Scan barcode
djbeyers75's review against another edition
4.0
Like all books, there are good and bad things one can say about this book. First the good.
Rabbi Sacks writes very well. He is both eloquent and accessible. Aside from his writing style, Sacks also presents some rather striking points within his book regarding the relationship between science and religion. I admire his commitment to demonstrating the mutual relationship the two can share. Although not the first writer to present this idea, Sacks emphasizes the different ways these two strands of human thought approach often the same reality. Science has one way of perceiving things, and religion another. According to Sacks, we need both. This can be a helpful reminder not only for scientists, for whom it seems Sacks is writing for, but also the increasing number of religious fundamentalists who seemingly shudder every time someone suggests the plausibility that science may actually be right.
Where I found Sacks book not to be appealing was largely in part due to his endless repetition of a handful of points. If you read the first fifty pages of the book, you will more than likely know what the entire book is about. Sacks just repeats his theme. Moreover, I found the latter half of the book to be somewhat of a religious sermon, a reminder to those of us in the secular world, the many reasons why religion and faith are essential to our well-being. While certainly many of his points would be praised by religious thinkers, I question if they will hold with others. Which, I must confess, is a bit disappointing to me, a person who deeply values his religious tradition. I kept thinking to the end of the book that theologians and religious scholars certainly can do better in emphasizing the importance of religion in contemporary society.
Rabbi Sacks writes very well. He is both eloquent and accessible. Aside from his writing style, Sacks also presents some rather striking points within his book regarding the relationship between science and religion. I admire his commitment to demonstrating the mutual relationship the two can share. Although not the first writer to present this idea, Sacks emphasizes the different ways these two strands of human thought approach often the same reality. Science has one way of perceiving things, and religion another. According to Sacks, we need both. This can be a helpful reminder not only for scientists, for whom it seems Sacks is writing for, but also the increasing number of religious fundamentalists who seemingly shudder every time someone suggests the plausibility that science may actually be right.
Where I found Sacks book not to be appealing was largely in part due to his endless repetition of a handful of points. If you read the first fifty pages of the book, you will more than likely know what the entire book is about. Sacks just repeats his theme. Moreover, I found the latter half of the book to be somewhat of a religious sermon, a reminder to those of us in the secular world, the many reasons why religion and faith are essential to our well-being. While certainly many of his points would be praised by religious thinkers, I question if they will hold with others. Which, I must confess, is a bit disappointing to me, a person who deeply values his religious tradition. I kept thinking to the end of the book that theologians and religious scholars certainly can do better in emphasizing the importance of religion in contemporary society.
and_opossum's review
2.5
While I really wanted to like this book, and agree with the thesis and ideas Sacks is trying to argue for, I ultimately found this book too frustrating to rate highly or finish despite trying for weeks.
Sacks' ultimate failure is that he is trying to use science to make points without understanding it. Coming to this book from a scientific understanding of any topics that he addressees will make this rapidly clear. In the fields where I have scientific education it was easy to see that he found one study or idea that supported his point and either took it out of context or tortured it to death in order to make it fit the thesis of the book. I sent a few excerpts to other friends who have expertise in other fields when chapters did not pass the 'sniff test' and they confirmed that these chapters had the same issues.
Additionally, especially in the chapters that address biology and linguistics, there are some bizarrely outdated and offensive ideas about both gender and race, including positive representation of linguistic theories that are not only disproven but blatantly racist against east asian populations. Having read other books by Sacks and thinking of him as a progressive figure this was shocking to read.
While The Great Partnership set out to do great things - and I even agree with many of its big ideas - the paths it takes to get there are ultimately too misinformed and based on poor understandings of science for me to recommend it, which honestly makes me quite sad.
Sacks' ultimate failure is that he is trying to use science to make points without understanding it. Coming to this book from a scientific understanding of any topics that he addressees will make this rapidly clear. In the fields where I have scientific education it was easy to see that he found one study or idea that supported his point and either took it out of context or tortured it to death in order to make it fit the thesis of the book. I sent a few excerpts to other friends who have expertise in other fields when chapters did not pass the 'sniff test' and they confirmed that these chapters had the same issues.
Additionally, especially in the chapters that address biology and linguistics, there are some bizarrely outdated and offensive ideas about both gender and race, including positive representation of linguistic theories that are not only disproven but blatantly racist against east asian populations. Having read other books by Sacks and thinking of him as a progressive figure this was shocking to read.
While The Great Partnership set out to do great things - and I even agree with many of its big ideas - the paths it takes to get there are ultimately too misinformed and based on poor understandings of science for me to recommend it, which honestly makes me quite sad.
dbg108's review against another edition
4.0
Rabbi Sacks admits to using extremes in contrasts, and sometimes he generalizes or oversimplifies really complex dynamics within religions. Nonetheless, this book is a wise and lovely guide to receiving and claiming faith in our modern world.
steds's review against another edition
3.0
good 'beach' level read on the topic. some theo/phil missteps, interesting opinions.
liliepaddy's review against another edition
Really interesting and beautifully written and compelling. I don't think he completely addresses the questions he claims he will, and I am not persuaded by his argument that religion is absolutely necessary for moral life. The whole right brain/left brain thing also feels like a slightly flimsy metaphor. And of course, he oversimplifies a lot of the issues he mentions- Marxism, most notably- in his quest to make his point. But he raises some interesting points and the overall theme is one of love.
steveinadelaide's review against another edition
5.0
This is a brilliant discourse on the relationship between science, faith, and religion. It should be read by three groups of people: 1) religious fundamentalists who have rejected science; 2) secular fundamentalists who have rejected religion; and 3) everyone in between.
The author, Jonathan Sacks, Baron Sacks, Kt is the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth. His Hebrew name is Yaakov Zvi.
In THE GREAT PARTNERSHIP Sacks rejects the extremism of both religious and secular fundamentalists who wish to but an unbreachable barrier between religion and science. And unlike Stephen J Gould's suggestion that religion and science should be kept separate, Sacks argues for a complementarity (a partnership) between them.
This book is one of the most clearly articulated discussions on why both science and religion are necessary to maintain a full humanity and the way in which both need each other to avoid extremism. My finger was almost worn out with all the highlighting I was song on my Kindle. Sacks is very, very widely read, a deep thinker, and yet writes in a beautiful, easy-to-read narrative style making profound and memorable statements simply.
His essential point is that science takes things apart to see how they work. Religion puts things together to see what they mean. The idea is simple but extremists on both ends of the alleged science vs religion divide have burdened this idea with some very destructive unhealthy nonsense. Sacks is gently critical of both religious and secular fundamentalists appealing for a respectful conversation which, all too often, neither side are willing to engage in.
I can't speak highly enough of this book. It's one of the best I've read for ages. In fact, I nearly didn't read it, thinking that there can't be much more to say on the topic given the myriad books and debates on the topic. But I took the plunge and was incredibly rewarded. If you have any issues regarding the relationship between religion and science - whether you are an atheist or a “believer” - don't miss this brilliant, thought provoking read. It's easily digested meat for the mind!
The author, Jonathan Sacks, Baron Sacks, Kt is the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth. His Hebrew name is Yaakov Zvi.
In THE GREAT PARTNERSHIP Sacks rejects the extremism of both religious and secular fundamentalists who wish to but an unbreachable barrier between religion and science. And unlike Stephen J Gould's suggestion that religion and science should be kept separate, Sacks argues for a complementarity (a partnership) between them.
This book is one of the most clearly articulated discussions on why both science and religion are necessary to maintain a full humanity and the way in which both need each other to avoid extremism. My finger was almost worn out with all the highlighting I was song on my Kindle. Sacks is very, very widely read, a deep thinker, and yet writes in a beautiful, easy-to-read narrative style making profound and memorable statements simply.
His essential point is that science takes things apart to see how they work. Religion puts things together to see what they mean. The idea is simple but extremists on both ends of the alleged science vs religion divide have burdened this idea with some very destructive unhealthy nonsense. Sacks is gently critical of both religious and secular fundamentalists appealing for a respectful conversation which, all too often, neither side are willing to engage in.
I can't speak highly enough of this book. It's one of the best I've read for ages. In fact, I nearly didn't read it, thinking that there can't be much more to say on the topic given the myriad books and debates on the topic. But I took the plunge and was incredibly rewarded. If you have any issues regarding the relationship between religion and science - whether you are an atheist or a “believer” - don't miss this brilliant, thought provoking read. It's easily digested meat for the mind!
christine_sunderland's review against another edition
4.0
While detailed and profound, a good treatise on the relationship between faith and reason, religion and science, and why they should not be considered at odds with one another, but supporting one another. These things need to be said, and said with passion, conviction, and knowledge. Rabbi Sacks does all of these things and more.
megaden's review against another edition
2.0
The ideas behind the book were really interesting. Unfortunately, the author rehashed the same couple thoughts over and over. I quit halfway through.
guiltyfeat's review
4.0
My brother was so worried about me reading my first Richard Dawkins a couple of weeks ago that he bought me this as a present. It's the perfect counterpoint. Rabbi Sacks makes a very strong case for the co-existence of religion and science and how each one offers us something different but vital. Brim full of great anecdotes and wisdom both secular and divine, this was a gentle, non-confrontational read. That approach alone puts it ahead of Dawkins's slightly more belligerent framing.
More...