Most helpful customer reviews
1.0 out of 5 stars
The definition of the key concept missing, May 6 2004
By A Customer
Like one of the other reviewers, I was offended by the bad scholarship. The title of the book is "Scientific Blunders" and the aim of the book is to lay bare several misconceptions in the history of science. I had these things in my mind, when I took a deep dive to the book. In my opinion, the following statement should be pretty obvious: when deciding if something is science or not, one is making value judgement based on a certain conception of science. So, in the introductory chapter I would have excepted to find a definition of science, but couldn't find one. When my reading progressed, I was constantly waiting for the aforementioned definition - but still couldn't find it. At certain point of my reading, it became clear to me, that the writer is not trying to convince the reader with logically and conceptually sound and coherent proof, but with rhetorics and assertions based on an implicit, narrow and (propably) philosphically poorly justified conception of science. For that reason the word "science" started to look like a magical word, which is somehow mysteriously expected to explain itself. But, it is pointless to continue on this track. To summarize: the aim of the book is ambitious, but the attempt falls dolefully short. If I had a second chance, I would buy some other book and not waste my money to this... well, rubbish.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4.0 out of 5 stars
A journey through science, Aug 29 2002
The 'Blunders' mentioned in this book are only an excuse to take the reader on an exciting journey through the very broad spectrum of science. You can actually compare this book with a menu card you would get in The Restaurant of Science: a starter of Evolution Theory, a main course of Physics, a slice of Biology and maybe some Technology as a dessert? The common thread through all these chapters -being how wrong things can get- gives the reader an interesting view on what scientific prove actually means. All scientists are humans (we hope...) and this gives rise to emotional arguments popping up from time to time. What happens when you mix these with experimental research has been illustrated in abundance: carelessness, wrong-headedness, arrogance, moral fear or plain bad luck. Fair, not all 'blunders' are worthy of this tag, quite a lot are just as can be expected from a normal struggle for the truth. But still, science would have been far more advanced if these human influences could have been avoided. But isn't this a utopia? Although the title might suggest some humorous content, it certainly does not deliver on these expectations. The tongue-in-cheek approach makes the topics quite more readable, but does not reduce the explanations to kindergarten gibberish. It is true that a few facts are plainly wrong, but the main message of the book doesn't suffer from this. To conclude: it's a nice book intended for a general public and easy to read (I read it on a plane). It lets you browse through popular science in a relaxed manner. Hopefully this will encourage people to dive deeper into the topics they find interesting. But be aware: people who think of science as a sacred institution might get offended by this book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
3.0 out of 5 stars
well, not exactly, Oct 8 2001
do not expect some kind of a breath taking find in the book, the name of this book should be more of a breif history of scientific misconseptions. good book for easy reading and popular science history, no more but no less as well. nice book to have on the shelf.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|