Great premise, terrible execution.Calculating God proposes the question "what if we make contact with aliens and discover that they are not rationalist-atheist scientists, but true believers?" It's a provocative opening and challenge to science fiction in general, which is often though not always written by rationalist, atheist authors who assume their readers and their imagined futures will share those values. The problem is that Calculating God isn't a very good book on any level. The majority of its pages take the form of a dialogue between Hollus, an alien Forhilnor, and Thomas Jericho, an aging, cancer-stricken paleontologist at the Royal Ontario Museum. The aliens have come to Earth to conduct research, having determined that mass extinctions have occurred at the same points in the histories of three different inhabited worlds. Hence, they wish to speak with a paleontologist and not with the United Nations.Sawyer's dialogue follows more the pattern of Galileo than that of Plato. It's a dialogue between straw men in which the hand of the creator (ironic, that) is never absent. There is no depth to the theology he places in his characters' mouths, which varies between absent-God Deism and a strange sort of scientist-theology of a God who intervenes only at cosmic scales. His science is equally poor: the aliens' proof of the existence of God is based on the anthropic principle, the well-known claim that the universe's structure and parameters have been "fine-tuned" to allow the existence of life. The anthropic principle is hardly new ground. Sawyer's aliens turn it into a "proof" of the existence of God via their discovery (but not explication!) of a Grand Unified Theory which conveniently shows that the "multiverse" answer to the principle — that ours is one of a multitude of universes with different physical constants — isn't true. The other major response, that the apparent fine-tuning is the result of an underlying order yet to be discovered, is mentioned but glossed over. Since the only remaining explanation is that (a) God intervened, say the aliens, clearly God exists. Unfortunately for Sawyer and his aliens, that isn't how scientific proofs work. (It's also not how Occam's Razor, which the author repeatedly has characters invoke incorrectly, works). Proof by elimination must be coupled with a proof of the extent of the field — i.e., demonstration that an enumerated set of possible solutions is exhaustive — and with rigorous definitions. The ridiculous "proof" presented in Calculating God manages to insult science and religion. (This kind of deeply flawed reasoning is present throughout the book. Found an abandoned planet? Clearly, the vanished civilization uploaded themselves into a computer, says our protagonist. "Oh. Clearly. Why didn't I think of that eminently and indisputably a-priori correct explanation?" says the alien, and proceeds).So the majority of the book is consumed in this very silly discussion, together with personal reflection and reminiscence from the dying protagonist. Then — surprise! — a couple of even sillier things happen. First, there's a ludicrous subplot featuring fundamentalist American terrorists destroying "lying" fossils, at the Royal Ontario Museum of all places. It's almost farcical, except that the author seems to be taking it seriously. Secondly...(view spoiler)[ there's a supernova. Yes, Betelgeuse picks this moment to explode and threaten to wipe out all intelligent life in the surrounding systems, etc, etc. Except! A giant black cloak appears and swallows the inchoate supernova whole. Clearly, everyone concludes, that must be God. The God who fine-tunes the universe for life, leaves, and then pops up to alternately cause mass extinctions and eat supernovae. Jericho makes a not-very-wrenching decision to leave his family and go talk to the God-cloak with the aliens and... finis. (hide spoiler)]
Usually, if I sense an alien coming, I run. In movies or books, anyway. Beasties with six legs and eyes on wands, flying saucers and such... not my thing. But good writing, in any genre, is always my thing. There is so much to learn and understand in solid reality that I wish no escapism, the latter wasting precious real time for matters of value and substance ... but when science fiction keeps enough of its six legs firmly planted in issues we face in substantiated reality, even as it waves its eye wands into the unknown ... then my interest is won. Robert J. Sawyer is a familiar name to me, even without being a sci fi fan. The title, "Calculating God," locked into my lifelong fascination with the spiritual realm. I was intrigued to know how a sci fi writer of acclaim would approach the concept of God, that is, faith, grounded in a world of science, however speculative: he does it well and convincingly. Hollus, aforementioned six-legged alien with waving eye wands, comes to Earth to research, well, life itself. And all that the concept of life and living encompasses. She enters a museum to find a paleontologist, thus meeting Tom Jericho, scientist who is facing the afterlife, like it or not, as a newly diagnosed cancer patient. The two have an ongoing dialogue about God and faith, which pretty much sums up the entire premise of this story, with few sidelines. Surprise! For it is the alien who believes in God, the human being who so mightily resists, even as he contemplates his fast approaching mortality. I could complain that various scenes and plot twists in this book leave me unconvinced. I have a hard time buying the idea that people would accept so quickly and easily, almost to the point of being oblivious, an alien moving so casually among them, even if mostly in hologram form. The vandalism in the museum by religious fundamentalists is on shaky ground, potentially unnecessary, but with more solid plotting, might have been developed into a fascinating tangent of exploring religious fervor when it goes too far. Sawyer missed his mark here for what might have added a fine nuance to the story. Yet, regardless, I found myself recommending this book to others even before I had finished it. Several times, the author brings out points in this dialogue on faith that made me "a-ha!" aloud in my reading, wondering, why had I never thought of that? He makes arguments, via Hollus, favoring the idea of intelligent design, that for all the proven evolution of one species over time in a myriad of ways and forms, never has science shown one species evolving into another species. A dog can, over time, become a great many other breeds of dog, but he will never become a bird. And this, after all, is the premise on which the idea of evolution is, must be, built. Cell becomes fish becomes reptile becomes primate becomes man... you know the lineage. Science has gaps in this area, requiring faith. What Sawyer so masterfully brings to light in this story is that it is science that requires many leaps of faith ... *not* believing in God. Perhaps, in fact, much more so. With his alien voice, in various examinations of one scientific premise after another, he argues that God is rooted in science, that is, well substantiated in many forms of solid evidence, while the [godless] science we accept in the contemporary world is actually standing on the clay feet of irrational faith. Fascinating. The literary value of this book, in terms of style and form, for me, is on the weak side. Its value as invitation for lively discussion, its courageous groundbreaking of the usual storylines of more typical sci fi fare, deserves high praise. Science fiction fan or not -- recommended reading.
What do You think about Calculating God (2001)?
I’m not rating this book, because it’s a BIG FAT DID NOT FINISH for me.This book is very reminiscent of the Three Dialogues of Hylas and Philonous to me. And, if you don’t know what that piece of literature is, than you aren’t a philosophy student, and you are probably making more money than me, and are making a plethora of other, better life choices. Congratulations. Any ways, I also have a History and a Classics Major, and I do stand by those, but I digress. The point being, this is a book where largely you have two heads, pretty static in any given scene, arguing the philosophies of science and religion. Normally I would be totally fine with that, but this book isn’t presenting any knowledge or arguments that I haven’t already heard. Understandably, it’s hard for an author to create with believable science that proves God, he wants it to be realistic, and he wants it to be accurate…. But that leaves the reader with a lot of information they’ve already come across if they’ve really thought about these things before.So let me be frank. I believe in God because I chose (actively, on purpose, with thought) to believe in God. For a while, I didn’t, but I didn’t like the reality, and decided I wanted to believe in a Creator. I also adamantly believe in Science. I believe that God purposely created the Universe not in whimsical mysterious ways, but scientifically and logically, because like any good parent, God wants us to grow up and understand how things work. In the end, because of that, and because I had looked into these things before, I found the book to be monotonous and boring. I can absolutely see how this book would be of interest to people. I personally, could not connect with the narrator at all, nor in the end, was I particularly interested in the story.
—Becky
4.5 stars. Most of this book is a solid 5 star effort that I thought was incredibly well done. The central plot involves a representative from a highly advanced alien culture arriving on Earth to review our fossil records and demonstrating to an atheist anthropologist actual proof of the existence of God. It is a well written, deftly plotted and extremely clever spin on the "intelligent design" theory and was a lot of fun to read. The story loses one star (or at least a half star) for a very clunky tacked on subplot involving "right wing" religious fanatics. It played no useful part of the story and I got the feeling that the author included it only to make sure that readers didn't think he was advocating a "creationist" point of view. It was completely unnecessary and distracted me from the main story which was so very engaging. Still, the subplot was not a huge part of the book and is easily skipped over so as not to significantly take away from the rest of the book which an absolute GEM. If you have never read Robert Sawyer, this is a great place to start. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!Nominee: Hugo Award for Best Science Fiction Novel (2001)Nominee: John W. Campbell Award for Best Science Fiction Novel (2001)
—Stephen
While it is true that science and religion often seem at odds in western culture, I have often experience much joy in science fiction genre that boldly deals with religious and philosophical thought. To illustrate I've posted a link to one of my favorite list on Goodreads.http://www.goodreads.com/list/show/36...Calculating God achieves near perfection in this area. Regardless of your worldview, you will appreciate the depth of thought in this entertaining story about an alien scientist, who is a theist and the growing friendship with a human scientist atheist. The story is as entertaining as it is thought provoking. Even though this is one of my all time favorite subject in science fiction (aliens and religion) I put off reading this, because I thought it would be a dry read. It turns out I was wrong. Robert Sawyer has created characters that come to life (both human and alien alike) and has told an engaging tale of discovery.I've got to say something about the aliens without giving anything away. The ideal alien (IMHO) has to maintain a careful dynamic in science fiction. They need to be strange, something totally different, to which we have difficulty understanding. At the same time, we need to be able to relate to them on some inner level, weather they are good or bad aliens. He so nails this! The way he shows the effects of evolution on different life forms, from different star systems and how and why they turned out like they did is ingenious. Ok a little bit more about the religion / science thing. This story allows both science and religion to be true to their mutual foundational goal, which is the pursuit of truth. The scientific discussion between human and alien absolutely delighted me.The book is not just dialogue, there is an exciting plot that builds through out the book to a very satisfying conclusion. Didn't care to much for one of the subplots, but found it only a minor nuisance.If you don't mind having your core beliefs challenged ( whichever side of the fence you may find yourself on and in the nicest way possible). If you enjoy character driven stories. If you like a little hard science, made easy and mixed in with some great fictional story telling. You'll enjoy this book.
—Banner
