The last time the 100 book meme came around I decided to step out of the vein and create a list of 100 books that I liked or have had a significant influence on me. Most of the them were non-fiction books about science, and I was glad to see the Jennifer has created a list of 75 popular science books to share.
As with the last survey, though, I've read almost nothing on this new list. I've read On the Origin of Species, The Demon-Haunted World, and Wonderful Life, but that's it.
As with the last meme, I'm considering going through my library and making a list of my favorite 75 popular science books. I know that I've read more than that, but there are quite a few that I didn't particularly care for, so I might have to shorten the list a bit.
[Hat-tip to John Lynch]
Humanities & Social Science
Comments
I've read a few more than that, but — sssh! — not many. And some of the best books on my personal list I wouldn't count as "popularizations", The Feynman Lectures on Physics for example.
Listing the worst is always more fun, too.
Posted by: Blake Stacey | August 27, 2008 8:48 AM
By my count I've read 13 out of the 75. I also fail, apparently.
Posted by: Justin Wagner | August 27, 2008 10:48 AM
I wonder: are people who have been formally trained in some scientific field more likely to "fail" this kind of thing? There exist only so many hours in the day, and if we have to spend them reading textbooks and journal articles, well. . . .
Posted by: Blake Stacey | August 27, 2008 11:09 AM
Blake; I think you might be on to something. I would definitely read more popular science books outside the realm of my immediate area of interest if I had more time. Between work, class, and working on the book, though, I just don't have the time.
In general I imagine that we science folk are more likely to stick to a particular area than to read all the good pop science books that are put out. Jennifer is probably more widely read than most, and I know if I do my own list it's going to be much more narrow in focus.
As for the worst pop-science books, I made such a list in December of last year. Maybe it's time to make a new one...
Posted by: Laelaps | August 27, 2008 12:04 PM
Tom Swanson makes a similar point: it's not just the time we have to spend, but the activities we feel to be relevant ways to spend it.
It's probably something which we should keep in mind — a book which a professional X-ologist might find an interesting and invigorating complement to the standard presentation of X might not be a good introduction to X for an untrained reader (or a specialist in field Y).
Posted by: Blake Stacey | August 28, 2008 1:25 PM