1. i have read this book and enjoyed it, but i do have some criticisms. although the conclusions of the books are correct as far as i can tell, i’m not sure how useful the information provided actually is in helping people to *see* that the conclusions are correct. my main beef is that chapters 2 & 3 are a) very conceptual and b) second hand knowledge. i can’t really know if brian greene’s block universe model is correct – i’m not a theoretical physicist. am i supposed to just take someone else’s words on faith? i really don’t think that approach will get the job done in driving the message home. chapter 1 is the best IMO as it involves some direct 1st person inquiry and i think if this is seen, it has to be seen for yourself. a scientific theory, even one that’s 100% right, doesn’t cut it if you can’t check it out thoroughly to your own satisfaction. just my 2c.

    1. HI TJ. Thanks for reading the book and for the comments. Fair points and I agree – it has to be seen for yourself. I guess this book is written for people who accept the outputs of the scientific community, not for people who need to “check it out” for themselves.

      However, the book is really just an attempt to get people to start questioning their concepts of who and what they are. Once you start questioning, it’s then a matter of “seeing for yourself” that you aren’t the individual entity with free will that you always assumed. I really don’t want anyone to take anything Brian Greene says (or I say) on faith. Just to start examining their own beliefs.

      And whether or not Brian Greene is correct, I’m sure pretty much everybody accepts that everything is made of atoms and that atoms obey the laws of physics – we don’t need to be theoretical physicists to believe this to be true. If what I am made out of is entirely atoms that obey the laws of physics 100% of the time, then there is no room for free will and every single thing that happens in life is the result of natural laws.