BOOK REVIEWS || JOURNAL OF CREATION 28(1) 2014 David Deutsch’s strange reality whole of physical reality”, in his The Beginning of Infinity: view.5 Explanations that Transform Born in Israel in 1953, Deutsch now the World lives in the village of Headington, David Deutsch near Oxford, once the home of J.R.R. Viking, New York, 2011 Tolkien, creator of the fictional ‘universe’ of Middle Earth.6 While I’m sure that Middle Earth at times Jim Melnick felt real to Tolkien and to many millions of us who have loved The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, xford theoretical physicist Tolkien certainly didn’t believe that David Deutsch is best known O what flowed from his pen actually as ‘the father of quantum computing’. existed somewhere in reality. But for But quantum computing for Deutsch supposedly don’t see into these other David Deutsch, multiple and parallel is just a way station for something universes because the quantum- universes are very real indeed, and more significant—his quest for based interference that would the strangest things imaginable exist “a new and deeper and better way to otherwise occur or be visible to us is somewhere in this extended reality.7 understand the laws of physics, and suppressed. This occurs because of hence understanding physical reality our size and complexity as ‘objects’ as a whole”. 1 He also contends that Deutsch—we are all in this universe (p. 293). “a successful implementation of a ‘multiversal objects’ This conclusion about reality does not sit well with New York Times quantum computer would constitute Deutsch’s 2011 book, The reviewer David Albert, who is both incontrovertible evidence” for Beginning of Infinity: Explanations 2 a philosophy professor at Columbia parallel universes. that Transform the World, builds Jim Holt, author of Why Does on his aforementioned 1997 work, University and holds a doctorate in the World Exist?, considers Deutsch The Fabric of Reality: The Science theoretical physics. Albert branded “one of the most daring and of Parallel Universes and Its Deutsch’s multiverse views— 3 versatile thinkers alive”. Physicist Implications. According to “classical developed from Hugh Everett’s 1957 10 Lee Smolin contends that “There (pre-quantum) physics”, he says, “the ‘Many Worlds’ thesis —as “simply, is no more foundational thinker world was thought to consist of only wildly wrong”. Otherwise, Albert than Deutsch; he was motivated to one universe”. But those days are now largely praised The Beginning of invent quantum computers by his gone, according to Deutsch. “It is Infinityas “a brilliant and exhilarating 11 disquiet with foundational problems time”, he says, “to sever that last link and profoundly eccentric book”. in both mathematics and quantum with the classical, single-universe But there was much that Albert theory.” Smolin adds that Deutsch’s conception of reality”.8 Otherwise, did not cover in his review that is originality and clarity as a thinker we are just ‘clingers’—those who of interest to the creationist and ID “can be seen in his provocative ‘cling’ to the single universe view.9 communities. [first] book, The Fabric of Reality, According to Deutsch, “every atom in which he elaborates on his many- in an everyday object is a multiversal A Dawkins disciple; views on worlds theories. I disagree with object”. What this means is that creationism much of what he writes, but I loved “Whenever we observe anything it.” 4 Deutsch believes in multiple … what we are actually seeing is Deutsch is an arch-disciple of universes, or the multiverse. Our a single-universe perspective on a Richard Dawkins.12 While he appears universe is “just a tiny facet of the larger object that extends some way to lack Dawkins’ vitriol against into other universes” (p. 302). We theistic religion, he doesn’t seem 39 JOURNAL OF CREATION 28(1) 2014 || BOOK REVIEWS to have the slightest patience with While largely being devoid of personal preference: “most insist that alternative Darwinian theories, rancor toward creationism, Deutsch there is no such thing as one object such as the Gould–Eldredge theory also puts forward the most ridiculous being objectively more beautiful of punctuated equilibrium.13 He and dishonest straw man when than another”, but he disagrees, is also completely dismissive of comparing alleged creationist views asserting that, indeed, “There are many other concepts, such as the denying the existence of dinosaurs objective truths in aesthetics”.24 “Copenhagen interpretation” of with scientists who deny the reported Objective knowledge, on the other quantum mechanics.14 ‘evidence’ of parallel universes. In hand, he says is “hard to come by, Deutsch’s devotion to Dawkins 15 an interview about this book, he but attainable” (p. 226). Deutsch was already evident in The Fabric of compares “creationists who say … asserts that mathematics is “the study Reality, where he wrote that “the way [regarding] fossils, [that] no one’s of absolutely necessary truths”. Or, in which punctuated equilibrium and ever seen a dinosaur” with those who put another way, he says that “the other variant evolutionary scenarios would say that “no one’s ever seen truths that mathematics studies are 25 have been presented”, as if they parallel universes; all we have is the absolutely certain”. seek to provide a solution to “some circumstantial evidence of fossils Given the relativism of much of allegedly overlooked problem in the and the interpretation of fossils as our culture, these are extraordinary 19 prevailing evolutionary theory”, being the remains of dinosaurs” (!). statements. Deutsch qualifies that this merely “reveals the extent to which That he can’t name any creationist “does not mean that our knowledge the explanatory power of Dawkins’ writer who believes such an absurdity of those necessary truths is itself theory has yet to be assimilated”.16 doesn’t seem to matter. certain”. So, we therefore have ‘absolutely Amazing devotion as well as necessary truths’, but mankind falls chutzpah! “Deep truth is often beautiful” short of understanding them per- Nevertheless, Deutsch’s as- Deutsch’s views on what is ‘truth’ fectly! Whether Deutsch has realized sessments of creation (a ‘bad are fascinating. “It is a fact”, he it or not, with these statements he has explanation’, he calls it) contain writes, “often mentioned but seldom nearly expressed two key elements far less rancor than what one might explained— that deep truth is often of biblical truth—first, that there is expect from a Dawkins disciple. beautiful” (p. 355). He cites physicist such a thing as Absolute Truth, and, Deutsch is simply matter-of-fact John Archibald Wheeler’s famous second, that we apprehend such truth in his dismissiveness: “it was once comment in 1986 that “Behind it all imperfectly because all our means thought that living things must have is surely an idea so simple, so of apprehension are themselves im- been designed by a supernatural beautiful, that when we grasp it … perfect: “For now we see through a person”, but “now we know that we will all say to each other, how glass darkly but then face to face …” living things, including humans could it have been otherwise?” 20 This (1 Corinthians 13:12). … were not designed by anyone” is similar to the notion expressed by (p. 43). Deutsch then posits the many physicists, including outspoken 17 Anthropic reasoning, negative theodicy that “the atheist Steven Weinberg,21 co-winner Leonard Susskind, Popper biosphere is much less pleasant for of the 1979 Nobel Prize in physics, and the ‘Popperazzi’ its inhabitants than anything that a that “in any case, we would not benevolent, or even halfway decent, accept any theory as final unless it Some Darwinists, such as physicist human designer would design”. He were beautiful”.22 Weinberg is not Leonard Susskind, have resorted to believes that the “prospect of the alone in this sentiment.23 anthropic reasoning to try to explain unlimited creation of knowledge in Contrary to contemporary rela- away the problem of extreme fine- the future” will eventually make “a tivists and many post-modernists, tuning in our universe.26 Deutsch supposed designer of our biosphere Deutsch believes that “there is such partially rejects some anthropic … seem not only morally deficient, a thing as objective beauty”. In a reasoning. He says that but intellectually unremarkable” fictional conversation with Socrates “… there is something special— (pp. 80–81).18 Of course, for one in The Beginning of Infinity, Deutsch infinitely special, it seems— thing, like many critics of Intelligent has Socrates say: “there is only one about the laws of physics as we Design (and to be fair, like much of truth of any given matter” (p. 231). actually find them, something the Intelligent Design movement), Deutsch also critiques the notion exceptionally computation- Deutsch ignores the Fall. that everything is just a matter of friendly, prediction-friendly and 40 BOOK REVIEWS || JOURNAL OF CREATION 28(1) 2014 explanation-friendly … anthropic believes. Problems only indicate that this view as being “irreparably arguments alone cannot explain “our knowledge must be flawed or parochial and mistaken” (p. 76). it” (p. 189). 27 inadequate” (p. 18). This is a remarkable conclusion by Deutsch admits that Before us is an ‘infinity’ of oppor- an atheist Darwinian. “… while anthropic reasoning may tunities and choices, much like a From Deutsch’s perspective, we well be part of the explanation for secular restatement of Deuter- are not just an insignificant little apparent fine-tuning, it can never onomy 30:19: “… I have set before world of beings without any purpose be the whole explanation for why you life and death, blessing and in an insignificant little corner of an we observe something that would cursing: therefore choose life …”. unremarkable galaxy: otherwise look too purposeful Deutsch closes his book with these “… people are the most significant to be explicable as coincidence words: “All we can choose is whether entities in the cosmic scheme of [emphasis added]” (p.