The Best Short Works of Richard Feynman by Richard P. Feynman (2001-04-05)

I very much enjoyed this entertaining and delightful collection of lectures, talks and essays by the world-renown and sorely missed Professor Feynman, Nobel Prize winning physicist, idiosyncratic genius and one of the great men of the twentieth century.

I particularly enjoyed the subtle yet unmistakable way he scolded the people at NASA for putting their political butts before the safety of the space program they were managing in his famous "Minority Report to the Space Shuttle Challenger Inquiry." But the chapter that really sold me on Richard P. Feynman, boy wonder grown up, was "It's as Simple as One, Two, Three" in which he explores the ability to do two things at once through an experiment with counting. Such a delight he took in learning as a kid from his friend Bernie that we sometimes think in pictures and not in words. And then the further delight he took in learning that some people count with their inner voice (himself), and others (his friend John Tukey) count by visualization.

I was also loved the chapter, "What is Science?", a talk to science teachers in which Feynman demonstrates that the real difference between science and other ways of "knowing" (e.g., religion) is the ability to doubt. In science we learn, as Feyman said he himself learned, to live with doubt. But in the religious way of "knowing" doubt is intolerable. Feynman gives an evolutionary illustration of why doubt is essential. He begins with the "intelligent" animals "which can learn something from experience (like cats)." At this stage, he says, each animal learned "from its own experience." Then came some animals that could learn more rapidly and from the experience of others by watching. Then came something "completely new...things could be learned by one animal, passed on to another, and another, fast enough that...[the knowledge] was not lost to the race...," and could be passed on to a new generation.

Now, let's stop for a moment. What a great teacher does--and here and elsewhere Feynman proves himself to be a great teacher (although he said he doubted that!)--is to guide the student just enough so that the student arrives at or anticipates the point of the lesson before the teacher gets there. What is the punch line of this lesson for the science teachers? Namely this: with the passing of knowledge from one generation to the next it became also possible to pass on false knowledge or "mistaken ideas." Feynman calls this a "disease."

"Then a way of avoiding the disease was discovered. This is to doubt that what is being passed from the past is in fact true, and to try to find out ab initio, again from experience, what the situation is, rather than trusting the experience of the past..."

In other words, don't blindly accept the word of authority. Test it for yourself! And this is what science does. It tests and it tests again, and it doubts and it doubts--always.

I loved this because one of my dictums is "always guide the experts"--the lawyer, the doctor, the insurance adjustor, et al. Always guide them because, although they are the experts, you're the one who really cares. To this I can now add that you should also doubt the experts because even though they are experts they can be wrong. And, as Feynman showed in his report on the Challenge disaster, they can be wrong for reasons that have nothing to do with their expertise.

I also liked the commencement address he gave at Caltech on "Cargo Cult Science...and How to Not Fool Yourself." We fool ourselves a lot. The managers at NASA fooled themselves; what's their names of cold fusion delusion fame fooled themselves. Feynman has noted that he has fooled himself. Science, he avers, is a tool to help us to not fool ourselves. He is profoundly right. Without science we would go on fooling ourselves with all sorts of mumbo-jumbo, "revealed" religiosity and scientific-seeming stuff such as Rhine's ESP experiments some years ago at Duke, the entire litany of New Age pseudobabblese, and--yes!--such stuff as the amazing Cargo Cult Science in which some Pacific Islanders, in an attempt to attract the big birds of the sky with their cargoes of goodies, built "nests," that is, landing fields with empty cargo boxes, and faux towers, etc. in the hope that the planes flying overhead would see them and land on their island. Feynman has taken this as an example of pseudoscience, that is, behavior in the form of science without the substance of science, without the "integrity" of science.

The integrity of science, Feynman advised the graduates, demands that all the information about the experiment be given, even detrimental facts. Feynman contrasts this idea with that of advertizing in which only that which makes the product look good is given.

When reading this book it helps to imagine that one is listening to Feynman speak. The text includes repetitions and the omissions which he no doubt conveyed with his voice, expression or gesture. When one reads him this way, some of Feynman's endearing charm and the gentle, self-effacing humor for which he is famous comes through. Here's a joke from pages 206-207: He is at Esalen in a hot bath with another man and a girl. The man begins to massage the girl's foot. He feels something in her big toe. He asks his instructor, "Is that the pituitary?" The girl says, "No, that's not the way it feels." Feynman injects, "You're a hell of a long way from the pituitary, man." And they both look at him. "I had blown my cover, you see--and she said, It's reflexology. So I closed my eyes and appeared to be meditating." Yes, Feynman is a long way from reflexology.

--Dennis Littrell, author of "The World Is Not as We Think It Is"

Feynman seems to have something of a cult following, which is a shame, I think. He'd not approve of it. Reading his books, though, it's easy to understand how many people might come to almost worship the man. He was not only a remarkable scientist, he was accessible to the layman by virtue of his clear communication and clear language style. It was his accessibility, his style of communicating in the popular vernacular, and his passion for understanding and explaining things at their most basic level that gained him so much respect. While many academics were busy trying to impress their peers with 50-dollar words and technical mumbo jumbo, Feynman was explaining things with words like "jiggle."
While appreciating Feynman's dislike of cult figures, I count myself among the thousands of individuals that admire the man not only for his intelligence, but also for his earthly mannerisms. Here was a man who was not only very smart � he was, in a real sense, one of us; part of the mass of humanity. I found this book to be very engaging. In typical Feynman style it is both easy to read, and profoundly enlightening. These are the musings of a citizen scientist, curious intellectual, and genuine genius.
One of the stories I enjoyed most was Feynman's description of things his father taught him about birds. One day one of the other school kids asked Feynman to name a particular bird in the field. Feynman replied that he had no idea what the bird's name was, whereupon the kid jested that Feynman's dad had taught him nothing. But it was just the opposite. Feynman's dad had taught him lots about the bird � things about its behavior, color, etc. As Feynman recalls his father's lesson: "you know in all the languages you want to know what the name of that bird is and when you've finished with all that you'll know absolutely nothing whatsoever about the bird. You only know about humans in different places and what they call the bird." [See page 4]. This is a most profound observation that many people seem continually confused about: memorizing language-based facts (like the names of birds, lizards, planets, etc.) is not the same as studying those things, and understanding them.
Another of Feynman's beliefs was that understanding things at a mathematical and scientific level does not, and should not, destroy one's ability to appreciate the wonder of the world and universe we live in. In fact, Feynman argues just the opposite; that someone who understands science should find the world an even richer and more amazing place than someone who looks at it with unknowing eyes. This is also a theme in Richard Dawkins' book "Unweaving the Rainbow."
The book is replete with Feynman's musings about the nature of science, and a common thread is that the core of science is the freedom to doubt. He muses that he "believe[s] that one of the greatest dangers to modern society is the possible resurgence and expansion of the ideas of thought control; such as Hitler had, or Stalin in his time, or the Catholic religion in the Middle Ages, or the Chinese today." [See page 99]. He also speaks of the absolute need for full intellectual honesty in science: report all the data, and don't allow personal prejudices to filter it. Lay it all out, keep total commitment to truth, and let the chips fall where they fall.
One chapter describes his ideas regarding the conflict between science and religion. While other authors seem inclined to simply repeat the mantra "there is no fundamental problem between science and religion" Feynman points out that doubt is a foundation stone for science and a frequent taboo in religion. He also (correctly) points out that religion is composed of multiple parts, and that there is not a disagreement between the ethical parts of religion and science, but that a schism does exist between science and much of the mythological base found in religion.
It's not all about philosophy (which Feynman generally disliked). There are chapters that describe the ultimate energy use of computing machines, appeals for the development of nano technology, and Feynman's report on the Challenger disaster. There are also fun chapters, with Feynman describing some of his experiences while working at Los Alamos during development of the atomic bomb. Found throughout these stories are his contempt for figures of authority, and his ever-present need to question things, especially those things we take for granted.
In keeping with Feynman's advice, I resolved to find at least one thing in his book with which I disagreed. After all, Feynman would have wanted it that way. In the chapter that discusses science and religion, Feynman states "� it seems to me that there is no scientific evidence bearing on the Golden Rule." On the contrary, I think evolutionary pressure actually selects for "the Golden Rule," and I believe authors like Dawkins have shown convincingly that what looks like selflessness in some types of altruistic behavior is actually, from an evolutionary point of view, a selfish thing (it promotes the replication of genes responsible for that behavior).
Whether or not you agree with everything in the book is hardly the point. Feynman's point is that we should question and think about everything � including what he wrote. That's how you find things out. And if you've ever had the pleasure of finding things out, and then sitting back with hands clasped behind your head and a broad smile across your face, this book is for you.

Richard Feynman's The Pleasure of Finding Things Out is a collection of interviews, lectures, and other short works written by the Nobel Prize winning physicist. The volume, wonderfully and unobtrusively edited by Jeffrey Robbins, covers a wide range of materials that gives readers a sense not only of the scientist, but of the man; in the included works the audience is treated to stories of Feynman's childhood, his experiences and hijinks while working at Los Alamos during WWII, formal lectures and speeches on various scientific subjects, and a healthy dash of humor and personality throughout.

I was intimidated to read the work, as I fully acknowledge my lack of competency in subjects like mathematics and physics, but my husband (a great admirer of Feynman) promised me I wouldn't get lost in the physics, so I gave it a try. And yes, I did get lost at time - although more so when Feynman discussed nanotechnology than anything else - but I found it very easy to pick up the narrative again if I didn't get myself worked up over understanding the specifics of the material. I wasn't reading The Pleasure of Finding Things Out to understand physics and nanotechnology; I was reading the work to understand a little more about one of my husband's heroes, and the volume accomplished just that. Even for someone with only a marginal interest in Feynman's actual work I found The Pleasure of Finding Things Out to be quite charming.

As a physics professor in the 1970s, I tried introducing my "liberal arts physics" students to Richard Feynman, via xerox copies of some of his writings, and via the filmed Messenger Lectures of a decade before, "The Character of Physical Law"--- by the way, why aren't these available today on video tape?
Now, 25 years later, there's a modest "boom" of Feynman material in print, by no means all worthy of being in that state (which is why Feynman kept a number of lecture transcripts tucked away forgotten in file folders) and one fears, after seeing "The Meaning of it All," that even Feynman's used kleenex and desk blotters are not safe from publication!
But this collection is welcome for gathering together many transcriptions of his famous talks from this era, the 1960s and 1970s, the best of which are "Los Alamos from Below," the deservedly legendary "There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom," "What is Science?" and "Cargo Cult Science."
As a physicist and as one who had the pleasure of hearing Feynman lecture in person on a number of occasions, I had some reservations about the editing of this book, however. The book unwisely starts out with an interview from late in Feynman's life, in which he tells some of his favorite stories in a quite inarticulate way, and then edits out the same stories as they appear in far more comprehensible fashion in the later material (related two decades before). The editor himself seems singularly innocent of science in all its aspects, which results in some major howlers. For example, the speed of light in glass is about 75% of its speed in vacuum, far from "a fraction of a percent" slower than its vacuum speed (p.xii) and CP Invariance (p. 101) has no connection whatsoever to conservation of charge. The operator C, "charge conjugation," changes particles to antiparticles. And so on!
Some of the material presents Feynman strugging publicly with ideas, presentations and even grammar. By comparing the actual Messenger Lectures of 1965 with their published versions, you can see how carefully Feynman himself would edit such transcripts before publication. Without the touch of the master, "The Pleaure of Finding Things Out," an interview which opens the book and "The Relation of Science and Religion," which closes it, don't make a whole lot of sense! Feynman in person, no matter how much he might struggle to get a thought or concept stated to his satisfaction, would convey the successful outcome by body language and a triumphant tone of voice--- to see a transcript in cold print is to see a lot of rambling words with no clear focus, which is no service at all to Feynman, one of the princes of clear thinking!
Recommended with some serious reservations.

Feynman is brilliant, arrogant and emotionally cold. He was the youngest brilliant mind working on the atomic bomb in Los Alamos in the 1940's and later won the Nobel Prize in physics. This book is an unintegrated collection of essays, transcripts of speeches, interviews and memoirs. As such it gets repetitive. We hear three or four times about how his father taught him to observe and we hear three or four times the identical story about the Cargo Cults in New Guinea after WW II. His father, who was not a scientist, turned out to be an excellent teacher specializing in teaching his son to learn by observing. Feynman and his school buddies also had basement "workshops" so that helped their intellectual development. It's fun to see a mind at work, punching the envelope, too undisciplined and too powerful to be contained within a skull.

Anyone who became familiar with Richard Feynman from his hugely popular memoirs What Do You Care What Other People Think, and Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman will find The Pleasure of Finding Things Out an intermediate step between those books and the dense scientific texts behind his Nobel Prize and reputation as one of the 20th century's great minds.
This book is not meant to be entertaining, but I suppose a glimpse into Mr. Feynman's mind cannot help but be entertaining, even when it is a series of lectures based entirely on science. Here he talks about what he calls the "thrill" of boldly finding out what no man knew before, on subjects ranging from the discovery of the reasons behind the crash of the space shuttle Challenger to the atomic bomb project at Los Alamos and from the role of science in society to his Nobel acceptance speech. And while it is not specifically written with the non-scientist in mind, a strong background in science is not necessary to understand and enjoy the wind-ranging collection of philosophies, musings, and remarks collected on these pages.

Those who have read Gleick's biography of Richard P. Feynman (Genius) have probably also read this collection of Feynman's "best short works." This is indeed an odd collection. Feynman is most accessible in the interviews and speeches; least accessible in his "Minority Report to the Space Shuttle Challenger Inquiry." Gleick's biography reveals a man who exemplifies what Whitman had in mind when he observed "Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself. I am large. I contain multitudes." Feynman was indeed large; he contained multitudes. To read this book is to share the pleasure of his company as he formally and informally shares his thoughts and feelings about himself, his life, his career, and just about everything else which attracted his attention. Chapter 1 ("The Pleasure of Finding Things Out") and Chapter 8 ("What Is Science?") are my personal favorites. The aforementioned "Minority Report" (Chapter 7) was, for me, tough going. As I worked my way through this collection, I began to think that I was in the company of someone who has Albert Einstein's intellect and Danny Kaye's personality. Feyman must have been a flamboyant (albeit demanding) classroom teacher. There can be no doubt about his intelligence. Nor his passion and compassion. Nor his playfulness. How much I regret never having known him personally. Therefore, how much I appreciate this collection which I continue to re-read with joy.

Here's the problem with having high expectations: they're so often dashed.

In my years trawling the web and being a science nerd, I've heard a lot about Richard Feynman. There are legends about him, that he was the Puck of physics - brilliant, untamed, and really, really funny. When I got the book, I was expecting to read a lightning-quick volley of ideas that would set my mind alight with the wonder and infinite possibilities continued within a lifetime's pursuit of science.

Yeah, that didn't quite happen.

Don't get me wrong - Feynman is indisputably brilliant, and far from the classic mold of the physicist. He had no patience for titles or honors, and in fact couldn't give a damn about them as long as he had science to do. He would tell Nobel laureates - men whose names were bywords for scientific brilliance - that they were wrong, without hedging or worrying about their egos. He liked to play the bongos, loved a good party, and delighted in playing tricks. One of his more irritating hobbies was safe-cracking, and by the time he left Los Alamos labs after the Manhattan Project there were no places left to hide secrets from Feynman.

So Feynman was no doubt a really cool guy, the kind of scientist you would want to invite to your party without hesitation. His first interest was science, and as scientist go, he was one of the best.

That doesn't mean that reading him is entirely entertaining.

The book is, for me, not very readable for two reasons. The first is that it goes get terribly technical at times, and while I love science, I am not educated enough in it to grasp a lot of the technical details. Indeed, it broke my heart when Feynman said that, when it comes to physics, if you don't know the math, you don't know the science. True, yes. Humbling, yes. But still....

Were I editing a collection of Feynman's work, I would have started with the Big Ideas, defenses of science as an integral function of humanity's ultimate progress. Then, having made the reader comfortable with how Feynman thought, they could have gotten into what Feynman thought.

But no, the book starts of with highly technical lectures on quantum electrodynamics and the difficulties in getting parallel computers to work. If you don't know a lot about how computers work, or you don't have a detailed awareness of atomic theory, you're going to be a little lost. Or a lot lost. Even his minority opinion on the Challenger accident, something I was especially keen to read, was far too dry to be enjoyable.

The second reason why I didn't really enjoy this book is because a lot of it is transcripts of speeches and interviews. Very few people are able to speak in a readable manner, and someone with a mind like Feynman's - always moving, always active - isn't one of them. There are a lot of asides and false starts, wandering thoughts and truncated paragraphs. Even his more structured speeches aren't structured very well for the reader. Perhaps it would be different to listen to him, to sit in the audience and watch the man speak. I reckon that he had the kind of infectious energy and enthusiasm that would make it easy to gloss over structural problems and really enjoy the speech. But turning speech into print is always dangerous, and here I think it fails.

For different people - people who are deeply involved in physics or who are Feynman acolytes - this book is probably a fascinating look into the mind of one of the 20th century's greatest scientists. For the rest of us, we're going to have to find other things to enjoy from the text, and it is there. One of those is, indeed, the title of the book - the pleasure of finding things out.

For Feynman, science wasn't a rigor or a job, it was a joy. He attributes a lot of that attitude to his father, an unlikely fan of science. As a uniform salesman, Feynman's father was not a scientist and had no scientific training. But he raised his son to think about the world. Rather than tell him why, for example, a bird picked at its feathers with its beak, encouraged Richard to observe the bird, to form a hypothesis and then see if observations confirmed it. His father taught him to question everything, to form his own opinions about the world, and by doing so, made him into a scientist from an early age.

It is that attitude which should be the dominant theme of this book, rather than Feynman's technical genius. He says, over and over, to doubt everything. Ask yourself why things are the way they are, rather than just relying on what other people tell you. Observe, experiment and test, and you're doing science.

He has some disdain for social sciences, and a pretty healthy dose of misogyny in a couple of places, but if he is arrogant, then it is probably deserved. Feynman was a man fascinated with how the universe worked, all the way down to its smallest components, and that was his passion. Not awards, not titles, not praise - just the work, the discovery and the pleasure.

If you want to immerse yourself in the human side of the great Richard Feynman without having to struggle with a book full of equations, then this book is for you.
As the subtitle of the book suggests, this book is a compilation of short works by Richard Feynman. Most of them are transcriptions of public talks and interviews, some other are short essays and one of them is the famous report he made after participating in the committee that investigated the reasons behind the explosion of the Challenger space shuttle.
Throughout the book you learn how much of an influence his father (who was a simple uniforms salesman) was on Feynman's deeply scientific mind as well as on his irreverent attitude towards authority.
Standing out among the many chapters is 'Los Alamos from Below', in which he talks about the whole experience of being part of the Manhattan project. From the moment in which he was invited to participate in the project, all the way to his analysis of the morality of creating the atomic bomb, years after it was completed. In this chapter you also learn about his infamous ability to crack safes.
My favorite passage is where he describes what science is to a group of science teachers. I love the way he explains how the human ability to learn from others experience and to pass this knowledge from one generation to the next is both a blessing and a curse of our species, and why science is the cure for it.
After reading this book, you really end up with a clear idea of why Richard Feynman is one of the most revered scientists of the twentieth century.

To be honest, I can't get enough Richard Feynman. One of the most horrible realizations for me is the knowledge that I will never get to know him personally. Luckily, books such as this do much to bring the man closer, and well illustrate the genius that he was.
This collection of transcripts and writings delves into the mind of Richard Feynman, and shows him at his greatest. His irreverence for the honors and accolades of academia, his incomprehension of authority, and the joy and wonder that was his perspective of life. This is not a physics book, but a book of philosophy, disguised as anecdote; this book will help you see the world as Feynman saw it. Read SURELY YOU MUST BE JOKING and WHAT DO YOU CARE..., followed by this book, and you will quickly develop a love for, and a deep regret for the loss of, Richard Feynman.

Feynman expresses a love for discovery, starting with his father's walk in the woods ... not identifying birds but rather trying to discover why the birds do things. He sees science as fitting in the mold of asking questions of the form: "If I do this, what will happen?" and of doubt being a continual part of the scientific process. He views religion as not having this doubt, but I would offer Paul Tillich as a counter example. His chief area of conflict is with the metaphysical aspects of religion.
He has little patience either for sociology or psychology, pseudoscience or the ponderousness of philosophy. In some ways he is still a "kind in a candy shop", for example hob-knobbing with physicist at the Los Alamos lab, but never afraid of any of them when he is talking about physics. He exhibits a quest for truth, for example if the Challenger inquiry. The articles on understanding physics reveal his enthusiasm at its best!

While not as funny as other stories featuring Feynman, these collected lectures go over the relationship between science, doubt, philosophy, and teaching. They also do a great job of explaining QED (Quantum Electro-Dynamics, what Feynman shared a Nobel Prize for) and quarks in terms a layman can understand. After reading, I understand what the Hadron super-collider is trying to experimentally prove.

If you enjoy science, physics especially, this is an excellent work. Two or three of the chapters are on the dry side, which is what keeps it off five stars from me.

Feynman reminds me that the basis for an interesting human being is that person's pursuit of curiosity.

As Salvador Dali said, "Intelligence without ambition is a bird without wings", this aphorism applies so very well to Feynman.

The chapters in the book I enjoyed the most were "The Pleasure of Finding Things Out", "What is Science?" "Cargo Cult Science: Some Remarks on Science, Pseudoscience, and Learning How to Not Fool Yourself" and "The Relation of Science and Religion".

It is always wonderful to read intelligent people express their ideas and thoughts so that one can learn from them and check one's own!

These short works gave me a glimpse of someone wonderfully human. Feynman is capable of great introspection and expressions of truth as he sees them. He jokes about his ignorance and then proceeds to "rush in where fools fear to tread". That is his strength and weakness. Here is a certified genius that sees the world around him in ways we are aware of but usually keep to ourselves since we do not have his chutzpah.

On page 245, Richard P. Feynman discusses the relation of Science to Religion where he writes "In this age of specialization, men who thoroughly know one field are often incompetent to discuss another." I heartily agree with him but wonder why he does not apply this dictum to himself.

First of all I will not dispute his genius status. I do not know him well enough, but will accept Freeman J. Dyson's opinion of Feynman "half genius and half buffoon". Freeman J. Dyson's forward to the book "This Side Idolatry" was the best chapter in the book.

Feynman's originality and greatness are in his physics and mathematics; his other pursuits have authority because of his Nobel Prize.

In this "short works" Richard P. Feynman's proletarian background and weakness in the humanities rear their unruly head from time to time.

Let me give you just one example: on pages 172-173 he writes, "What is science? Of course you all must know, if you teach it. That's common sense. What can I say? If you don't know, every teacher's edition of every textbook gives a complete discussion of the subject. There is some kind of distorted distillation and watered-down and mixed-up words of Francis Beacon from centuries ago, words which then were supposed to be the deep philosophy of science. But one of the greatest experimental scientists of the time who was really doing something, William Harvey (1578-1657, discovered the body's circulatory system), said that what Bacon said science was, was the science that a lord chancellor would do. He spoke of making observations, but omitted the vital factor of judgment about what to observe and what to pay attention to.".

I do not see why Feynman has this animus towards Francis Bacon. He is well respected by historians of science and they see Bacon in a positive light.

W.P.D. Wightman in his book, "The Growth of Scientific Ideas", Yale University Press, New Haven CT, 1953, page 61 had this to say about Francis Bacon* "but his comparisons are applicable to all the problems of nature. The gist of the message is that we must seek out the common natures of the things we are comparing, and thus, remembering that "all true and fruitful natural philosophy hath a double scale or ladder, ascendant and descendent, ascending from experiments to the invention of causes, and descending from causes to the invention of new experiments', we may knit all nature together into one coherent assemblage of events.".
*Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
"Advancement of Learning"
"Novum Organum"
"New Atlantis"

According to the "The Works of Marx K. & Engels F", Kyiv, 1955, Volume 2, page 135, Karl Marx had this opinion of Francis Bacon "the real progenitor of English materialism and current experimental science".

Quote from Feynman "William Harvey (1578-1657, discovered the body's circulatory system), said that what Bacon said science was, was the science that a lord chancellor would do.".

The "lord chancellor's view" in my opinion is indispensable in the development of abstract ideas and general principles.

Compare the science of ancient China, Egypt and Greece and you will see the foolishness of ignoring the "lord chancellor's view".

It was the ancient Greeks (6thh century B.C.) who for the first time in human history abstracted the concept of straight line, circle, radius, and angle and so on from the practical surveying geometry of the Egyptians. Fortunately for science the Greeks had a distain for physical labor, only slaves did that! This does not mean that applied science is any way less important. We need both, as Francis Bacon in his book "Advancement of Learning" propose.

The diversity of intellects, outlooks and experiences of billions of human beings over the years have enabled us to stumble onto the scientific method. I applaud all honest efforts to advance our limited knowledge by people such as Richard P. Feynman and Francis Bacon.

This book is a great introduction to Feynman, though I would still have to recommend "Surely You're Joking..." for the novice. That book was not technical at all, and exposed Feynman's joy in both learning and being a prankster. The Pleasure of Finding Things Out is (slightly) more technical in places, but hardly difficult. It is also much more well-rounded, allowing greater insight into Feynman, who was:
1. Smart as hell
2. Arrogant
3. Happy only when learning
4. Quite a storyteller (in every sense of the word)
5. Thoroughly unconventional
The piece by Freeman Dyson was worth the price of admission, and led me to investigate his works (also highly recommended). I also think the very underrated Challenger Inquiry report was extremely interesting.
Keep in mind, though, that many people I've spoken with really dislike Feynman's arrogance (one person said "he's just a jerk"). I personally feel he had every right to be vain, but over the course of four books, it does get tiring.

Although the forward by Dyson did seem a little too worshipful, I can't blame him for writing kind things about his friend and mentor.

This was the first of Feynman's works I've read (actually I listened to it, as an audiobook). I enjoyed his descriptions of his pranks and work at Los Alamos. I also very much enjoyed hearing his thoughts on the value of science and what science is. The talk at the Galileo symposium was great.

On a human level, it was interesting learning about how he interacted with other people, especially other physcists. I went to Caltech as an undergrad, but unfortunately that was after Feynman passed away. Reading this now, I appreciate how well he fit with the culture there. He didn't beleive in worshiping other people or accepting the opinions of anyone as dogma.

As a scientist, I know why the great physicists at Los Alamos appreciated this quality in the young Feynman. We need to be challenged, to hear criticism of our work. (Of course not everyone would have been able to meaningfully challenge Bohr's or Bethe's ideas about physics. I know I wouldn't have been able to. But Feynman could, and he didn't just sit quietly out of reverence like many other physicists who were there with them.)

His musing on nonscientific questions were interesting, even though I do not agree with all of them. In his own spirit of inquiry, his ideas pose interesting questions precisely when you don't take them as dogma. I particularly like his humility about addressing nonscientific topics.

While not as funny as other stories featuring Feynman, these collected lectures go over the relationship between science, doubt, philosophy, and teaching. They also do a great job of explaining QED (Quantum Electro-Dynamics, what Feynman shared a Nobel Prize for) and quarks in terms a layman can understand. After reading, I understand what the Hadron super-collider is trying to experimentally prove.

If you enjoy science, physics especially, this is an excellent work. Two or three of the chapters are on the dry side, which is what keeps it off five stars from me.

If you want to immerse yourself in the human side of the great Richard Feynman without having to struggle with a book full of equations, then this book is for you.
As the subtitle of the book suggests, this book is a compilation of short works by Richard Feynman. Most of them are transcriptions of public talks and interviews, some other are short essays and one of them is the famous report he made after participating in the committee that investigated the reasons behind the explosion of the Challenger space shuttle.
Throughout the book you learn how much of an influence his father (who was a simple uniforms salesman) was on Feynman's deeply scientific mind as well as on his irreverent attitude towards authority.
Standing out among the many chapters is 'Los Alamos from Below', in which he talks about the whole experience of being part of the Manhattan project. From the moment in which he was invited to participate in the project, all the way to his analysis of the morality of creating the atomic bomb, years after it was completed. In this chapter you also learn about his infamous ability to crack safes.
My favorite passage is where he describes what science is to a group of science teachers. I love the way he explains how the human ability to learn from others experience and to pass this knowledge from one generation to the next is both a blessing and a curse of our species, and why science is the cure for it.
After reading this book, you really end up with a clear idea of why Richard Feynman is one of the most revered scientists of the twentieth century.

A WONDERFUL AND INSIGHTFUL LOOK INTO THE MIND OF NOT ONLY A BRILLIANT SCIENTIST, BUT A DOWN TO EARTH HUMAN BEING AS WELL. WHETHER A SCIENTIFIC OR NON-SCIENTIFIC THINKER, THERE IS MUCH TO BE LEARNED ABOUT LIFE FROM THIS UNCHARACTERISTIC MAN, FATHER AND HUSBAND.

Anyone who became familiar with Richard Feynman from his hugely popular memoirs What Do You Care What Other People Think, and Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman will find The Pleasure of Finding Things Out an intermediate step between those books and the dense scientific texts behind his Nobel Prize and reputation as one of the 20th century's great minds.
This book is not meant to be entertaining, but I suppose a glimpse into Mr. Feynman's mind cannot help but be entertaining, even when it is a series of lectures based entirely on science. Here he talks about what he calls the "thrill" of boldly finding out what no man knew before, on subjects ranging from the discovery of the reasons behind the crash of the space shuttle Challenger to the atomic bomb project at Los Alamos and from the role of science in society to his Nobel acceptance speech. And while it is not specifically written with the non-scientist in mind, a strong background in science is not necessary to understand and enjoy the wind-ranging collection of philosophies, musings, and remarks collected on these pages.

Although I had been given the book earlier, I never seemed to get around to actually reading it. Listening to the tape was so much easier. Plus the reader does a terrific job of making it seem like Feynman himself is talking. A 5-star recording!
I listened to this tape on my daily commute, having just returned from a trip to Los Alamos the week before. Feynman worked there as a young graduate student and shares personal insights about Oppenheimer, Fuchs and the others on the tapes.
This set of tapes is a terrific collection of short pieces on everything from The Bomb to how his father whetted his interest in science as a child. A must-listen for anyone remotely intrigued by brilliant teachers, science, and/or raising children. Have I forgotten anyone?

While I greatly enjoyed 'Surely You're Joking Dr. Feyman..." this book leaves me unentertained. There are a number of insightful articles and some gems, but the best material is repeated from 'Surely you're joking...'. For the dedicated Feynman fan, this is must-have, but it's a poor intro: read another of this amazing man's works first!

This book is a hodge-podge of personal and professional reminiscenses and interviews. Feynmann tells stories about building the A-bomb, his Dad, teaching his children, curiosity, learning, "the big picture," and how he learned that different minds work differently. I enjoyed parts of the book, particularly the parts most related to the book's title, like how his Father taught him scientific curiosity.
It is obvious that a lot of people have respect for Feynman, and I don't doubt he earned it. But as a story-teller, while he is sometimes interesting, frankly a lot of the time he is rather incoherent. The interviews are especially inarticulate, fumbling for words. I guess you had to be there. Elsewhere, Feynman comes across as another famous scientist piddling in other fields in his spare time. As an educator he is interesting, though not always fully syntactical. What he teaches well is his own infectious enthusiasm for "finding things out." Like some other scientists who are not very familiar with other fields, he tends to depict that pleasure as an almost exclusively scientific one. But of course Confucius, Origen, and Augustine knew the same pleasure, as do we in the contemporary humanities. As a teacher myself, I agree that enthusiastic curiosity is itself the greatest lesson. Feynman communicates that well, among other things.
Feynman admits that "in a field that is so complicated that true science is not able to get anywhere, we have to rely on a kind of old-fashioned wisdom." It would be truer to say that science is one in a continuum of epistomological methods, from the most direct (and limited), like math, to "hard sciences" like physics and chemistry, to "soft sciences" (paleontology) and up through history to psychology and finally theology. Like many scientists, and antagonistic philosophers (Rorty), Feynman confuses epistomological "hardness" with rationality, in the sense of finding out what truly is, and being reasonably certain about it.
The odd thing about Feynman's excursions into other fields is that he admits, "I'm still a very one-sided person and don't know a great deal." His editors think he's just being modest, I guess.
Most of the time Feynman treats religion with formal respect (one gets the feeling he's been scolded before and doesn't want to pour oil on the fire). He is, in fact, rather ignorant on the subject, refuting silly heresies, and thinking he has got to the heart of the matter. At one point he compares the "Catholic religion in the Middle Ages" to Hitler and Stalin. I'm not Catholic, but in my opinion that reflects poorly on his understanding of the historical roots of science and democracy. For all Feynman's love of science, it's a pity he should be ignorant of where it came from.
That such a grab-bag of a book would inspire the loyalty that is revealed in reviews below, is something I have great sympathy for. But it also demonstrates what many observers have commented on, the priest-like status that scientists have attained in Western culture. Books like this make me mourn for the sins of modern thought: over-specialization, the cults of celebrity and science, and philosophical confusion about how we know things. The book did make me think about how to teach, however, and introduced me to an interesting scientist.
author, Jesus and the Religions of Man

I read a lot of Asimov non-fiction (essays, textbooks, etc.), so I figured this might be something similar. It's really not; Feynman is not a very good writer, and in any case much of this book is transcription from talks he has given. The talks are fascinating, but not particularly well-organized. On the other hand, the "appendix" piece (from the report on the Challenger disaster) is absolutely incredible. The content is straightforward, factual, and devastating. That piece alone is worth the price of the book.

I had a general impression of Feynman before reading this. I knew he was defiant, funny, brilliant, etc., but this collection of works, letter, and interviews featuring Richard Feynman really shows just how different and original this man was. I enjoyed reading words and ideas coming directly from the man himself, rather than being regurgitated by some biographer. Feynman is by no means a good writer, which he admits, but nevertheless he has important things to say. His perspectives on life, science, learning, and religion are worth hearing out.

This book was my first introduction to Feynman. Being an engineer, I find his deep dives into physics very interesting. However, the true gem here is his philosophy that keeps peeking out: doubt everything - test it for yourself; and have a child-like wonder of the universe. His sense of humor also jumps out and makes you laugh out loud. This book covers a wide range, from his early adventures to his later musings. I recommend it to anyone who is curious about how to find out for themselves how things work.

I bought this book because I was familiar with Feynman and his work with QED. It's a fantastic book that contains lectures and interviews about Feynman's childhood and work on the Manhattan Project, to the future of computer technology, as well as many more subjects. This man had an awesome life that anyone interested in math or science would aspire to. The book is interesting and easy to read. I'm in 11th grade and I can understand it, so anyone who is at all familiar with physics and has a decent mathematical background will do fine reading it.

Good book, but definitely has many overlaps with Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman. This book is basically an edited collection of unfinished works from Feynman that Cashman has edited and transcribed.

An entertaining firsthand account of a genius physicist in accessible language largely curated from a series of lectures you can probably 'hear' in your head if you've watched youtube clips of his lectures. A free spirit - an odd descriptor for a Nobel prize winning physicist.

Many of this collection of stories are very enjoyable, giving a personal view into the person behind the scientist. Unfortunately, some of them are rather disturbing, standing in stark contrast to other information we have about him (even from other stories in this very book). Among the worse pieces is the one titled "The Value of Science." In it Feynman says things like "I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy" and "scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty ... none absolutely certain". The commitment to REALITY of a scientist is one thing (among several) that makes a scientist better equipped to deal with nonscientific problems. And if scientists are not certain of anything, how can they be certain that they are uncertain? It is an oxymoron. Also, where is the pleasure in finding things out if nothing is really found out? Granted a scientist's commitment to reality means he is always open to new evidence, but this does not preclude certainty. Statements are made in a context, and they can be certain IN THAT CONTEXT. If there appears to be a discrepancy, the scientist will attempt to discover how the context has changed.

The other big disappointment is Feynman's apparent lack of knowledge or concern for Philosophy. While most philosophies support the kind of pseudo-science of which Feynman complains, there were some philosophers (notably Aristotle and Ayn Rand) who used reason exclusively and are therefore a major cornerstone of Science.

This book tells us lots of things: computer, science and physics. Do you know how small we can make a computer? Feyman tells you from a viwe of physics. Do you know science or just the difinitions? Check it with this book! The lectures on this book surely broadens your knowledge and gives you a new way to think everything in the world.

This book makes Feynman come alive in all his irreverant best,the man,his works,his brilliance,"Feynman-the rough cut",it all gells magically thru this wonderful book.Richard Feynman continues to be a tower of inspiration to millions worldwide.The best role model one can ever imagine.

Disappointing to say the least. The book at times is too technical and drags on and thus dosent engross as much as other feynmann books like surely you must..... Probably this is meant for a different audience. The challanger report is interesting though. Buy it only if you want to spend some evenings concentrating on what you are reading...

I found this book to be complicating as it jumped from subject to subject. It wasnt really that informative. It gave out the authors personal information and feelings rather than actual facts. I guess it was something that one with the same mind frame as him could relate to. I had to read this book for school. I got nothing out of it, except the ignorant and close minded thoughts of the author. The grammar was also terrribe. It wasnt written in a way that one could follow. I had to use my imagination to kind of figure out the authors feelings of whatever he was talking. It was written in a way as if he was actually talking to in person rather than through a book. But I do have to say that it was different. I guess if you are into and study science it is the book for you. But its not really a book to learn from. Instead its more like a book to say "Oh! I feel that way too." To conclude, I dont know what to say to those of you who are into science, but to those of you who do not have much of an interest in it i would reccomend that you choose another book.

Boy, yet another collection of incoherent musings by Feynman. Instead of being impressed, I am quite disgusted at this bundle of babble being sold as some profound truths uttered by a deep thinker. If there is one thing that's been elucidated by Feynman's nontechnical writings, it is the fact that outside of physics Feynman was a totally pedestrian individual. His thoughts on social and religious issues are no deeper than those of an average college kid. Yet with his "genius" label successfully marketed, in no small part by himself, he could ramble aimlessly about anything and the Feynman groupies would take it as gospel. Even on some technical issues, such as quantum computing and nano technology, his thoughts were really quite superficial, or sketchy, at best. Nonetheless, they have been billed as ideas of a "visionary." For those of you who aren't paying attention to the cult behavior among physicists, a side-benefit of being a visionary is that you don't actually have to think hard about the question of feasibility -- it's mundane task for the lesser men.

All in all, another ripoff from the Feynman cult industry.

Richard Feynman was a great physicist and a wonderful teacher. In another nice book THE BIBLE ACCORDING TO EINSTEIN, he is quoted as saying "The fact that I understand this rose -- the light reflected off its surface, how it is composed of cells, why it is red, the evolutionary origin of the bees' attraction to it, and so on -- these things do not in any way diminish my appreciation of its beauty. In fact, they enhance my ability to enjoy the rose." This says it all.