Carl Sagan: A world full of demons: Science is like a candle in the darkness. Carl Sagan - A World Full of Demons: Science as a Candle in the Dark A World Full of Demons Science

CARL SAGAN

A WORLD FULL OF DEMONS:

The science - like a candle in the dark

2014

To my grandson Tonio.

May you live in a world full of light and free from demons

We wait for the light, but we live in darkness.

Isaiah 59:9

Don't curse the darkness - light at least one candle.

Proverb

Preface.

MY MENTORS

Stormy autumn day. On the street, fallen leaves swirl in the funnels of small tornadoes, each hurricane lives its own life. It's good to be home, warm and safe. Mom is preparing dinner in the kitchen. Older guys, the kind who bully kids with or without reason, will not enter our apartment. Not even a week had passed since I got into a fight - I forget with whom, probably with Snoony, who lived on the fourth floor - I swung as hard as I could, and my fist flew into the glass window of Schechter's pharmacy.

Mr. Schechter was not angry. “It’s no problem, I’m insured,” he consoled, pouring a horribly stinging antiseptic on my wrist. Then my mother took me to the doctor, to the office on the first floor of our house. The doctor used forceps to remove the glass shard stuck in his hand, took a needle and thread and placed two stitches.

“Two seams!” - my father repeated with delight that evening. He knew about seams: his father worked as a cutter in a garment factory; with a huge, scary-looking saw, he cut ready-made shapes from a high stack of fabric - backs, for example, or sleeves for ladies' coats and suits - and then these patterns were sent to women who sat in endless rows at sewing machines. My father was pleased: I was finally angry, and anger helped me overcome my natural timidity.

Sometimes it's a good idea to fight back. I didn’t plan such an outburst of rage, it just surged. A second ago Snoony was pushing me - and now my fist crashes into Mr. Schechter's window. I hurt my wrist, my parents incurred unexpected doctor's expenses, I broke a window - and no one was angry. Snuni, too, suddenly became my friend.

I tried to think about this lesson. It was much more pleasant to think about it in a warm apartment, looking out of the living room window at the Lower Bay, than to go down to the street, risking encountering new adventures.

Mom, as usual, changed clothes and put on makeup before father arrived. The sun was setting. Mom came up to me, and together we looked at the choppy waters.

People fight and kill each other there,” she said, pointing with a wave of her hand to the other side of the Atlantic. I looked as closely as I could.

“I know,” I answered. - I see them.

You don't see anything. “It’s very far,” she objected sternly and went back to the kitchen.

How does she know whether I see those people or not, I thought. Squinting, I imagined I could see a narrow strip of land on the horizon, and there were tiny figures pushing and shoving each other and fighting with swords, just like in my comics. But maybe mom is right? Maybe it’s just my imagination, something like the nightmares that still woke me up sometimes at night - my pajamas soaked through with sweat, my heart pounding desperately?

* * *

That same year, on one Sunday, my father patiently explained to me the role of the zero-placeholder in arithmetic, taught me the hard-to-pronounce names of large numbers, and proved that there is no greatest number (“You can always add another one”). Suddenly, like a child, I felt the urge to write down all the numbers in a row from one to a thousand. There was no paper in the house, but my father had cardboard boxes that the laundry service put into shirts. I enthusiastically began to implement my plan, but, to my surprise, things did not go so quickly. I had only just written out the first hundred when my mother announced: it was time to wash my face for bed. I became desperate. I won't go to bed until I reach a thousand. My father, an experienced peacemaker, intervened: if I go to the bathroom without whims, he will pee for me for now. My grief was immediately replaced by wild joy. When I got out, washed, my father was already approaching 900, and I managed to reach 1000 thanks to only a slight delay from the usual bedtime. Huge numbers have retained their fascination for me ever since.

And back in 1939, my parents took me to the World's Fair in New York. There I saw a vision of the ideal future that science and advanced technology were supposed to provide us with. A time capsule filled with modern objects was ceremoniously buried in the ground to teach descendants from the distant future - oddly enough, it was assumed that they would know little about the people of 1939. The “world of the future” will be clean, well-equipped, and, as far as I could understand, there will be no trace of the poor there.

“See the sound,” urged one of the fair's amazing inscriptions. And in fact, when the tuning fork was hit with a hammer, an elegant sine wave appeared on the oscilloscope screen. “Hear the light,” another poster read; and sure enough, when a beam of light fell on the photocell, a crackling sound was heard, similar to the one that was heard from our Motorola receiver, if you turn the knob and get between the radio stations. The world was full of wonders that I had never even suspected before. How can sound turn into a picture, and light into noise?

My parents were not scientists at all; they were not even close to science. But they almost simultaneously instilled in me doubt and amazement, that is, those two hardly compatible ways of thinking from which the scientific method is born. My parents had just emerged from poverty, but when I told them that I would become an astronomer, I received their unconditional support, even though they hardly knew what an astronomer does. My parents never advised me to stop being stupid and study to be a doctor or lawyer.

I would be glad to remember with kind words the teachers of elementary, middle or high school who inspired me to turn to science, but I did not have such teachers. We recited the periodic table of elements, tinkered with levers and inclined planes, memorized that photosynthesis occurs in green leaves, and learned the difference between anthracite and bituminous coal. But there was no inspiring amazement, just as there was no hint of the evolution of ideas, not a word about those misconceptions that were once generally accepted. In high school, laboratory classes began with a predetermined result - if you don’t get it, you won’t get a good grade. Personal inclinations, intuition, the desire to test - and even refute a hypothesis - were by no means encouraged. It always seemed that the most interesting chapters in the textbook were the appendices, but the school year invariably ended before one's hands reached these optional pages. Wonderful books on the same astronomy could be found in the library, but not in school. Long division was learned as a set of rules, more like a recipe, without any explanation of why such a set of ordinary divisions, multiplications and subtractions led to the answer. In high school, taking the square root was taught with such reverence as if it were the Eleventh Commandment proclaimed from Mount Sinai. The main thing is to get the right answer, and don’t care if you don’t understand anything. In my second year of studying algebra, the class was taught by a strong teacher from whom I learned a lot, but he was rude and often brought my classmates to tears. I retained my interest in science during my school years only through books and science (and science fiction) magazines.

All my dreams came true at the university: there I met mentors who not only understood science, but also knew how to explain. I was lucky to get into one of the best educational institutions of that time - the University of Chicago. The “core” of our physics department was Enrico Fermi, Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar taught us the elegance of mathematical formulas, I had the good fortune to talk about chemistry with Harold Uhry, and in the summer I interned in biology with Hermann Muller at Indiana University, and I studied planetary astronomy with the only one in that It's time for a specialist on this subject - Gerald Kuiper.

Kuiper taught me to “count on the back of the envelope.” An idea occurred to you - you take out an old letter, include knowledge of fundamental physics and sketch out on the back of the envelope (somehow, approximately) a series of equations, substituting the numbers that seem most likely to you, and see if the answer is similar to the one you expected. If it doesn't work, look for another theory. With this method, all nonsense was cut off immediately, as if with a swing of a knife.

At the University of Chicago, I was also fortunate in that we were taught in Robert Hutchins' liberal arts program, which embraced the sciences as an integral part of the magnificent mosaic of human knowledge. The future physicist was supposed to know the names of Plato and Aristotle, Bach, Shakespeare, Gibbon, Malinowski, Freud - the list is far from complete. In the initial astronomy course, Ptolemy's geocentric system was presented so convincingly that many students were ready to renounce allegiance to Copernicus. The teachers of the Hutchins program were not required, as in modern American universities, to have a high scientific status; on the contrary: teachers were valued precisely as teachers for their ability to teach and inspire the younger generation.

Book “A World Full of Demons. Science is like a candle in the darkness" by Carl Sagan was published after his death. It seemed to sum up his entire life and scientific activity. For the author of this book, science is something amazing and delightful. With its help you can learn many secrets of nature.

The author is skeptical about many things, however, this is a feature of the scientist’s worldview. He addresses the human mind, explaining what great power lies within it. The book talks about the importance of delving into the essence of things and processes, without allowing yourself to be deceived. For example, Carl Sagan talks about the existence of a large number of legends: the existence of Atlantis, UFOs, aliens, magic, reincarnation and the like. It would seem that people know about many scientific facts, but continue to believe in something supernatural, while many myths can be debunked if we take into account the simplest and most accessible facts. Instead, people are content with superficial knowledge, preferring to believe someone’s inventions that are not scientifically confirmed in any way.

The scientist says that you need to seek confirmation before believing in something. A skeptical attitude allows you to double-check everything. As a scientist, a person can question any ideas and test their truth. And this is available to everyone. Although it is generally accepted that scientists are distinguished by a special mind, the only difference is that they have set themselves the task of understanding a particular area of knowledge. This means that the brain of any person can cope with this if there is a desire. And this is not all that is discussed in this book.

On our website you can download the book “A World Full of Demons. Science is like a candle in the darkness” by Sagan Carl Eduard for free and without registration in fb2, rtf, epub, pdf, txt format, read the book online or buy the book in the online store.

Translator Love Sum

Editor Arthur Klyanitsky

Project Manager I. Seregina

Proofreaders M. Milovidova, S. Mozaleva, M. Savina

Computer layout A. Fominov

Cover designer Yu. Buga

Nonprofit Programs Fund "Dynasty" founded in 2002 by Dmitry Borisovich Zimin, honorary president of VimpelCom.

The Foundation's priority areas of activity are support for fundamental science and education in Russia, popularization of science and education. As part of the program to popularize science, the Foundation has launched several projects. Among them is the website elementy.ru, which has become one of the leading thematic resources on the Russian-language Internet, as well as the Dynasty Library project - a publication of modern popular science books carefully selected by scientific experts. The book you are holding in your hands was published as part of this project. More detailed information about the Dynasty Foundation can be found at www.dynastyfdn.ru.

All rights reserved. No part of the electronic version of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means, including posting on the Internet or corporate networks, for private or public use without the written permission of the copyright owner.

To my grandson Tonio. May you live in a world full of light and free from demons

We wait for the light, but we live in darkness.

Don't curse the darkness - light at least one candle.

Proverb

Preface

My mentors

“Two seams!” – my father repeated with delight that evening. He knew about seams: his father worked as a cutter in a garment factory; with a huge, scary-looking saw, he cut ready-made shapes from a high stack of fabric - backs, for example, or sleeves for ladies' coats and suits - and then these patterns were sent to women who sat in endless rows at sewing machines. My father was pleased: I was finally angry, and anger helped me overcome my natural timidity.

Sometimes it's a good idea to fight back. I didn’t plan such an outburst of rage, it just surged. A second ago Snoony was pushing me - and now my fist is crashing into Mr. Schechter's window. I hurt my wrist, my parents incurred unexpected doctor's expenses, I broke a window - and no one was angry. Snuni, too, suddenly became my friend.

Mom, as usual, changed clothes and put on makeup before father arrived. The sun was setting. Mom came up to me, and together we looked at the choppy waters.

“People fight and kill each other there,” she said, pointing with a wave of her hand to the other side of the Atlantic. I looked as closely as I could.

“I know,” I answered. - I see them.

– You don’t see anything. “It’s very far,” she objected sternly and went back to the kitchen.

How does she know whether I see those people or not, I thought. Squinting, I imagined I could see a narrow strip of land on the horizon, and there were tiny figures pushing and shoving each other and fighting with swords, just like in my comics. But maybe mom is right? Maybe it was just my imagination, something like the nightmares from which I still woke up sometimes at night - my pajamas were soaked through with sweat, my heart was pounding desperately?

I would be glad to remember with kind words the teachers of elementary, middle or high school who inspired me to turn to science, but I did not have such teachers. We recited the periodic table of elements, tinkered with levers and inclined planes, memorized that photosynthesis occurs in green leaves, and learned the difference between anthracite and bituminous coal. But there was no inspiring amazement, just as there was no hint of the evolution of ideas, not a word about those misconceptions that were once generally accepted. In high school, laboratory classes began with a predetermined result - if you don’t get it, you won’t get a good grade. Personal inclinations, intuition, the desire to test - and even refute a hypothesis - were by no means encouraged. It always seemed that the most interesting chapters in the textbook were the appendices, but the school year invariably ended before one’s hands reached these optional pages. Wonderful books on the same astronomy could be found in the library, but not in school. Long division was learned as a set of rules, more like a recipe, without any explanation of why such a set of ordinary divisions, multiplications and subtractions led to the answer. In high school, taking the square root was taught with such reverence as if it were the Eleventh Commandment proclaimed from Mount Sinai. The main thing is to get the right answer, and don’t care if you don’t understand anything. In my second year of studying algebra, the class was taught by a strong teacher from whom I learned a lot, but he was rude and often brought my classmates to tears. I retained my interest in science during my school years only through books and science (and science fiction) magazines.

A Demonful World is the last book by Carl Sagan, an astronomer, astrophysicist and outstanding popularizer of science, published after his death. This book, dedicated to one of his favorite topics - the human mind and the fight against pseudoscientific stupidity - is a kind of summation of all his work. Myths about Atlantis and Lemuria, faces on Mars and encounters with aliens, magic and reincarnation, clairvoyance and Bigfoot, creationism and astrology - Sagan consistently and mercilessly exposes the myths created by ignorance, fear and self-interest. This book is a skeptic's manifesto, a textbook of common sense and the scientific method. A bright, deeply personal text - not only a battle with pseudoscience, but also an amazing picture of the formation of a scientific worldview, the greatest discoveries and ascetics. Science for Sagan is pure joy, it is amazing in itself. Take just a few facts: all information about a person is contained in every cell of the body; quasars are so far away that their light began to radiate towards the Earth before it was formed; all people are relatives and descend from the same ancestors who lived several million years ago. Science is opening up unprecedented possibilities, and humanity has long since ceased to need to invent idols for itself and allow itself to be manipulated. 3rd edition.

Carl Sagan The name of the American astronomer and exobiologist Carl Sagan (1934−1996) is known to all science lovers. His planetary research has always been at the forefront and highly regarded by professionals, but he has also done an extraordinary amount to popularize science in every conceivable form of the genre. He is rightly considered an outstanding educator of the 20th century. All of Sagan's projects in this area had a great public response, and books and films captivated an audience of millions. Suffice it to recall his science fiction novel and film “Contact”, a book about the evolution of the brain “Dragons of Eden”, a tome “Cosmos”, embodied in an excellent television series. Many of Sagan’s books have not yet been translated into Russian, but, fortunately, with the support of Dynasty, one of the last and most important books of Carl Sagan, “A World Full of Demons: Science is Like a Candle in the World,” has just been published in translation by Lyubov Summ. darkness" (The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark).

In the broadest sense, the book is dedicated to the relationship between science and society. Taking a firm position on the side of rational thinking (doubt is the main virtue of a scientist!), Sagan still sincerely tries to understand the roots of irrationalism and pseudo-scientific errors. First of all, he is not worried about the malicious persecutors of science, but about ordinary people who have not lost their thirst for the new and unusual.

One day, a taxi driver named Mr. Buckley, recognizing “that” scientist in Sagan, bombarded him with questions about frozen aliens hidden at an Air Force base, about contacts with spirits, about magic crystals, the prophecies of Nostradamus, astrology, the Shroud of Turin... Sagan is polite, but firmly, expressed a scientific point of view on these issues, but soon regretted it: “We were driving through the rain, and the driver grew gloomy before our eyes. I was not just disproving an incorrect theory, I was depriving his spiritual life of some precious edge.”

Where is the source of the conflict between science and the worldview of the common man? Here is Sagan's opinion: “Mr. Buckley—intelligent, inquisitive, voluble—remained completely ignorant of modern science. He was gifted with a keen interest in the wonders of the Universe. He wanted to understand science. The trouble is that “science” came to him after passing through unsuitable filters. Our culture, our education system, our media have failed this man badly. Only fiction and nonsense seeped into his consciousness. No one taught him to distinguish genuine science from cheap fakes. He had no idea about the scientific method."

Sagan's conclusion is clear: fairy tales sell better than skepticism, fiction entertains, and critical investigation strains brains that are already burdened with everyday problems. And as a result, “a living and inquisitive person, relying on popular culture and from it drawing his information about Atlantis (and other wonders - V.S.), is a hundred, a thousand times more likely to stumble upon an uncritically transmitted myth than to a sober and balanced analysis."

Already on page 20 of Sagan’s very thick book, a recipe for countering pseudoscience seems to have been found: “Science appeals to our curiosity, delight in mysteries and miracles. But exactly the same delight is awakened by pseudoscience. Scattered, small populations of scientific literature leave their ecological niches, and the vacated space is immediately taken over by pseudoscience. If it were made clear to everyone that no statement should be taken on faith without sufficient evidence, there would be no room left for pseudoscience.”

However, the author himself soon demonstrates that in this serious matter one cannot limit oneself only to the commercial component: “Pseudoscience advances more easily than true science, since it avoids comparisons with reality, namely reality, over which we have no control; any discovery is verified. As a result, the criteria for proof or evidence for pseudoscience are significantly lower. Partly for this reason, pseudoscience is easier to feed to the uninitiated, but this is clearly not enough to explain its popularity.”

Discussing various pseudo-scientific misconceptions (the face of the Moon, the Martian sphinx, crop circles, contacts with UFO pilots, etc.), Sagan notes the deep-seated features of our psyche that contribute to such misconceptions. For example, why do we see faces in spots on the lunar disk and the Martian surface? “Having barely learned to see, the child begins to distinguish faces. We now know that this is our innate skill. Those children who - millions of years ago - did not recognize faces and did not greet them with a smile, could not win the hearts of their parents, which means they had less chance of survival. Nowadays, every baby immediately learns to identify human faces and breaks into a toothless smile. An inevitable side effect: recognizing a face from any pattern has become so habitual for us that our brain manages to find a face even where there is none.”

Sagan discusses both world religions and newfangled spiritual practices and sects like Aum Shinrikyo. The range of issues and persons touched upon is extremely wide: Mao Zedong and Trotsky, Mesmer and Uri Geller, Kashpirovsky and Zhirinovsky are not forgotten. It would seem what relation these persons have to science. Yes, none! It’s just that their popularity is based on people’s lack of scientific method. “The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark” “If scientists popularize only scientific discoveries and achievements, no matter how exciting, without revealing the critical method, then how can an ordinary person distinguish science from pseudoscience? Both will act as the final truth. In Russia (the author meant the USSR. - V.S.) and China, this is exactly what is happening: science is presented to the people in an authoritarian manner with a sanction from above. Science has already been separated from pseudoscience for you. Ordinary people don't have to rack their brains. But when large-scale political changes occur and thought is freed from its shackles, every self-confident or charismatic prophet acquires followers, especially if he can tell people exactly what they want to hear. Any opinion, without evidence, is immediately elevated to dogma. The main and difficult task of a science popularizer is to tell the true, intricate story of great discoveries, as well as misunderstandings, and sometimes stubborn refusal to change an unsuccessfully chosen course. Many, almost all, manuals for beginning scientists take this task too lightly. Of course, it is much more pleasant to present the filtered wisdom of centuries in an attractive form as the result of a patient joint study of nature than to understand the technical details of this filtering apparatus. However, the scientific method - complex, tedious - is in itself more important than its fruits."

But - and then the conversation mainly concerns religion - “when applied consistently, science also imposes a severe burden in exchange for its manifold gifts: we are obliged, no matter how difficult it is, to apply a scientific approach to ourselves and to our cultural norms, i.e. e. do not take anything for granted, examine your hopes, your vanity, your unfounded beliefs; We should, if possible, see ourselves as we are. Or will we diligently and courageously study the movements of planets and the genetics of microbes and follow these discoveries wherever they lead, but consider the origin of matter and human behavior an impenetrable mystery? The scientific method is so powerful that once you have mastered it, you will be tempted to use it everywhere and always.” Mastering the scientific method is difficult not only for the average person, but also for some scientists: “Every society develops a treasure trove of myths and metaphors that are precious to its members, which somehow coexist with everyday reality. Efforts are made to unite these two worlds, and the discrepancies, the protruding corners, are usually left out of sight, as if they were not there. We know how to divide our consciousness into sealed compartments. Even some scientists succeed in this: without breaking a stride, they move from a skeptical scientific worldview to religion and faith and back. Of course, the greater the discrepancy between these worlds, the more difficult it is for a person to live in both without straining his consciousness and conscience.”

(Here I am forced to note that I have to correct some quotes from the Russian edition from the original. The editors of Alpina Non-Fiction did not fully cope with the task. But this can be corrected: the book is so good that the day of its second edition is not far off.)

However, Sagan is not at all a militant atheist and rationalist. He sympathizes with the weak: “Earthly life is short and full of surprises. Isn’t it cruel to deprive people of the consolation of faith when science is unable to console their suffering? Let those who cannot bear the burden of scientific knowledge allow themselves to neglect the scientific approach. But we cannot take science piecemeal, at our own discretion, apply it where it suits us, and reject it as soon as we sense a threat.”

Moreover, while asserting the power and greatness of the scientific method, Sagan does not forget about those who go too far in the camp of scientists:

“Do skeptics sometimes become arrogant and disdainful of other people’s opinions? Of course, I myself have encountered this more than once. Sometimes, as if from the outside, I heard this unpleasant tone from my own lips. Human weaknesses manifest themselves equally on both sides of the barricade. Skepticism, even in practice, can appear arrogant, dogmatic, and callous toward the feelings and beliefs of others. And in fact: some scientists and inveterate skeptics wield the method like a blunt instrument - they hit people over the head indiscriminately. Sometimes it seems as if a skeptical conclusion is made immediately, deliberately discarding any argumentation, and only then the facts are considered. Everyone values their beliefs; we are, as it were, made up of them. When our belief system is challenged, found to be insufficiently justified, or simply asked, as Socrates did, uncomfortable questions, revealing something we had not thought of, or showing that we have hidden the premises too far to see for ourselves, the situation is perceived. no longer as a joint search for truth, but as a personal war.”

“We should not forget,” he writes further, “that adherents of superstitions and pseudoscience, although wrong in everything, are also people with normal human feelings, and they, like skeptics, are also trying to comprehend the structure of the world and their place in it. In most cases, the motives of these people coincide with the driving motive of science, and if education or culture has not equipped them with weapons for this great search, then all the more should we criticize them with sympathy - and, by the way, none of us is blameless.

But sympathy should not develop into opportunism. Some, looking down on “the people,” argue: “And skepticism has limits beyond which it becomes useless. We need to analyze the benefits and losses, and if mysticism and superstition provide a sufficient level of peace, consolation, hope and no harm from this belief, then shouldn’t we keep our doubts to ourselves?” Not an easy question, says Carl Sagan. Do you want to know how he himself answers it? Read the book - it's worth it!