Scrape wikipedia-science: 346 new, 4 updated, 368 total (kb-cron)

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_New_Kind_of_Science-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+---
+title: "A New Kind of Science"
+chunk: 1/4
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_New_Kind_of_Science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:29.444242+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+A New Kind of Science is a book by Stephen Wolfram, published by his company Wolfram Research under the imprint Wolfram Media in 2002. Wolfram explores how rules that control the interactions between cellular automata can generate surprisingly non-chaotic results.
+
+== Contents ==
+
+=== Computation and its implications ===
+The thesis of A New Kind of Science (NKS) is twofold: that the nature of computation must be explored experimentally, and that the results of these experiments have great relevance to understanding the physical world.
+
+=== Simple programs ===
+The basic subject of Wolfram's "new kind of science" is the study of simple abstract rules—essentially, elementary computer programs. In almost any class of a computational system, one very quickly finds instances of great complexity among its simplest cases (after a time series of multiple iterative loops, applying the same simple set of rules on itself, similar to a self-reinforcing cycle using a set of rules). This seems to be true regardless of the components of the system and the details of its setup. Systems explored in the book include, among others, cellular automata in one, two, and three dimensions; mobile automata; Turing machines in 1 and 2 dimensions; several varieties of substitution and network systems; recursive functions; nested recursive functions; combinators; tag systems; register machines; and reversal-addition. For a program to qualify as simple, there are several requirements:
+
+Its operation can be completely explained by a simple graphical illustration.
+It can be completely explained in a few sentences of human language.
+It can be implemented in a computer language using just a few lines of code.
+The number of its possible variations is small enough so that all of them can be computed.
+Generally, simple programs tend to have a very simple abstract framework. Simple cellular automata, Turing machines, and combinators are examples of such frameworks, while more complex cellular automata do not necessarily qualify as simple programs. It is also possible to invent new frameworks, particularly to capture the operation of natural systems. The remarkable feature of simple programs is that a significant proportion of them can produce great complexity. Simply enumerating all possible variations of almost any class of programs quickly leads one to examples that do unexpected and interesting things. This leads to the question: if the program is so simple, where does the complexity come from? In a sense, there is not enough room in the program's definition to directly encode all the things the program can do. Therefore, simple programs can be seen as a minimal example of emergence. A logical deduction from this phenomenon is that if the details of the program's rules have little direct relationship to its behavior, then it is very difficult to directly engineer a simple program to perform a specific behavior. An alternative approach is to try to engineer a simple overall computational framework, and then do a brute-force search through all of the possible components for the best match.
+Simple programs are capable of a remarkable range of behavior. Some have been proven to be universal computers. Others exhibit properties familiar from traditional science, such as thermodynamic behavior, continuum behavior, conserved quantities, percolation, sensitive dependence on initial conditions, and others. They have been used as models of traffic, material fracture, crystal growth, biological growth, and various sociological, geological, and ecological phenomena. Another feature of simple programs is that, according to the book, making them more complicated seems to have little effect on their overall complexity. A New Kind of Science argues that this is evidence that simple programs are enough to capture the essence of almost any complex system.
+
+=== Mapping and mining the computational universe ===
+In order to study simple rules and their often-complex behavior, Wolfram argues that it is necessary to systematically explore all these computational systems and document what they do. He further argues that this study should become a new branch of science, like physics or chemistry. The basic goal of this field is to understand and characterize the computational universe using experimental methods.
+The proposed new branch of scientific exploration admits many different forms of scientific production. For instance, qualitative classifications are often the results of initial forays into the computational jungle. On the other hand, explicit proofs that certain systems compute this or that function are also admissible. Some forms of production are also in some ways unique to this field of study—for example, the discovery of computational mechanisms that emerge in different systems but in bizarrely different forms.
+Another type of production involves the creation of programs for the analysis of computational systems. In the NKS framework, these themselves should be simple programs, and subject to the same goals and methodology. An extension of this idea is that the human mind is itself a computational system, and hence providing it with raw data in as effective a way as possible is crucial to research. Wolfram believes that programs and their analysis should be visualized as directly as possible, and exhaustively examined by the thousands or more. Since this new field concerns abstract rules, it can in principle address issues relevant to other fields of science. But in general, Wolfram's idea is that novel ideas and mechanisms can be discovered in the computational universe, where they can be represented in their simplest forms, and then other fields can choose among these discoveries for those they find relevant.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_New_Kind_of_Science-1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+---
+title: "A New Kind of Science"
+chunk: 2/4
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_New_Kind_of_Science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:29.444242+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+=== Systematic abstract science ===
+While Wolfram advocates simple programs as a scientific discipline, he also argues that its methodology will revolutionize other fields of science. The basis of his argument is that the study of simple programs is the minimal possible form of science, grounded equally in both abstraction and empirical experimentation. Every aspect of the methodology NKS advocates is optimized to make experimentation as direct, easy, and meaningful as possible while maximizing the chances that the experiment will do something unexpected. Just as this methodology allows computational mechanisms to be studied in their simplest forms, Wolfram argues that the process of doing so engages with the mathematical basis of the physical world, and therefore has much to offer the sciences.
+Wolfram argues that the computational realities of the universe make science hard for fundamental reasons. But he also argues that by understanding the importance of these realities, we can learn to use them in our favor. For instance, instead of reverse engineering our theories from observation, we can enumerate systems and then try to match them to the behaviors we observe. A major theme of NKS  is investigating the structure of the possibility space. Wolfram argues that science is far too ad hoc, in part because the models used are too complicated and unnecessarily organized around the limited primitives of traditional mathematics. Wolfram advocates using models whose variations are enumerable and whose consequences are straightforward to compute and analyze.
+
+=== Philosophical underpinnings ===
+
+==== Computational irreducibility ====
+Wolfram argues that one of his achievements is in providing a coherent system of ideas that justifies computation as an organizing principle of science. For instance, he argues that the concept of computational irreducibility (that some complex computations are not amenable to short-cuts and cannot be "reduced"), is ultimately the reason why computational models of nature must be considered in addition to traditional mathematical models. Likewise, his idea of intrinsic randomness generation—that natural systems can generate their own randomness, rather than using chaos theory or stochastic perturbations—implies that computational models do not need to include explicit randomness.
+
+==== Principle of computational equivalence ====
+Based on his experimental results, Wolfram developed the principle of computational equivalence (PCE): the principle says that systems found in the natural world can perform computations up to a maximal ("universal") level of computational power. Most systems can attain this level. Systems, in principle, compute the same things as a computer. Computation is therefore simply a question of translating input and outputs from one system to another. Consequently, most systems are computationally equivalent. Proposed examples of such systems are the workings of the human brain and the evolution of weather systems.
+The principle can be restated as follows: almost all processes that are not obviously simple are of equivalent sophistication. From this principle, Wolfram draws an array of concrete deductions that he argues reinforce his theory. Possibly the most important of these is an explanation of why we experience randomness and complexity: often, the systems we analyze are just as sophisticated as we are. Thus, complexity is not a special quality of systems, like the concept of "heat", but simply a label for all systems whose computations are sophisticated. Wolfram argues that understanding this makes possible the "normal science" of the NKS paradigm.
+
+=== Applications and results ===
+NKS contains a number of specific results and ideas, and they can be organized into several themes. One common theme of examples and applications is demonstrating how little complexity it takes to achieve interesting behavior, and how the proper methodology can discover this behavior.
+First, there are several cases where NKS introduces what was, during the book's composition, the simplest known system in some class that has a particular characteristic. Some examples include the first primitive recursive function that results in complexity, the smallest universal Turing machine, and the shortest axiom for propositional calculus. In a similar vein, Wolfram also demonstrates many simple programs that exhibit phenomena like phase transitions, conserved quantities, continuum behavior, and thermodynamics that are familiar from traditional science. Simple computational models of natural systems like shell growth, fluid turbulence, and phyllotaxis are a final category of applications that fall in this theme.
+Another common theme is taking facts about the computational universe as a whole and using them to reason about fields in a holistic way. For instance, Wolfram discusses how facts about the computational universe inform evolutionary theory, SETI, free will, computational complexity theory, and philosophical fields like ontology, epistemology, and even postmodernism.
+Wolfram suggests that the theory of computational irreducibility may explain how free will is possible in a nominally deterministic universe. He posits that the computational process in the brain of the being with free will is so complex that it cannot be captured in a simpler computation, due to the principle of computational irreducibility. Thus, while the process is indeed deterministic, there is no better way to determine the being's will than, in essence, to run the experiment and let the being exercise it.
+The book also contains a number of results—both experimental and analytic—about what a particular automaton computes, or what its characteristics are, using some methods of analysis.
+The book contains a new technical result in describing the Turing completeness of the Rule 110 cellular automaton. Very small Turing machines can simulate Rule 110, which Wolfram demonstrates using a 2-state 5-symbol universal Turing machine. Wolfram conjectures that a particular 2-state 3-symbol Turing machine is universal. In 2007, as part of commemorating the book's fifth anniversary, Wolfram's company offered a $25,000 prize for proof that this Turing machine is universal. Alex Smith, a computer science student from Birmingham, UK, won the prize later that year by proving Wolfram's conjecture.
+
+== Reception ==

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_New_Kind_of_Science-2.md

@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+---
+title: "A New Kind of Science"
+chunk: 3/4
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_New_Kind_of_Science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:29.444242+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+Periodicals gave A New Kind of Science coverage, including articles in The New York Times, Newsweek, Wired, and The Economist. Some scientists, including Cosma Shalizi and Scott Aaronson, criticized the book and perceived a fatal flaw—that simple systems such as cellular automata are not complex enough to describe the degree of complexity in evolved systems, and observed that Wolfram ignored the research categorizing the complexity of systems. Although critics accept Wolfram's result showing universal computation, they view it as minor and dispute Wolfram's claim of a paradigm shift. Others found that the work contained valuable insights and refreshing ideas. Wolfram addressed his critics in a series of blog posts.
+
+=== Scientific philosophy ===
+A tenet of NKS is that the simpler the system, the more likely a version of it will recur in a wide variety of more complicated contexts. Therefore, NKS argues that systematically exploring the space of simple programs will lead to a base of reusable knowledge. But many scientists believe that of all possible parameters, only some actually occur in the universe. For instance, of all possible permutations of the symbols making up an equation, most will be essentially meaningless. NKS has also been criticized for asserting that the behavior of simple systems is somehow representative of all systems.
+
+=== Methodology ===
+A common criticism of NKS is that it does not follow established scientific methodology. For instance, NKS does not establish rigorous mathematical definitions, nor does it attempt to prove theorems; and most formulas and equations are written in Mathematica rather than standard notation. Along these lines, NKS has also been criticized for being heavily visual, with much information conveyed by pictures that lack formal meaning. It has also been criticized for not using modern research in the field of complexity, particularly works on complexity from a rigorous mathematical perspective. And it has been criticized for misrepresenting chaos theory.
+
+=== Utility ===
+NKS has been criticized for not providing specific results that are immediately applicable to ongoing scientific research. There has also been criticism, implicit and explicit, that the study of simple programs has little connection to the physical universe and hence is of limited value. Steven Weinberg has pointed out that no real-world system has been satisfactorily explained using Wolfram's methods. Mathematician Steven G. Krantz wrote, "Just because Wolfram can cook up a cellular automaton that seems to produce the spot pattern on a leopard, may we safely conclude that he understands the mechanism by which the spots are produced on the leopard, or why the spots are there, or what function (evolutionary or mating or camouflage or other) they perform?"
+
+=== Principle of computational equivalence (PCE) ===
+The principle of computational equivalence (PCE) has been criticized for being vague, unmathematical, and not making directly verifiable predictions. It has also been criticized for being contrary to the spirit of research in mathematical logic and computational complexity theory, which seek to make fine-grained distinctions between levels of computational sophistication, and for wrongly conflating different kinds of universality property. Moreover, critics such as Ray Kurzweil have argued that it ignores the distinction between hardware and software; while two computers may be equivalent in power, it does not follow that any two programs they might run are also equivalent. Others suggest it is little more than a rechristening of the Church–Turing thesis.
+
+=== The fundamental theory (NKS Chapter 9) ===
+Wolfram's speculations of a direction toward a fundamental theory of physics have been criticized as vague and obsolete. Scott Aaronson, Professor of Computer Science at University of Texas Austin, also claims that Wolfram's methods cannot be compatible with both special relativity and Bell's theorem violations, and hence cannot explain the observed results of Bell tests.
+Edward Fredkin and Konrad Zuse pioneered the idea of a computable universe, the former by writing a line in his book on how the world might be like a cellular automaton, later further developed by Fredkin using a toy model called Salt. It has been claimed that NKS tries to take these ideas as its own, but Wolfram's model of the universe is a rewriting network, not a cellular automaton, as Wolfram himself has suggested a cellular automaton cannot account for relativistic features such as no absolute time frame. Jürgen Schmidhuber has also charged that his work on Turing machine-computable physics was stolen without attribution, namely his idea on enumerating possible Turing-computable universes.
+In a 2002 review of NKS, the Nobel laureate and elementary particle physicist Steven Weinberg wrote, "Wolfram himself is a lapsed elementary particle physicist, and I suppose he can't resist trying to apply his experience with digital computer programs to the laws of nature. This has led him to the view (also considered in a 1981 paper by Richard Feynman) that nature is discrete rather than continuous. He suggests that space consists of a set of isolated points, like cells in a cellular automaton, and that even time flows in discrete steps. Following an idea of Edward Fredkin, he concludes that the universe itself would then be an automaton, like a giant computer. It's possible, but I can't see any motivation for these speculations, except that this is the sort of system that Wolfram and others have become used to in their work on computers. So might a carpenter, looking at the moon, suppose that it is made of wood."
+
+=== Natural selection ===
+Wolfram's claim that natural selection is not the fundamental cause of complexity in biology has led journalist Chris Lavers to say that Wolfram does not understand the theory of evolution.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_New_Kind_of_Science-3.md

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+---
+title: "A New Kind of Science"
+chunk: 4/4
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_New_Kind_of_Science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:29.444242+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+=== Originality ===
+NKS has been heavily criticized as not original or important enough to justify its title and claims.
+The authoritative manner in which NKS presents a vast number of examples and arguments has been criticized as leading the reader to believe that each of these is original to Wolfram; in particular, one of the most substantial new technical results presented in the book, that the rule 110 cellular automaton is Turing complete, was not proven by Wolfram. Wolfram credits the proof to his research assistant Matthew Cook. But the book's notes section acknowledges many of the discoveries made by these other scientists, citing their names together with historical facts, although not in the form of a traditional bibliography section. Additionally, the idea that very simple rules often generate great complexity is already an established idea in science, particularly in chaos theory and complex systems.
+
+== See also ==
+Digital physics
+Scientific reductionism
+Calculating Space
+Marcus Hutter's "Universal Artificial Intelligence" algorithm
+
+== References ==
+
+== External links ==
+A New Kind of Science free E-Book
+What We've Learned from NKS YouTube playlist — extensive discussion of each NKS chapter; (As of 2022, Stephen Wolfram discusses the NKS chapters in view of recent developments. Wolfram Physics Project)

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_the_Science-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+---
+title: "Mind the Science"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_the_Science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:22.304123+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+Mind the Science: Saving Your Mental Health from the Wellness Industry is a 2024 book by psychologist and adjunct assistant professor at the University of Calgary, Jonathan N. Stea. This book examines the Wellness industry, the harm medical pseudoscience can have on individuals in the hope that people will be able to make more informed decisions about their health care. The book is written for the lay audience and also includes many appendices that define terms that act as a reference guide. This book was published by Oxford University Press.
+
+
+== Synopsis ==
+The journal Psychiatric Times notes that the book is divided into three main sections:
+
+how to see red flags in wellness information,
+identifying propaganda and misinformation, and
+solutions "grounded in mainstream science and medicine".
+Stea uses many examples to explain to the layperson how seductive alternative medicine can be when science-based medicine does not offer immediate results. Using the personal story of his mother, Stea explains various pseudoscience practices such as acupuncture, reflexology, chiropractic, Reiki and more.
+Multiple examples used show how difficult it is to navigate through mental illness, addiction and obsessive compulsive disorder often wasting time, money and causing "great harm".
+
+
+== Reception ==
+Psychologist Cassandra L. Boness writing for Skeptical Inquirer states that Mind the Science "is a critically important contribution to the literature on pseudoscience" and "artfully achieves the aim of his book: to 'educate and embolden' people to make informed decisions about their mental health by providing the tools needed to avoid harmful misinformation." Boness writes that Stea focuses on the harm created by the wellness industry and that she appeached that he used many examples, some personal experiences to educate readers.
+Clinical Assistant Professor of Psychiatry at Case Western Reserve University, Awais Aftab reviewing Mind the Science for Psychiatric Times writes that, "Stea's writing style is engaging, marked by empathy and humor, and he makes complex concepts digestible. The book provides practical, relatable scenarios that illustrate the dangers of pseudoscience."
+The Science Writers and Communicators of Canada designated this work for their 2024 Book Award in the General category.
+
+
+== References ==
+
+
+== External links ==
+Interview by Leighann Lord for Skeptical Inquirer Presents (video)
+Interview by Dr Mike with Dr Jonathan Stea titled "What Alternative Medicine Does Well & When It Lies" (video)

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Obsessions-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+---
+title: "Natural Obsessions"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Obsessions"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:25.859067+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+Natural Obsessions is a book written by American science author Natalie Angier published in 1988. It chronicles a year in the laboratories of two prominent cancer biologists during a period where there was a race to discover and characterize some of the first cancer-causing and cancer-suppressing genes.
+
+
+== Overview ==
+It chronicles the time, about a year, that she spent in the labs of two very prominent cancer biologists, Robert Weinberg and Michael Wigler, during a period where there was a race to discover and characterize some of the first cancer causing and cancer-suppressing genes (oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes, respectively). This book gives insight into the day-to-day working of a top scientific laboratory with no embellishment - both the excitement and thrill of discovery as well as the drudgery and politics can be found in Natural Obsessions. Pressure to find these genes mounts and everyone is scrambling to be the first to announce this major discovery which could have gone to several laboratories.
+
+
+== Commercial and critical reception ==
+Natural Obsessions was reviewed favorably in the New York Times and Smithsonian magazine in the months after its initial publication. The book was named a New York Times Notable Book for 1988.
+As of 2001, the book has been used as a text in a cancer biology course at the University of Chicago and the University of Houston.
+
+
+== Editions ==
+Natural Obsessions, Natalie Angier, Houghton Mifflin, 1988, 394 pp.
+Natural Obsessions, Natalie Angier, Warner Books, 1989
+Natalie Angier (1999). Natural obsessions: striving to unlock the deepest secrets of the cancer cell (reprint ed.). Mariner Books. ISBN 978-0-395-92472-3. OCLC 40715347., 420 pp.
+Natural Obsessions, Natalie Angier, Virago, 2000
+
+
+== See also ==
+Ras
+Rb
+
+
+== References ==
+
+
+== External links ==
+Natalie Angier: Natural Obsessions: Synopsis

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_of_Man_Series-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+---
+title: "Nature of Man Series"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_of_Man_Series"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:27.032852+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+The Nature of Man Series is a four-volume series of works in paleoanthropology by the prolific playwright, screenwriter, and science writer Robert Ardrey. The books in the series were published between 1961 and 1976.
+The series majorly undermined standing assumptions in social sciences, leading to an abandonment of the "blank slate" hypothesis; incited a renaissance in the science of ethology; and led to widespread popular interest in human evolution and human origins.
+The first work, African Genesis (1961), particularly helped revive interest in ethology, and was a direct precursor to the Konrad Lorenz's On Aggression (1966), Desmond Morris's The Naked Ape (1967), Lionel Tiger's Men in Groups (1969), and Tiger and Robin Fox's The Imperial Animal (1971). The director of the Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program Rick Potts, cited Ardrey's work as inspiring him to go anthropology.
+The works were wildly popular and influenced the public imagination. Stanley Kubrick cited them as major influences in developing his films 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) and A Clockwork Orange (1971).
+
+
+== Robert Ardrey ==
+
+Robert Ardrey was a prolific playwright, screenwriter, and science writer. By the time he returned to the sciences in the 1950s, he had already had a decorated Hollywood and Broadway career, including the award of a Guggenheim Fellowship and an Academy Award nomination for best screenplay.
+In 1955 Ardrey travelled to Africa, where he wrote a series of articles for The Reporter. At the same time he renewed an acquaintance with prominent geologist Richard Foster Flint and investigated claims made by Raymond Dart about a specimen of Australopithecus africanus. This trip would initiate the decades of work Ardrey completed in the field of human evolution.
+
+
+== African Genesis (1961) ==
+
+The central thesis of African Genesis: A Personal Investigation into the Animal Origins and Nature of Man was that early man evolved from carnivorous African predecessors, and not, as was then the scientific consensus, from Asian herbivores. It drew particularly on the scientific work of Raymond Dart and Konrad Lorenz. This thesis has been proven and is now scientific doctrine.
+African Genesis also challenged a key methodological assumption of the social sciences, namely that human behavior was distinct from animal behavior. Ardrey instead asserted that evolutionarily inherited traits were a major factor in determining human behavior. This was a hugely controversial hypothesis, though it has gained widespread acceptance today. It was a major theme that would extend throughout the Nature of Man books and continue to surround them with controversy.
+African Genesis was a major popular success. It was an international bestseller translated into dozens of languages. In 1962 it was a finalist for the National Book Award in nonfiction. In 1969 Time magazine named African Genesis the most notable nonfiction book of the 1960s.
+
+
+== The Territorial Imperative (1966) ==
+
+The Territorial Imperative: A Personal Inquiry Into the Animal Origins of Property and Nations extends Ardrey's work in examining the effects of inherited evolutionary traits on human social behavior with an emphasis on the hold that territory has on man. In particular it demonstrates the influence of the drive to possess territory on such phenomena as property ownership and nation-building.
+The Territorial Imperative further developed the nascent science of ethology and increased public interest in human origins.
+Like African Genesis it was also an international bestseller and saw translation into dozens of languages. It influenced several notable figures. Stanley Kubrick cited Ardrey as an inspiration for his films 2001: A Space Odyssey and A Clockwork Orange. The strategic analyst Andrew Marshall and U.S. Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger are known to have discussed The Territorial Imperative in connection to military-strategic thinking.
+
+
+== The Social Contract (1970) ==
+
+The Social Contract: A Personal Inquiry into the Evolutionary Sources of Order and Disorder is the most controversial book of the Nature of Man series. It sought to apply evolutionary thinking to the creation of social order. In particular it examined inherited characteristics' effects in determining hierarchy and inequality. Ardrey argued that, while inequality was not necessarily a social evil, it could only be justly expressed under conditions of absolute equality of opportunity. He also argued that the presence of inequality does not justify the domination of the weak by the strong. "Ardrey showed that in all societies at any level of the animal world, structures exist to protect the vulnerable, and that this is an evolutionary advantage as it protects diversity, diversity being essential for creativity."
+The Social Contract continued Ardrey's refutation of cultural determinists through interwoven analyses of animal and human behavior. It also emphasized the importance of a reasoned respect for nature, foreshadowing the environmental concerns of The Hunting Hypothesis.
+
+
+== The Hunting Hypothesis (1976) ==
+
+The Hunting Hypothesis: A Personal Conclusion Concerning the Evolutionary Nature of Man continued Ardrey's examination of the importance of inherited evolutionary traits. In particular it demonstrated the determinant force of traits that co-evolved in early man with hunting behavior.
+At the time of publication, it was not even commonly accepted that early man were hunters, much less that hunting behavior influenced their evolution. Following publication of Ardrey's work this thesis gained support and eventually widespread acceptance."For decades researchers have been locked in debate over how and when hunting began and how big a role it played in human evolution. Recent analyses of human anatomy, stone tools and animal bones are helping to fill in the details of this game-changing shift in subsistence strategy. This evidence indicates that hunting evolved far earlier than some scholars had envisioned – and profoundly impacted subsequent human evolution."
+The Hunting Hypothesis was also one of the first books to warn about climate change as a possible existential threat to mankind.
+The Hunting Hypothesis, with some exceptions, was remarkably well reviewed. The famed biologist and naturalist E. O. Wilson, the noted anthropologist Colin Turnbull, the acclaimed journalist Max Lerner, and the noteworthy social scientist Roger Masters, among others, all wrote effusive reviews. Antony Jay wrote that "Robert Ardrey's books are the most important to be written since the war and arguable in the 20th century."
+
+
+== References ==
+
+
+== External links ==
+The Official Robert Ardrey Estate Website
+The Nature of Man Series at the Robert Ardrey Estate Website Archived 2019-09-13 at the Wayback Machine

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus_Gesamtausgabe-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+---
+title: "Nicolaus Copernicus Gesamtausgabe"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus_Gesamtausgabe"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:30.561247+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+The Nicolaus-Copernicus-Gesamtausgabe (Nicolaus Copernicus Complete Edition) is a comprehensive, commented collection of works by, about, and related to Nicolaus Copernicus. The Gesamtausgabe includes Copernicus's surviving manuscripts and notes, his published writings, other authors' commentary about Copernicus and his works, a bibliography, and a biography.
+Compilation of the series began in 1973 to commemorate the 500th anniversary of Copernicus's birth. The first volume is the astronomer's landmark work, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres), which expounded Copernicus's heliocentric theory of the universe. The set is published by Akademie Verlag in Berlin, Germany.
+
+
+== Volumes ==
+I:      De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, 1974, ISBN 978-3-05-003897-1
+II:
+III/1:  Kommentar zu "De revolutionibus", 1998, ISBN 978-3-05-003123-1
+III/3:  De Revolutionibus. Die erste deutsche Übersetzung in der Grazer Handschrift, 2007, ISBN 978-3-05-004355-5
+IV:
+V:      Opera Minora 1999, ISBN 978-3-05-003498-0
+VI/1:   Documenta Copernicana, 1994, ISBN 978-3-05-002594-0
+VI/2:   Documenta Copernicana, 1996, ISBN 978-3-05-003009-8
+VII:
+VIII/1: Receptio Copernicana, ISBN 978-3-05-003433-1
+IX:     Biographia Copernicana
+
+
+== External links ==
+Nicolaus Copernicus Gesamtausgabe at Akademie Verlag

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Meme_Machine-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+---
+title: "The Meme Machine"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Meme_Machine"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:18.746897+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+The Meme Machine is a popular science book by Susan Blackmore on the subject of memes. Blackmore attempts to constitute memetics as a science by discussing its empirical and analytic potential, as well as some important problems with memetics. The first half of the book tries to create greater clarity about the definition of the meme as she sees it. The last half of the book consists of a number of possible memetic explanations for such different problems as the origin of language, the origin of the human brain, sexual phenomena, the Internet and the notion of the self. These explanations, in her view, give simpler and clearer explanations than trying to create genetic explanations in these fields.
+The idea of memes, and the word itself, were originally speculated by Richard Dawkins in his book The Selfish Gene although similar, or analogous, concepts had been in currency for a while before its publishing. Richard Dawkins wrote a foreword to The Meme Machine.
+In the book, Blackmore examines the difficulties associated with the meme including its definition and how to spot one as well as the difficulties which arise from seeing it as being like the gene. She sees the meme in terms of being a universal replicator, of which the gene is but an example, rather than being like the gene itself. Universal replicators possess three key characteristics: high fidelity replication, high levels of fecundity (and therefore many copies) and longevity. She believes that while memes have attained/evolved a sufficiently high level of these characteristics to qualify as replicators, they are not as effective replicators as genes, based on these key characteristics.
+While others have accepted the possible existence of memes, they are sometimes seen as subordinate to genes. The author suggests that this is not the case now and that memes are independent replicators. Indeed, she suggests that memes may now in some cases be driving genetic evolution and be the cause of the abnormally large brain in Homo sapiens.  Blackmore notes that human brains began expanding in size at about the same time that we started using tools and suggests that once individuals began to imitate each other, selection pressure favored those who could make good choices on what to imitate, and could imitate intelligently.
+
+
+== Terminology ==
+In the book, Blackmore tries to create a consistent vocabulary, since memetics has had a wide range of different terminologies and therefore, in Blackmore's opinion, many misleading concepts. Some of the terms that are central in her book include:
+
+Copy-the-product: e.g. make a copy of the soup. This is more prone to error since it requires an analytic capability of the soup itself and then a synthetic ability to combine the recognised elements. Any inserted errors will be passed on in the event of this copy of a soup being copied.
+Copy-the-instructions: e.g. make a copy of the soup recipe. This is less error prone since the important elements of the soup are already identified and the synthetic method explained. Any errors in using the recipe will not be passed on to future copiers since they will receive the recipe itself.
+Meme Fear: The idea that we are vessels for memes unacceptably undermines the popular understanding of free will and autonomy.
+Memeplex: Memes that are replicated together, such as religions and cultures.
+Memetic Theory of Altruism: She proposes that meme theory explains altruism better than genetics.  That other things being equal, more people will observe altruistic behavior than selfish behavior, will like the altruistic person better than the selfish one, and will be more likely to adopt the behaviors of the altruistic person than the selfish one.
+
+
+== Reception ==
+Writing for The New York Times, Robert Wright gave his insight regarding the book, commenting that "her enthusiasm for memes gets the better of her", leading to Blackmore disregarding aspects of evolutionary fitness and biology. He criticizes her for neglecting previous research in anthropology and biology, while praising her for giving good insights into modern life and culture.
+
+
+== References ==

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Millennial_Project-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: "The Millennial Project"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Millennial_Project"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:19.887806+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+The Millennial Project: Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps by Marshall T. Savage is a book (published in 1992 and reprinted in 1994 with an introduction by Arthur C. Clarke) in the field of exploratory engineering that gives a series of concrete stages the author believes will lead to interstellar colonization. Many specific scientific and engineering details are presented, as are numerous issues involved in space colonization.
+
+
+== The book's thesis ==
+Savage takes a Malthusian view of the exponential growth of human population and life in general, and also recommends the exponential growth of blue-green algae for sustenance. He states that it is humanity's destiny to colonize every star in the galaxy. He draws heavily on the Fermi paradox (briefly stated as, "If there is intelligent life in space, why haven't we found it yet?") to support his position that it is humanity's burden alone to ignite the universe with the "spark of Life."
+In The Millennial Project, he calls for the creation of an international foundation to realize these goals. Originally known as the First Millennial Foundation (founded by Savage in 1987), the organization changed its name to the Living Universe Foundation.
+
+
+== The steps of the project ==
+The "Eight Easy Steps" proposed by Savage are as follows:
+
+Foundation – constitute an organization convened to realize these destinies.
+Aquarius – build arcologies in the tropical oceans as a first step to learning how to build ("grow") colonies in space using a method not unlike that used by living corals developed by Prof. Wolf Hartmut Hilbertz and applying his concept of Cybertecture. They also would generate income to fund later steps.
+Bifrost – first step in actually getting off the Earth using ground-based free-electron-laser-powered laser-propelled Waverider. Leik Myrabo, an aerospace engineering professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, demonstrated the feasibility of using ground-based lasers to propel objects into orbit in 1988.
+Asgard – build a space station in geosynchronous orbit.
+Avalon – build colonies on the Moon by doming over the craters and creating miniature ecologies.
+Elysium – start terraforming Mars to "create a living planet to sustain us" connected with Earth through Buzz Aldrin's proposed Mars Transit System, an example of Earth-Mars cycler.
+Solaria – mine asteroids to create asteroid colonies and Asgard-like stations throughout the Solar System to create a Dyson cloud.
+Galactia – colonize beyond the Solar System, expand throughout the galaxy heading to a level 3 on the Kardashev scale, a method of measuring a civilization's level of energy production and consumption.
+In the early stages of the Project, Savage recommends Spirulina algae as a primary foodstuff, supplemented by seafood mariculture from the cities of the Aquarius phase.
+The Living Universe Foundation, previously known as the First Millennial Foundation, is an organization that supports ocean and space colonization more or less based upon the book The Millennial Project. Space Environments Ecovillage in Bastrop, Texas, is one of the few LUF projects that have materialized so far.
+
+
+== Criticisms ==
+The book has drawn some criticism in that while it is replete with details concerning OTEC construction and space colonization, it touches very little on the subject of how governments and societies will need to change to enact the Project. Defenders and the author himself maintain that one man writing one book cannot be expected to write out the entire course of human development over the next millennium.
+
+
+== See also ==
+Mining the Sky by John S. Lewis
+The Case For Mars by Robert Zubrin
+The High Frontier: Human Colonies in Space by Gerard O'Neill
+Engines of Creation by K. Eric Drexler
+Antimatter rocket
+Asteroid mining
+Beam-powered propulsion
+Closed Ecological Life Support System or CELSS
+Inflatable space habitat
+In-Situ Resource Utilization
+Kessler Syndrome
+Lightcraft
+Mass launcher
+Ocean thermal energy conversion
+Project Valkyrie
+Biorock
+Space geostrategy
+Terraforming of Mars
+Prof. Wolf Hartmut Hilbertz
+Human outpost
+
+
+== References ==

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mind_of_God-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+---
+title: "The Mind of God"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mind_of_God"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:21.131877+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+The Mind of God is a 1992 non-fiction book by Paul Davies.  Subtitled The Scientific Basis for a Rational World, it is a whirlwind tour and explanation of theories, both physical and metaphysical, regarding ultimate causes. Its title comes from a quotation from Stephen Hawking: "If we do discover a theory of everything...it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason—for then we would truly know the mind of God."
+In the preface, Davies explains that he has been interested in ultimate causes since childhood, having annoyed his parents with unending "why's" about everything, with each answer demanding another "why," and usually ending with the reply, "Because God made it that way, and that's that!"  In the book proper, Davies briefly explores: the nature of reason, belief, and metaphysics; theories of the origin of the universe; the laws of nature; the relationship of mathematics to physics; a few arguments for the existence of God; the possibility that the universe shows evidence of a deity; and his opinion of the implications of Gödel's incompleteness theorem, that "the search for a closed logical scheme that provides a complete and self-consistent explanation is doomed to failure."
+He concludes with a statement of his belief that, even though we may never attain a theory of everything, "the existence of mind in some organism on some planet in the universe is surely a fact of fundamental significance. Through conscious beings the universe has generated self-awareness. This can be no trivial detail, no minor byproduct of mindless, purposeless forces. We are truly meant to be here."
+
+
+== Reception ==
+In a review in The New York Times, Marcia Bartusiak called the book "both stimulating and enlightening".
+
+
+== See also ==
+First Cause
+Substantial form
+Laws of Thought
+Laws of Nature
+Nous
+Plato
+Theory of Everything
+
+
+== References ==
+
+
+== External links ==
+The publisher's webpage for The Mind of God

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Naked_Ape-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+---
+title: "The Naked Ape"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Naked_Ape"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:24.669197+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+The Naked Ape: A Zoologist's Study of the Human Animal is a 1967 book by English zoologist and ethologist Desmond Morris that looks at humans as a species and compares them to other animals. The Human Zoo, a follow-up book by Morris that examined the behaviour of people in cities, was published in 1969.
+
+
+== Summary ==
+The Naked Ape, which was serialised in the Daily Mirror newspaper and has been translated into 23 languages, depicts human behaviour as largely evolved to meet the challenges of prehistoric life as a hunter (see Nature versus nurture).  The book was so named because out of 193 species of monkeys and apes, only humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) are not covered in hair. Desmond Morris, the author, who had been the curator of mammals at London Zoo, said his book was intended to popularise and demystify science.
+Morris said that Homo sapiens not only have the largest brains of all higher primates, but that sexual selection in human evolution has caused humans to have the highest ratio of penis size to body mass. Morris conjectured that human ear-lobes developed as an additional erogenous zone to facilitate the extended sexuality necessary in the evolution of human monogamous pair bonding. Morris further stated that the more rounded shape of human female breasts means they are mainly a sexual signalling device rather than simply for providing milk for infants.
+Morris framed many features of human behaviour in the context of evolution at a time when cultural explanations were more orthodox.  For example, Morris wrote that the intense human pair bond evolved so that men who were out hunting could trust that their mates back home were not having sex with other men, and suggested the possibility that sparse body hair evolved because the "nakedness" helped intensify pair bonding by increasing tactile pleasure.
+
+
+== Film adaptations ==
+A 1973 film directed by Donald Driver, very loosely based on the book, was made starring Johnny Crawford and Victoria Principal. In 2006, an independent film was made, based loosely on the book, written and directed by Daniel Mellitz, starring Josh Wise, Chelse Swain, Sean Shanks, Amanda MacDonald, Tony LaThanh, Corbin Bernsen. Beyond their scripts being loosely based on his book, Morris was not involved in either film.
+
+
+== Bibliography ==
+The Naked Ape: A Zoologist's Study of the Human Animal (hardback: ISBN 0070431744; reprint: ISBN 0385334303); Jonathan Cape Publishing, 1967
+Corgi Books paperback editions, 1967, 1968, 1969
+Dell Publishing edition, 1969
+The Illustrated Naked Ape: A Zoologist's Study of the Human Animal, Jonathan Cape Publishing, 1987 (reviewed by Janet Dunaif-Hattis in American Anthropologist, vol. 89, mo. 3, pp. 732–733, September 1987)
+Vintage Books; new (revised) edition, 2005; ISBN 0099482010
+Critical response
+
+John Lewis, B. Towers, Naked Ape or Homo sapiens?: Reply to Desmond Morris. Teilhard Study Library, 1969; ISBN 0900391219
+
+
+== Criticism ==
+In 1976, anthropologists Adrienne Zihlman and Nancy Tanner criticized The Naked Ape for being sexist. Writing for The Observer in 2017, science journalist Angela Saini said, "His consistent failure to understand the impact of patriarchy and female repression bordered on the bizarre." She points out that he chooses to erase hunter-gatherer societies from his analysis (despite those societies being closest to how humans evolved), claims that women have been mostly house-bound for all time, and claims that work is a predominantly male pursuit. Author and presenter of Radio 4's Inside Science, Adam Rutherford, called the book "erotic fantasy science" and "a book full of exciting ideas that have little scientific validity." Sociologist Stanislav Andreski, in his book Social Sciences as Sorcery (pp 151–152) referred to it as pseudoscience that "provides an uneducated public...with rather childish pornography".
+
+
+== Censorship ==
+In the United States, in February 1976, the book was removed from high school library shelves by the board of education of the Island Trees Union Free School District in New York. This case became the subject of a U.S. Supreme Court case in 1982.
+
+
+== Cultural impact ==
+The book is mentioned in the Italian entry for the 2017 Eurovision Song Contest "Occidentali's Karma" by Francesco Gabbani, in which most of the lyrics contain philosophical references. The lyricist had read The Naked Ape himself. Morris, "fascinated by the culture, beauty and richness" of the references to his theories, sent Gabbani a signed copy of the Italian translation of the book as a sign of gratitude and support for the latter.
+
+
+== See also ==
+Charles Darwin
+Evolutionary psychology
+Sociobiology
+The Territorial Imperative, 1966 book by Robert Ardrey
+The Moral Animal, 1994 book by Robert Wright
+
+
+== Notes and references ==
+Notes
+
+References
+
+
+== External links ==
+The Naked Ape 1973 at IMDb , and review

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Inquisition-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+---
+title: "The New Inquisition"
+chunk: 1/2
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Inquisition"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:28.194822+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+The New Inquisition is a book written by Robert Anton Wilson and first published in 1986. The New Inquisition is a book about ontology, science, paranormal events, and epistemology. Wilson identifies what he calls "Fundamentalist Materialism" belief and compares it to religious fundamentalism.
+
+== Description ==
+In The New Inquisition Wilson criticizes the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal by claiming that scientists do not give a fair hearing to anyone they do not already agree with. Something else he criticizes is that the dependence on the military-industrial complex is the norm. He proclaims that instead of this dictatory attitude scientists should apply skepticism, or a kind of agnostic principle, when faced with new ideas.
+According to Wilson, science these days glorifies the "Idol of Materialism". He calls their belief "Fundamental Materialism" and likens it to religious fundamentalists. Wilson suggests a principle that "refuses total belief or total denial and regards models as tools to be used only and always where appropriate and replaced (by other models) only and always where not appropriate". It is intended to be deliberately shocking, as Wilson states that he "does not want its ideas to seem any less startling than they are."
+
+=== Topics ===
+The book's subtitle Irrational Rationalism and Citadel of Science, summarizes its topics;
+
+=== Summary ===
+
+The New Inquisition is the author's term for what he refers to as a tendency within mainstream science to forbid certain forms of theories from being classed as "science."  He cites the cases of Wilhelm Reich, Rupert Sheldrake, and the Mars effect controversy, among others, in support of a central claim that a materialist bias within the scientific community has led to some speculations and theories he claimed were unjustly thought of as unscientific.
+The Citadel is the author's term for the military-industrial complex that he claims funds mainstream science and is the source of its bias. The book lists a large list of paranormal reports, (from the Fortean Times among others) with Wilson's tour of the history of modern physics.  He is particularly interested in Bell's theorem, and Alain Aspect's experimental proof of Bell's theorem.  Wilson opines that the implications of Aspect's proof include that magic is possible, and that "the sum total of all minds is one".  He claims it is not a coincidence that the Darwinian model of evolution best suits the "reality tunnel" of the Citadel, and that biologists such as Sheldrake who have alternative theories of evolution are drummed out of mainstream science.
+On the topic, he states,
+
+ [... the] Scientific Method (SM) [is] the alleged source of the certitude of those I call the New Idolators. SM is a mixture of SD (sense data: usually aided by instruments to refine the senses) with the old Greek PR [pure reason]. Unfortunately, while SM is powerfully effective, and seems to most of us the best method yet devised by mankind, it is made up of two elements which we have already seen are fallible. [...] Again, two fallibilities do not add up to one infallibility. Scientific generalizations which have lasted a long time have high probability, perhaps the highest probability of any generalizations, but it is only Idolatry which claims none of them will ever again have to be revised or rejected. Too many have been revised or rejected in this century alone.
+Among the concepts covered is the idea of "absolute laws of physics" - he ends up saying that every "law" that has been investigated seemed to be subject to anomalous results from time to time, and that there may be some other parallel universe with absolute laws of physics that are always obeyed, but Wilson has not seen any sign of it around in this one. Wilson draws on a large number of accounts of recorded events said to be "paranormal" but dismissed by materialist science as mass hallucination, e.g. the visions in Fátima, Portugal, and various UFO sightings. He comments that when it comes to 70,000 people having a mass hallucination, it's difficult to see how the explanation is any less occult than the events the explanation purports to explain.  "You try it", he writes. "See if by any means you can induce a mass hallucination [...] try, saying, hey, take a look at that light over there brighter than the sun."
+The book lists many phenomena that the author claims do not fit neatly into a materialist account of the world, and secondly, the book introduces various interpretations of quantum physics that may or may not provide a ground for explanation.  The book concludes with the idea which he claims Schrödinger supported, that the sum total of all minds is one, and that individual brains are best understood as local receivers, of an overall transmission which is always everywhere.
+
+The author repeatedly says "I am not asking you to believe any of this stuff, I'm just asking you to dispassionately observe your own reaction to these accounts".

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Inquisition-1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+---
+title: "The New Inquisition"
+chunk: 2/2
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Inquisition"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:05:28.194822+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+== Critical reception ==
+Jim Lippard described the quality of research in the book as "very shoddy". The book had a large number of typographical errors. He also said that Wilson's message about avoiding dogmatism was worthwhile, that the book was entertaining but that readers should be careful about taking Wilsons' explanations seriously. Lippard listed inaccuracies about the Esperanza Stone, fish falling from the sky and the alleged Mars effect.
+Kristin Buxton compared Wilson to Martin Gardner, noting that Gardner has written on many of the topics that Wilson writes about in the book, taking very different points of view. She pointed out that Gardner does not think it is easy to exactly define pseudoscience, nor does Gardner think his ideas are infallible. She mentioned that other reviewers had pointed out problems with the research and that the book needs to be read with care. She concluded with suggesting a merging of the views of Robert Anton Wilson and Martin Gardner as a possible new approach to science.
+Scientist Carl Sagan criticized Wilson's characterizing people skeptical of the phenomena he relates as an "inquisition" in his book The Demon-Haunted World, writing: "Wilson... describes skeptics as a 'new inquisition.' But to my knowledge no skeptic compels belief. Indeed, on most TV documentaries and talk shows, skeptics get short shrift and almost no air time. All that's happening is that some doctrines and methods are being criticized-at the worst, ridiculed-in magazines like The Skeptical Inquirer with circulations of a few tens of thousands. New Agers are not much, as in earlier times, being called up before criminal tribunals, nor whipped for having visions, and they are certainly not being burned at the stake. Why fear a little criticism? Aren't they interested to see how their beliefs hold up against the best counterarguments skeptics can muster?"
+
+== References ==
+
+== Editions ==
+
+Robert Anton Wilson, The New Inquisition: Irrational Rationalism and the Citadel of Science. 1986. 240 pages.
+Robert Anton Wilson, The New Inquisition: Irrational Rationalism and the Citadel of Science. 1994. 256 pages.
+Robert Anton Wilson, The New Inquisition: Irrational Rationalism and the Citadel of Science. Second Edition 2020. Hilaritas Press. 323 pages. ISBN 978-1-7344735-4-4
+
+== Further reading ==
+James Patrick Hogan, Kicking the Sacred Cow. Baen Books, 2004. 400 pages. ISBN 0-7434-8828-8