.

He starts out with the etymologies of words, a theme he comes back to in the later chapters. I personally don't find much of interest in such etymologies, but they seem to be rather fascinating to him.

Etymologies seem to be used as a way of describing words, as well as linking them. It's an interesting literary device, one which I have not seen used before.

Chapters 15-20

Lewis Thomas has turned the spotlight upon himself in these chapters. He asks what are the problems and peculiarities of his own line of work. The results are illuminating, if, at times, confusing.

In "On Disease", he seems to degrade into a jumble of jargon, so complex that it is hard for one not well acquainted with the field of biology to understand. However, he tries to make an interesting point -- that more often than not, the results of what we would call disease are in fact caused by our own body.

This is a theme he comes back to in "On Meddling", in which he posits that all problems are caused by meddlers, which, when removed, would restore everything back the way we wanted. It is an interesting thought, although it seems to be said slightly tongue-in-cheek.

In "On Committees", he discusses the biggest meddlers of all: committees. He suggests that if members of committees would only quietly listen to each other, they might actually get something done. It is an interesting thought, and is certainly held up by more modern events. The IETF, for one example, conducts all of their meetings by email, where the participants have the opportunity to quietly read and reflect upon everyone's points and suggestions. This is all the more amazing considering the IETF is the organization that decides the various standards that run the Internet, and consensus is so often reached that they only rarely have to put things up to a vote.

Chapters 21-26

As we near the end of the book, Lewis Thomas continues his introspection and begins to poke a bit of fun at himself. In "The Scrambler in the Mind" he speaks of linguists who use language to discuss linguistics and complains about linguistic work which seems to be nonsense to him. It very much reminds me of my reaction to the jargon in "On Disease".

Then, he commits the same mistake by trying to use punctuation to discuss punctuation. He writes playfully, using the various elements he describes throughout his writing as he pleases. It results in an interesting piece of writing.

He attempts, as do most great thinkers, to suggest reforms to education. These are not particularly interesting, and are focused towards premed education, a field I am not particularly familiar with.

He closes with Montaigne, who he makes out to be a rambling writer much like himself. An interesting thought, and a nice place to stop.