Non è vero ma ci credo. Intuizioni non provate, future verità

The diversity of perspectives is fascinating, but I'm curious about how the author chose which scientists and philosophers to feature. Was there a unifying criterion?

The book challenges the idea that science can answer everything, which made me reflect on my own beliefs. How did this influence others' views on knowledge and doubt?

Real-world applications of these ideas seem vast, but I wonder if readers found themselves questioning previously held assumptions after reading.