But What If We're Wrong?

 By Chuck Klosterman

This book took me a few months to complete. As is the nature of nonfiction, it is acceptable to pause and reflect as needed. (I also deem it acceptable to jump between chapters in nonfiction though do not typically practice such a method.) 

The first few chapters of this book really changed my mentality and brought me great joy. We (the readers across the world) learned about how scientists are able to predict where a planet should be with extensive math, and then visually find it. This idea is revolutionary because for centuries humans have been viewing the planets/stars visually, and then trying to map. This reversal of methodology is the crux of the book. The whole premise is to try and view the present moment as the past and essentially rewrite how we understand the world. We also discussed (I read Klosterman's words) the idea of gravity. He presented an interesting argument where we really don't understand what gravity is. Sure, we know the effect it has in the universe, but we do not truly know what it is. Reading this section caused me great pause. I had just taken my physics 2 course and felt good about my understanding of the universe and how forces worked. And here is an author with little to no ethos on the matter of physics and gravity and science academia, telling me we do not know what gravity is. Sure. It did benefit the argument that there were many great scientists called upon to assist in convincing the skeptical reader. The author did not give up. He presented the topic in enough ways and with enough analogies that I am convinced. He knew this would be an uphill battle, as most of the people who would buy a nonfiction book with such an odd concept would be considering their own understandings heavily. For his persistence, I owe Mr. Klosterman a round of applause. 

As the chapters continued, I felt less and less that we were discussing new ideas. We talked about tv shows and how they would lead to perceptions of life in this era for the future historians. We talked of politics and how the views of each president ebbs and flows with the passing of time and general popular opinions.  (That part did give me hesitation for the accuracy of former judgements upon politicians.) I also wish there was a little bit less information about the authors personal beliefs and more unbiased, bigger picture thinking. But generally there were less mind altering concepts in the back half of the book. 

If you're in need of a perception alteration for how you view the world, or are simply bored of your current  mental state, try it out. I would love to hear your thoughts on how we are setting up future historians. 

Happy Reading, Bookworms