it was originally at first the second home of the congregation for about 50 years. it was the home of the turn of memorial church for like 40 years, and it's been the synagogue now going on seven years. tonight's event is very typical, the type of events we tried to do, great people, very interesting topic and things that people are interested in. and jackie leventhal who runs our cultural programming always wants me to announce what i do this upcoming events, and generally i don't but i have to tell you this.

thank you are a match. hot not. [applause]

[applause] >> good evening. i'd like to add my welcome to everyone here. i'd like to say right at the outset that i have been in any comment and a distinguished environments in my life, but i've never been as out of my leg as i am tonight. have any of you read the book? be this. okay, good. so that means that the fact that it took me three times reading it to understand it doesn't make me feel bad because none of you have anything over me. at least i have tried. >> it makes me feel bad. >> it's actually an extraordinary book and i più aage copies either tonight or in the near future.

it is titled as you know, war of the world views. and my only gripe with the book is the word war. and i don't think -- frankly i don't think -- i don't think ohio's a war. i think we'll have an extraordinarily rich discussion with two people have arguably as good an insight into the scientific and spiritual world as any two people. so you are in for and are mistreated and i'm very much looking forward to it. one of my credentials tonight i think i prayed a lot as a kid. i prayed i would be the shortstop for the boston red sox. it didn't come true. that i prayed that i would win wimbledon. that didn't happen either. so i have a lot of experience with frustration on religion. and i read the book, going

600 miles an hour at six miles above the earth. and you can't help but remember remember -- and drinking a cup of coffee, as most of you have done an airplane, some on top of the ocean come you can't help but be reminded everywhere we go today of the extraordinary. it's just unbelievable achievements of science. so they stand in a world that seems hungry for the spirit, fascinated and conflict at about where those two ideas lead us. so without any further talking for me, i am going to turn it over to the experts. and i'm going to start by asking a very broad question, which is to ask dee pop and then wondered and say what is good about science and what is really good about spirituality? [laughter] >> whitey to laugh when you said talk about science?

>> what is really good about science is precisely what tim is mentioning. life would be impossible today. we are here because of a chip laden that tim was talking about. we have eliminated a number of epidemics of disease. we have social networks that instantly are too nice. in fact i believe because of science and technology we have the capacity today to rewire the global brain and really created planetary civilization for the first time. i could go on and on about what what, but it's not good for time, but what is really good about time is it enriches the possibilities in the night that the sense and the awesomeness of god.

that's really good about time. imagine creating a universe in minutes and instead of taking seven days to do it. imagine creating a big bang simultaneously appears everywhere. you know, the big bang wasn't in a particular location of space and time. before the big bang, there is neither space nor time. it appears everywhere because cosmic radiation -- back on radiation comes to us from all sides. imagine taking a god smaller then a period at the end of a sentence and not stretching out across billions of light years of space and time. that is omnipotent. imagine precise laws, so precise that they were off by even a fraction of a fraction.

that's on the same. i think we have done god's great injustice by squeezing got into the volume of a body, the span of a late game, giving him a mere identity and putting him, you know, somewhere in an ethnic background and thank him and this god is the creator of the universe. god is much more awesome thanks to time. [applause] >> so when you ask what is it about spirituality, there's two levels to answer that question. one level of spirituality in general. i think it's very important to people's lives to be spiritual. and if you're a scientist it's very important i hope that people realize being a scientist doesn't mean you're not a spiritual person. the other level of the question

is deepak spirituality. i admire deepak spirituality simulates to the human condition. free yourself from the baggage of your path, treating other people with respect and he's got me meditating. and i like to meditate. i think it's very good for you. i recommend it. and i also agree with deepak that i think spirituality -- being a spiritual person and being able to appreciate the human condition and your place in the world make science all the much more awesome. so there's a great complementary player to use across mechanical turn. >> great. so let's start than with science. you argue in the book that science is rooted in the idea of scientific met at a steep ingrained with the idea that you

measurability. nothing you can see, touch, >> i didn't say it's real. though you're being pretty clear that most religion, it moves towards that which cannot be proven to be true and therefore should not be except good. >> well, i talk about science as a way of unders and in the physical world. and when you try to understand the physical world, you should exclude your subjectivity. science is a way of understanding the world as it is about interference from the way we would like it to be. thousands of years ago, people always have the same questions they have today. why is the world the way it is? way the eclipse this? was behind them? why are there earthquakes and floods? what are the planets all about

the lights in the sky? and thousands of years ago people would just think of stories, often an old wolf coming across the sky juice in another wolf in blocking the sun. and after a while we developed philosophy, a way of approaching the same questions through logic. but the last few hundred years to develop science, and other method of understanding these issues. everything science ads is testability. we have a theory and science come you don't just say -- you don't just give an opinion, that require predictions that they be testable and falsifiable. the progress and understanding of the way the world -- universe is this coming last two centuries based upon that idea has been enormous. as much for progress by science should not be asked to answer other questions of of life. science does not explain the meaning of life. science doesn't explain why you

feel loved. science doesn't explain why human genes are here. and science should be required to do that. on the other hand, spirituality, which answers those other questions often not through deepak spirituality, or religion gives the answer to fiscal question is often contradict what we observe in science. in the book i argue about that. what you believe the creation of the story in the bible? religions can offer some new people, but when i talk about the physical world, they see things that are clearly not great. i always wonder -- i mean, everyone here believes literally the bible. the bible says should be killed, that children who disrespect her parents should be killed. we would have no one left. people who talk about creationism tend to ignore it.

i yalaha they get around ignoring that in passages in the bible. but then i take the other parts bitterly. i don't understand that. i think they should recognize that in some ways the bible is updated the way of looking at >> so, deepak, when leonard writes about the mind, the brain, he makes a pretty powerful case that science has somewhat secrets that are beyond anyone's imagination even a couple years ago. how the brain functions, how the we know how it started. we know how it will end. you're suggesting that consciousness is this concept that you can't measure. you can't see it come you can't touch come you can't get a microscope around it, but it's there. everyone is as fair, but no one can measure it.

>> usage of the dilemma theory can very accurately. and that a site is so difficult to actually talk about consciousness because consciousness is what is talking right now. because if i wasn't a conscious being, i couldn't articulate what i'm saying and you would be able to listen to me or understand what i'm saying. what the mistake that science is making about consciousness -- in science, by the way, as mr. leonard said towards the end of the book, science does not exceed consciousness. but he also -- for now -- he is for now. here's the big, big problem, okay. and this is an accepted problem. it's called the hard problem in consciousness by scientists of consciousness. here is a hard problem. i'll illustrate.

imagine the ocean. can you i'll see a? can he picture? >> i can. >> in a sea of red roses come in the face your mother. if i went inside your brain, there's no picture. there's electrochemical activity. and you were having this check is experience. lsu can see the correlation between the picture and the electromagnetic activity, we have no way of explaining and having a modern to explain how that electrochemical dvd creates the subjective experience, which is what life is about. you don't have so many units of oxytocin, right? because rather than experience, colors and experience, the taste of red wine is an experience, okay? sonar experience in art

unconsciousness by looking at the brain. the reason you can't find it is consciousness is doing the looking, okay? so how do you find some and that is already in the object of observation? looked in the mirror. >> that's it. so while scientific validation of consciousness is in for inches. look mirror. the only experience of consciousness and self-awareness. that's it. so because consciousness is a task. on the other can of itself, how can i find it then? so right now is your listening to me, try this, please. i want you to have a brief experience. as are listening to me, just turn your attention. as you're listening to me, turn

your attention to the listening. that awareness you experience right now, that is experiencing that awareness, you're saying what the heck is that disturbance, the sirens? so i wish i had gone to the bathroom before the lecture started. that is your mind. but that experience is in your consciousness. this is a dos virtual traditions have said. this is not what charles merz, the scientifically based philosopher says is the hard problem. leonard in other people accept that. it is a hard problem because we are looking for consciousness they are when it's doing the looking. so whether or not -- when deepak talks that way, i was

thinking -- [laughter] told you, you have to really work hard appeared. i was straka n-november the quote from the great scientist at the early part of the scientific revolution who said the heart has reasons. the reason doesn't know. and i thought to myself, at some level it seems that pascal is just saying. and he's a great scientist. one of the really important scientists at this time is just saying there's more than one way of knowing. the way in which science knows may be complemented by just a completely different way of knowledge. >> i believe that. i said earlier there is a way of knowing yourself and a way of knowing the physical world. but you have to be careful because sometimes yourself in the physical world have an overlap. so deepak believes the mind is separate from the brain. there some other valve that he

can talk about, that everything is connect good. and i believe that the consciousness, whatever it is, that the human mind and scientists believe comes from the brain. there is a lot of evidence that sensations in the human mind come from the brain. you can stimulate parts of the brain to get people to have thoughts or memories or experience a color. we are beginning to learn where the emotions come from and how the brain works. now i am not saying they doing that we are learning the meaning of life, but we are learning about ourselves as human beings. >> is very meaning to life in science? >> science doesn't justify the meaning of life. it's just the physical world. science as i was telling you, here is the universe. here is the situation. and i'm going to tell you what

will a second for a minute later. i'm going to tell you how this operates. it doesn't address the question of meaning. i don't know why that should be required of science. you can come up to me and say i love that part of the cooking is very important. by does not plavix address cooking? is a separate issue. as a separate problem. and i think what we get into problems and difficulties when you try and make science something that it's not. and i don't know for what end. >> he says explicitly in the boat what he said just now, that science cannot explain consciousness. >> i didn't say conscious can't explain mind. >> no brain science can tell you right now how we have free will. in fact come in the previous book, he has denied with stephen

hawking the existing of free will. i think we all have free will. no brain size can tell you the mechanics of creativity or imagination. and as we call it today with a geneticist and an earth scientist at harvard who actually joseph b. kennedy professor at mac general who explicitly says today to sats at the nearest science conference. where and how his memory is stored? after a little bit of hemming and high, they all said we don't know. >> is that spirituality? is spirituality just finding that science doesn't know? >> spirituality is also giving the meaning of the focus of my

existence. why am i here? do i have a soul? does god exist? what is the meaning of dead. if god exists, does he or she or it was a great ministry care about me? >> can i jump indiana? i think there is one thing that i want to make clear. science has not explained everything yet. and it may never appeared the human mind might not even be capable of understanding everything. just think that thousands of years ago. people did not understand what caused an eclipse and other people came along. if we don't understand what it is come and must be rules jumping across the sky. i am saying just because we don't understand consciousness or other aspects of human beings right now, we should just grab onto any explanation like rules jumping across the sky. science leaves blanks. you want to interrupt, but you won't. the science leaves blanks in the

understanding of the word, but it doesn't mean we are free to fill the most blanks with any answers we want. >> so can -- yeah, go ahead. unknown, the unknown unknowable. there are levels of reality that will never be accessible to us. >> i didn't hear him say that in the boat. >> for instance, science can never answer that you do know why? because you if you answered that of physics can have you asked with a luscombe from? you derive those lies. so the physics by definition starts with some laws or print the polls tenderize the consequences. so physics can address the question, what if those laws come from?

what created the laws? that's outside the realm of physics. >> why does physics than not acknowledge there is a first cause? >> a first cause of the universe quite >> of the luscombe of anything. >> i explicitly said that physics can explain. we have no objection to that. our opinion we also talked about about -- >> you think thomas aquinas first cause, first mover? >> what we are saying is the universe can come of the board. >> now, that's not quite saying that the universe -- that physics can create the universe. the universe and the laws of physics are two separate things. they talk about the laws of physics as there were.

>> we can also ask ourselves, what can we gain by saying that scott. what does that get ask linux >> it gets us into humility and reverence. >> you quote einstein. >> one of the einstein says in this book -- >> use a physicist physicist, right? >> he was a physicist. he was humbled to reverence of the nationality of the universe. and you know, first of all come you can't measure reference and secondly if it's a rational universe, it is comprehensible to us. it could have a rational thought. but here's another objection i have two scientific method that does not acknowledge consciousness. you know, leonard says that science is based on the loop of theory, experimentation and observation.

buras experiment designed in consciousness? wares observation made in consciousness? we have no scientific explanation for consciousness. right there you are ignoring the white elephant in the room, you know? you are saying they can have in the absence of consciousness in all explanation, science meets consciousness to extend anything. and consciousness does any science to explain anything. all it means is self-awareness. >> just a couple things. one is that deepak will be characterizing scientist has not been able to have it on in wonder at nature come even as he was quoting einstein. that's important for a physicist. you're a smart guy. you go to law school could make a ton of money. instead he chooses in some dark office working on paper all day on these equations all day and all night with no promise of any

particular success. you do that because you do have often wondered the universe and you want to know how it works. >> that is spiritual. spirituality is important for scientists. just because scientists don't believe wolves jump across the sky -- >> that's my opinion. [inaudible conversations] >> there's not one person in this or that believes -- >> to me, you do. >> i do? when did you hear me say that? >> i don't mean that literally. >> the other thing is that deepak said the scientist and i consciousness. i don't know where that comes from. there is scientists who are studying consciousness. the scientists admit that they don't just -- they can't just say where it comes from. science progresses in small steps carefully and scientists will start talking about what

consciousness is and they have a good idea what it is. but just because they can't explain it doesn't mean they deny it. >> what is the most prominent and he has made it a personal of his to say this. that is very controversial attitude. he's scientific even though he accuses me of causing eclipses. [laughter] one thing i can say about leonard is great intellectual integrity. you know, we spent a lot of time together. and i was say that he has intellectual integrity. but there are fundamentalists in science today who will make statements and actually have an

agenda. science is not supposed to have an agenda. >> in fairness to mama to people as they may be a first cause has done -- an outcome you could make a case that is justifiable as the definition of god or something. but people get uncomfortable with spirituality and religion because from the idea of the first kaiser consciousness, religions tend to make up a lot of rules and ideas and plans and programs that drive people kind of -- >> spirituality -- to say there's a spirituality is one thing. to say this is how you ought to live is another. the claims that people make as leonard points out in the book are not really verifiable. how do you know whether it's better to be peaceful or were like, whether it's better to be anxious or calm, whether it's better the situation to do this

or that, the religions and spiritual traditions tend to say this is the right way to go. and scientists come along and say, how do you know? >> separate religious dogma from religious experience because if you look at -- >> what i want you to help us in there is, how do you defend the inevitable need that in a spiritual leader has two say things about the world based on your spirituality that will inevitably lead to conflict? >> eyesight with hg wells comeau said scientist morality is just jealousy with a halo. so i think any morality is immoral. any imposed morality. but the religious experience gives you transcendence community consciousness, spontaneously brings about what you call platonic qualities, a hearing for platonic qualities.

use, goodness, beauty, abolition, peace, social justice, harmony, love, compassion, equanimity. this is the religious experience that has a spontaneous expression of transcendence as being connected to the first cause, whatever you want to call it. ..

>> one of the great challenges to people who say that god is good, god is beautiful, fine, our motives, et cetera, is the experience of the holocaust or the experience, the confrontation with evil or at least the sense which nothing good could allow. >> good is the evolutionary impulse. >> why would god, if that dean is good and true, why -- >> you are thinking of a being as being considered, it contains everything. in other words, by definition it's not infinite. that's the difference between eastern and western traditions. they want god to conform to their idea of how things should be. in fact, when god is being infinite of all things, there

are many faces of divine, it's our job to see where our free will allows us to align with the evolutionary impulse or the destructive impulse. if that is infinite by definition it is everything. now having said -- >> even the bad? >> we see the bad, don't we? it's a stage of development sometimes. it's a spiritual stage of development progress stages of development and psychology. why can't we have stages of development and spirituality? >> i was thing of development of whatever we're calling god your i just don't know why -- >> if you look at the world right now, less violence today, less racism, less bigotry, less of everything than 1000 years ago. we had slavery in this country,

you know, a few hundred years ago. women couldn't vote. we are improving in our evolution. that's part of the spiritual quest. but what i also have to say, the absence of that spiritual quest, we have, and i have to phrase it very carefully, i have to phrase this very carefully. science devoid of spirituality has given modern faculties that risk our extinction. you know, it has given nuclear weapons, global warming, climate chaos. i saw a program the other day on television where there are people in civilian uniform, civilian clothes, they had

worked nine to five jobs, they take cigarettes and coffee breaks and they go home at five and play with her children and go to sleep. but they have been moving a mouse on the computer to move drones in faraway places that have killed sometimes a few hundred people, and they don't have any emotional connection to that, or spiritual connection to that. this is diabolical creativity, that if i can say to you, if there is a distinction of our civilization, it will be because of modern capacities linked to primitive spiritual developmen developments. >> so leonard, doesn't science really, shouldn't science, great advanced thinkers like you another people who are applied physics to technology, shouldn't you be asking for spiritual guidance almost daily? >> i think so. all people should be looking for

spiritual guidance daily. deepak uses this example a lot, and i'm not quite sure what he's getting at because scientists like everyone else, like you, like everyone in the audience, should be moral people. they shouldn't do evil things. that's not the question at issue. the question at issue is how do we get, how do we up in a? or do we want to limit it? if you want to limit signs, let me make an argument that we should just stop signs because there will be evil people, you can make an atom bomb, first of all it takes old technology but anyone can read, once you read these things, would you get the knowledge people can apply. the ones are seeking for new knowledge, not the one to making things from what we know generally speaking. i don't want to get letters on this. but people, so the question is, is it dangerous to acknowledge? that's what he is talking about.

once knowledge is there, evil people can do evil things. >> isn't it -- >> i think knowledge is not the goal. we need wisdom, not knowledge. knowledge can be divine, it can be diabolical. >> does physics bring was in? >> it should. >> physics as you said seeks the guidance of those who understand the human spirit and says, let's make our time which we have the technology, we have the means today, to resurrect the species that are disappearing. we have the technology today to correct global warming. we have the technology today to harness solar energy. why aren't we paying attention to these technologies more than we're paying attention to -- >> can i say, i'm a scientist but i agree with you?

this -- >> if the failure of people in this town, the failure of -- [laughter] do you think a scientist look up and more as i i think a want to work on weapons today? the government pays companies to do this kind of research and if you don't like it, vote them out of office but don't say that science is a bad methodology for understanding the universe because you don't like some of the ways people use it. you seem to be saying that. you said science has to incorporate subjectivity and spirituality people what you mean is people need to incorporate those. >> part of the human experience, the human experience, documentation of data, the human experience is everything, everything you do, including the kind of pursuit is because of a subjective motivation. >> and yet if we're going to element properties to 10 decimal places it doesn't matter if we're in a bad mood, or cannot

work. [inaudible] >> exactly, thank you. scientist trying to avoid this human bias. >> a couple of questions from the audience, and this is picking up on this issue from -- to limit their candor the ultimate right and wrong? [laughter] >> this is a question? i'm the scientist but i'm not the emotion and i'm not a psychologist. >> would you allow it? i mean, in other words, i was asking my wife, what question do we really want to ask scientist. sometimes it's like why did sides seem so irritated by religion these days, by spirituality, i the question of right and wrong? >> side gets irritated -- scientists get irritated by some

of the use of the religion today when politicians say god told me to run, our evolution is wrong, or that global warming is just a theory. but when people look at the results and the hard work of scientists who really know a lot and test their theories and come up with results that are verifiable, and of the people are think about it at all, just dismissive, gives those. that's what irritates sciences, and deepak agrees with me. >> but that's not described in the book. there's books been written recently, the big best seller seem to have captured a level of anger. >> they capture the anger of people are angry, so that

tapping into that. the other people are tapping into the thing and a voice tapping into something enable is making a bock and it's great. >> i think everything, was it there the new germany, the man who had -- you have to take things in context. >> deepak, science and religion, i guess for both you, are often used to justify human superiority, human consciousness, the human mind and human capacity, science, religion seems to place he was at the center of meaning and value. are both guilty of making human severe over all other creatures, all other beings?

>> i think, you're talking about i guess talk outside his making people superior, talking about biologists, talk about how humans are being from other species? >> i'm not sure. it's a question from the audience. in the book you point out that humans have reached a level of consciousness, a level of intellectual capacity, and wonder, curiosity allows us to reason in a way that other animals can't do. it suggests that human beings have a special -- >> when you compare it, we all agree we can breathe a little better. but i don't think that science tends to feel any kind of superiority, that people are super to other animals that have some greater worth. scientists are studying the brains of animals, the behavior and what different species are. >> my response is human beings is paradoxical species.

we are the only species which can create, back in your in for the divine, that can have that longing for meaning, that have created art, civilization. so that's amazing part. but as i said, the human species is also the predator. it is gotten rid of other species, is risking its own extinction. i was talking to biologists in the day. he said if insects disappeared from our planet, if human beings disappeared from the planet, life would flourish in five years. [laughter] because we are they can speak if you look at it from a cosmic perspective, where multiple in, we have cause and a sustainable planet. we are metastasizing. we are scourging the planet and we're missing our extinction after 14 billion years of

creation. we can do this in the next 100 years. so that's the price you pay for free world. it's our responsibility to say, two of what -- [inaudible] collective imagination to become the next evolutionary impulse for the first cause, or do speed but is spirituality human only? despairs have a spirituality? >> i think every living form is connected to the spirit. how can it not be if it is alive? in fact, animals are much more than we are, therefore innocent much more sure and unconditioned. >> so, we're unfortunately, these are all good questions. i think one that really want to know the answer is from leonard. which episode of star trek did you work on? [laughter] >> now we get to the real

important stuff. i worked on the second season. i was called a story editor, rewriting episodes that would coming. my partner and i wrote one ourselves. it was leslie's first girlfriend. she was raised on one planet to be separate from the ruling class and then she was being transported to her home planet and had never seen, a very very special episode. had never seen another of her species, never been in love and was then, fell in love with leslie but she was supposed to fall in love with someone of another species certainly and she happened to be guided by a name he he was an evil shape shifter. it got to intense for a while. that was my scientific spiritual. the next generation. >> okay, a couple of questions that came from the "washington post," which we're obliged to

share, and you both have to take a swing at these. for those of us, the first one is for those of us who put faith in science, well constructed responses can we make statements by those without scientific training to attack scientific findings? for example, how should we respond to those who claim that hurricane is the wrath of god? >> through education. through education. i think -- >> religious people do this all the time. coincidence happens. god just made this coincidence happen. i just ran into my old friend, it must have been god's work. that's never true, that god didn't put us here together? >> no, i wouldn't, i think we have choice to do what we want. you know, natural disasters have

causes that we can explain, like earthquakes. some natural disasters like hurricanes, we know that humans have a lot to do with it, with changing weather patterns and climate, so you have to examine each case carefully. i would say a lot of the weather, we are definitely responsible for, but i wouldn't blame god for it. >> solyndra, what would make it more effective political leader of? >> a person of science or a person of faith and? >> a person of faith meaning a person who believes in what? >> can't a scientist a person of faith? exclusive? >> well, a scientist or a spiritual leader of. >> i think it have attorneys  politician, you certainly shoul be able to have physicists. [laughter] [applause] >> i think that you need a spiritual person, a person who

believes in the human spirit who cares about people, he cares about the community, who cares about helping other people. it would be helpful for someone who understands science to once and well. isamu go for the goal and try to get both. >> and i say something that politicians understand something they're intuitively. they know that people pretend to be intellectual but actually are bursting with emotion, but nobody ever makes a decision based on rationality and make emotional decisions. and politicians understand that. there's a biological reason for the. our emotions bring about 100 million years evolution, and according, only 4 million years. wife and older, and people respond to that and intuitively know. so it's not what a politician is saying, but what they feel.

>> so maybe we just start to get ready to close. i thought it might be worth remembering steve jobs today. his contributions are obviously enormous in many, many ways. his well-known stanford commencement speech, among the things he said, was this. death is very likely, single best invention of life. it is life changing. so, i guess the question is, is -- is life and death? was it a good invention? >> death makes life possible. if we didn't, every part of your body is dying right now so you can re-create it. cells are dying every five minutes. you were a child, that child is deadly to a teenager, and biology we have faced in -- when

a sofa gets to die it becomes cancerous. a cancerous cell is one that doesn't know how to do. the universe re-creates itself as the mechanism of death. but stevens on. every time i use in handheld device on my computer, steve's consciousness is in my body right now. and that's how he survived, in each other's consciousness. that's where we are right now, in each other's consciousness. >> do you think steve lives on, there? >> i think it is on, but i also agree with deepak, without death the earth would very quickly be overrun by old fogey's like us, and there'll be no room. [inaudible] >> there would be no room. death is a necessary part of life. at least if you're going to reproduce, and we all like that.

[laughter] >> we can agree on that. well, i think i started by saying all the things i pray for that i didn't get it i cannot add? the chicago cubs, they may not be winning the world series, but hasn't happened in my lifetime. >> you have to pray harder on that one. but i think we're in a was a grateful to the two of you to have taken in for so much effort into helping the average reader understand the worldviews of physics and the emerging worldview of a new kind of spiritual the, the deepak is a champion. effective and one that the spiritual if we think of we think of religious institutions. also remember the great call of israel, the lord our god is one, the way that prayer begins, which i'm sure is spoken many times from this place. the unity that comes from the ancient tradition. however, crazy we all -- aikido

thing these two guys agree on is how much they don't like the catholic church. i happen that you don't is a chief that gets in this book is the catholic church. but no. [laughter] >> the third jesus in a i know you like jesus, i know you like jesus. [laughter] pic he said jesus was a scientist. >> scientist of the spirit and you question that. >> i think we really want to thank you. >> thank you all for coming. >> for tolerating us. [applause] >> we are all invited to reception downstairs, and i think both leonard and deepak are willing to stay to have a conversation. we invite you all to come downstairs and enjoy, thank you. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> visible tv.org to watch any of the programs you see here online. type the author or book title in the search bar in upper left side of the page and click search. you can also share anything you see on booktv.org easily by clicking share on the upper left side of the page and selecting the format. booktv streams live online for 40 hours every weekend with top nonfiction books and authors. opv.org. spent on compromise is the name of the book. first of all, when and how did

you serve in the cia? >> i register working for the fbi as a special agent, and i worked with them for less than five years, and i transferred from the fbi and work with the cia in 2003. i've worked a number of high profile cases for the fbi such as the u.s. as coal, the bombing in riyadh, the complex bombing, the assassination and murder of the u.s. diplomat in 2002. and i was exposed to work with cia officers overseas, and they've agriculture and linguistic abilities. i transferred to the cia and others dispatch immediately to work in baghdad. so i was involved in the hunt of saddam hussein. that was a successful operation. but i get to a lot of other cases that i worked for for the cia. >> how long were you with the cia? >> for a little less than five

years, about 10 years, less than 10 years total government service pack the subtitle of your new book, "uncompromised," is the rise, fall and redemption. y. in that order of? >> because my career has skyrocketed that i was being in cases, a seasoned agent with years of experience, and then the same thing, i was given a lot of missions that are needed to accomplish that were extremely hard missions and their detailed in the book. but then after i returned from baghdad i was accused, falsely accuse i should say, as being a terrorist at the board of terrorism. eventually i was exonerated and i'm here today telling my story. >> tell us very quickly about that accusation. >> well, it involves the terrorist group hezbollah and the fbi has thought that i looked into documents related to hezbollah and passed intelligence to hezbollah.

i do see that wasn't too. the evidence against me was labeled secret and i wasn't able, the evidence was not shared with me, but the state conducted an investigation and a federal judge, and they both exonerated me publicly. >> were you arrested? >> no, i was not. i pled guilty to charges because i've threatened. basically the government said they're going to deport me to lebanon and announced the lebanese government that i worked with the fbi and the cia, and that's basically a death threat. so i pled guilty to these false charges. >> do you detail that in "uncompromised"? >> idea. i described a number of the cia missions, a number of cases i was involved in three renditions of the fbi and i described the circumstances around the false accusations, and finally the exoneration. >> nada prouty, as an arab-american woman, in the cia, did you face situations that may be a white male would not?

>> well, given my language skills, given my looks and cultural background, i was given missions to get out of the green zone and collect intelligence. i was disguised under which were my weapons, and i was able to collect intelligence that others may not have been able to. but again, i discussed these cases in the book and hope to get a chance to read it. >> that the cia have to bet your book? >> yes. i had to submit my manuscript to the fbi and they had to approve it. >> why did you leave the cia? >> it was part of the plea deal come unfortunately. when people ask me all the time, would you ever go back to government service, and i tell them the same thing. i am living proof that the justice system works because the truth was told in the end. and i'm happy to have served my country and i'll serve my country again at the drop of a dime.

this is not a pessimistic. this is for me, optimistic story. in any of the country had i been accused of these horrendous charges i would've been executed. only in america do you get the chance to tell your story and know that justice prevails and the income and know that the truth always comes out. >> this is booktv on c-span2. we've been talking with nada prouty, former cia agent and author of this book, published by palgrave macmillan, "uncompromised." and. >> next on booktv kathryn mcgarr recounts the poker career of robert strauss. mr. strauss, an attorney in the washington law firm, was well connected inside the beltway answered as chairman of the democratic national committee from 1972-1977. ambassador to the soviet union in 1991, and as an advisor to several presidents.

this is a little under an hour. >> leaving everybody. thank you for staying tight while we waited for people to trickle onto. thank you especially for coming out and breeding electrical storms, thunderstorms, tornado warnings and everything else. we really appreciate you being here. i'm lisa with my husband brad, i'm one of the new owners of politics and prose, and our behalf of our fantastic staff, we welcome you all here tonight. this is one of about 475 author events that we do at the store every year. we believe it's part of our mission as a great independent bookstore to do these events and bring authors to our community, and our community to them. and really to provide not just great books for people to read, but also a place and a