Choosing Reality, : A Buddhist View of Physics and the Mind

As both a physicist and a buddhist, this was the book I've spent years looking for. I must admit that I was turned off by the scary guy on the cover, and my previous readings of assorted new-age fluff. Make no mistake however, this book is rock solid. Dashing to bits our untenable "assumptions" of exactly what reality is (for the concept of reality itself is an idea), we develop a clearer picture of exactly what it means to be human. With a pertinent selection of quotes and ideas from the western world, Einstein, Poincare, Heisenberg, etc., we can clearly see how we have shaped our world from our worldview into what it has become. In the present age, we are the willing slaves of technology. Just as our cells don't know what we are doing, people spend their lives working to buy toys like cell phones and televisions, and have no idea how they work. Yet, because it is 'scientific', technological advancements are greatly praised and coveted. Meanwhile, intellectual, spiritual, and philosophical advancement is shunned as meaningless. This book deftly points out taking such a stance reflects complete ignorance, since scientific investigation of the mind or the physical world provides no further understanding of reality, just a better "understanding" of our own ideas. Are we to say we are more advanced than our ancestors because we can relieve ourselves indoors, whereas our ancestors didn't care? Our social advancement, which can be seen as that most critical for our own species, has been left in the dust, in lieu of technological advancement--that all too often poisons us and our planet. How is this the rational course of action? Although the first 9/10 of this book are right on track, I felt like the final portion, in its attempt to reach a resolution, a reconsciliation of western philosphy with Buddhist philosophy fell short. This may be the point. Wallace seems to want (or as the reader we want and assume that's where he's going) to pull us all out of the pit of buddhist emptiniess dug in the first 19 or so chapters. But, as Wallace points out, neither worldview is right, just 'more or less useful' in various contexts. There is no escape from our essential nature of emptiness and, like Descartes, by the end of the book the reader is left feeling like he can know nothing apart from his own 'existence'. But after having read the book, the reader of course realizes this is just an illusion, a particular spin on consciousness we decide to choose out of infinite number of possible interpretations, interpretations in turn all shaped by our cultures, mores, and environment, a.k.a 'reality'. Choosing Reality is a great book, and who knows how much you will gain by reading it.

Firstly, I must say that it is very difficult to summarize this book in any way. The complexity (and importance) of the material is such that there is no substitute for a direct, mindful read. However, if you are looking for a very worthwhile attempt at summarization, I suggest you read the review by ABC "bb" (I was persuaded to purchase by this review).Many reviewers have commented that "Choosing Reality" is an "easy read". While I do agree to an extent, it seems necessary to note that these comments are true only in relation to other books of the same nature. Considering the complexity of the subject matter, yes, this book is an easy read. In comparison to most literature, however, this "easy read" statement is perhaps less plausable. My point is this: do not expect this book to be simple (firstly, because it isn't; secondly, because it shouldn't be). This is of double importance if the reader is of a traditional, Western mindset. The content of "Choosing Reality" (especially the latter chapters) takes time to fully absorb. In fact, this book was, for me, the anti-thesis of a 'quick read'. That said, I must say that I enjoyed every long minute of it.Wallace does a wonderful job showing the flaws in scientific realism and instrumentalism, chronicaling the histories and the theories of each. He then thoroughly explains the comprimise, the middle way, the Buddhist way: a centrist view of reality. While the presentation of the centrist view was invaluable in its own right, the most enjoyable sections of the book came after this presentation. Wallace undertakes the very difficult task of using language to describe how the centrist view can be applied to our lives. Rather than just offering a theory, he describes how the centrist view deals with the mind, the nature of "physical reality", and the illusory "self". The author earnestly argues that the implications of the centrist view are real; implications that will certainly force you to re-evaluate the world you live in. The beauty of this book is that it caters to any audience. There is enough science to make it rational and reasonable; there is enough Buddhism to make it real and applicable. I consider this book of utmost importance to anyone interested in modern physics, Buddhism, the nature of reality, and/or the self.Finally, I must note that as much as this book is a religious view of science, it is equally (albeit more subtly) a scientific view of religion. As perhaps Wallace's greatest triumph in this book, modern science and religion are shown to be infinintely complimentary, both ultimately striving to understand the same things: the nature of reality and our role in it. To this end, "Choosing Reality" is a must read.

This is really two books, and the first part -- a review and analysis at a detailed and thorough level -- of the limits and uncertainties of what science knows and what it can know. I've always asked myself, how can we be so certain that stars are a certain distance away, or a red shift shifts so much, without making the huge assumption that time and space are uniform throughout the space in question? When popular physics areticles talk about new particles or string theory, are these observed phenomena, or just inferences from fancy schmancy math that may or may not have any correlation with reality? Wallace asks and addresses these questions and more in insightful, balanced and illuminating ways.The second half of the book is less satisfying. Wallace discusses at length the Buddhist notion of emptiness of all things, which (although I follow Buddhism falteringly as a tool to peace of mind) I don't buy. I'm no more persuaded now than I was before.This book is a great antidote for the pseudomysticism wherein works like "What the Bleep Do We Know?" oversimplify and link quantum physics to spirituality in a shallow, bumper sticker way. It also has a great, bonus discussion of "Meditation for Dummies".Wallace is a truly fair, balanced and encyclopedically brilliant writer. He manifests the humility of a Buddhist monk, because anybody else this smart and well schooled would have ego oozing out every page and would be shoving pet theories down your throat.

This is a clearly written book about the most fascinating of topics - the nature of reality and the nature of mind.As we all know, the scientific outlook is that reality is entirely physical. The universe operates through the laws of cause and effect. The human brain is a physical object so it must follow that our minds, our feelings, our consciousness have to be ultimately physical too. Subjectivity itself is unimportant - something to be eliminated from serious study, not studied in itself. Even in Psychology - that subject that investigates 'the mind', went through a stage of ignoring or discounting subjectivity as irrelevant. This just didn't work. It looks like it doesn't work in the study of the quantum world either. We cannot leave consciousness and subjectivity out of the equation. Consciousness appears to be essential for reality. Everyone has heard of the 'if a tree falls down in a forest and there's no-one to hear it, does it make a sound?'idea. There's no sound without an experiencer, so there's no sound if no-one hears it. Likewise, there's no reality without consciousness. Our concepts seem to create reality.The author explores these fascinating philosophical ideas and makes the case that the joining of science and Buddhism would allow a better grasp of the 'bigger picture'. Between the extremes of pure materialism, where mind is seen as irrelevant and the opposite view of idealism, where reality is purely mental, the Buddhist 'centrist' position states that mind and matter are co-dependent. Importantly, this is only at a conventional level. Through meditation, this can be transcended to see the ultimate reality of emptiness, where there can be no distinction between mind and matter.Most of the book had me excited. Always suspicious of scientific explanations of consciousness, I have always felt that Buddhism was on to something. It was great to read the views of a trained physicist AND Buddhist. But here comes the BUT...For all the fascinating and logical discussion, a few things grated.On page 185, the author discusses how people can be re-born as animals or as non-human forms on other planets. My sceptical nature turns back to why scientists have tried to banish subjectivity from their investigations. This sort of stuff is hard to swallow - maybe because of the time and culture that I find myself in. Maybe such views are credible, but so too might the idea of gnomes, fairies, UFO's, Unicorns etc. Subjectivity bristles with the weird and wonderful. Reliable knowledge cannot be contaminated by wild imaginings.In the discussion of Buddhist practice, the author mentions that "Food is eaten with the attitude of taking medicine. It is for the benefit of the body, to maintain one's health for the sake of spiritual practice.." p202. Okay, it's bad to eat too much and to eat 'bad' food, but really, what is so wrong about enjoying food? What has this sort of puritan stance got to do with finding the ultimate truth about reality and the mind? What has lunch got to do with it? Buddhism has some great ideas but it also has its primitive rituals and religious outlook. Is science ready to get in to bed with Buddhism? I think they should just be friends for a while and see how it develops...