What do you think?
Rate this book
Il club dei filosofi che volevano cambiare il mondo
Cambridge, 1812. Quattro brillanti studenti universitari – William Whewell, John Herschel, Charles Babbage e Richard Jones – scoprono di avere in comune l’amore per la scienza, oltre che per il buon cibo e le grandi bevute. Al loro primo incontro ne seguono altri, ogni domenica mattina, fino all’istituzione di un vero e proprio Club dei filosofi. Ispirandosi al metodo induttivo di Bacone, i quattro amici si propongono di rivoluzionare il concetto di scienza, portandola fuori dai polverosi ambienti accademici per metterla al servizio dell’umanità e delle classi sociali meno agiate. In cinquant’anni di amicizia, dibattiti, invenzioni, successi e fallimenti, questi straordinari pensatori riescono a mettere in atto una profonda trasformazione della scienza. La loro storia è quella di un grande sogno, e dell’incredibile legame umano e professionale che li unì. Il ritratto affascinante di un’epoca di importanti innovazioni e scoperte scientifiche destinate a cambiare per sempre il mondo.
384 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2011
124 people are currently reading
2535 people want to read
About the author
Laura J. Snyder
4 books46 followersAn expert on Victorian science and culture, Fulbright scholar Laura J. Snyder just completed a term as President of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science, and is Associate Professor of Philosophy at St. John's University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 103 reviews
March 20, 2011
If you enjoyed Holmes' book The Age of Wonder: How the Romantic Generation Discovered the Beauty and Terror of Science, then you will thorougly appreciate this book, as well. In The Age of Wonder, one of the main characters is William Herschel, the discoverer of the planet Uranus. In this book, one of the four main characters is his son, John Herschel. It turns out that John Herschel also became an astronomer, just as famous and as influential a scientist in his time, as his father. Another of the characters in the book, William Whewell, coined the term "scientist" extemporaneously during a lecture before the British Association of Science. He organized the first true international observing program; people from around the world simultaneously measured the tides at 15-minute intervals during a several-week period. Whewell used the vast data set to develop a large-scale cotidal chart of the Atlantic Ocean. Both Herschel and Whewell developed the philosophy of science and the scientific method; discoveries were transformed from a "Eureka" moment of serendipity into unifying theories that brought together explanations of a wide variety of phenomena. This concept, known as consilience, played a strong role in Charles Darwin's development of his theory of evolution through natural selection.
The third main character in the book was Babbage, a brilliant mathematician who developed mechanical computers. The book describes how, after the death of his wife, he became cantankerous, self-serving and egotistical. Perhaps Babbage did not quite understand the full implications of his computer designs--at least he seemed incapable of explaining them to outsiders. It was a friend named Ada Lovelace helped to advertise the potential of his inventions, and who showed how they were not merely number-crunching machines, but truly general-purpose symbolic computers. (The Defense Department's computer language "Ada" is named after her.) The fourth main character in the book, Richard Jones, is less well-known today. He developed theories of political economics that were to become very influential.
The book does a fine job of pulling together the interactions between these four scientists and the rest of the scientific community. The author, Laura Snyder, shows how politics, economics and society helped shape the lives and investigations of scientists in the first half of the 19th century.
The third main character in the book was Babbage, a brilliant mathematician who developed mechanical computers. The book describes how, after the death of his wife, he became cantankerous, self-serving and egotistical. Perhaps Babbage did not quite understand the full implications of his computer designs--at least he seemed incapable of explaining them to outsiders. It was a friend named Ada Lovelace helped to advertise the potential of his inventions, and who showed how they were not merely number-crunching machines, but truly general-purpose symbolic computers. (The Defense Department's computer language "Ada" is named after her.) The fourth main character in the book, Richard Jones, is less well-known today. He developed theories of political economics that were to become very influential.
The book does a fine job of pulling together the interactions between these four scientists and the rest of the scientific community. The author, Laura Snyder, shows how politics, economics and society helped shape the lives and investigations of scientists in the first half of the 19th century.
July 22, 2011
Four friends who met at Cambridge in the early 1800s and who went on to coining the term "scientist", run the world's first international data-gathering project, design the first computer, and reboot economics. It's a good story with a lot of colour and context, but it's a LONG story--it follows these four active chaps through their long lives and many projects. I have to admit that my attention waned towards the end, but perhaps that was a function of trying to rip through the last half in two nights of sleepy reading.
I enjoyed "Age of Wonder" by Richard Holmes. This book is less easy a read than that, but you'll recognize some characters! Joseph Banks makes an appearance, and one of the leading characters is John Herschel, the son of "Age of Wonder"'s William Herschel. John is a much more likeable chap--he's the aristocrat of the group, coming from scientific gentry, and his friends repeatedly wheel him in as the big gun to bring to bear on the political problems they're having with their projects.
One of the big revelations for me is what a king-sized ass Charles Babbage was. Not just brusque, but the wielder of the sort of bullheaded rudeness that pretty much guarantees you have no friends. And, sure enough, even his schooltime friends kept him at a distance. I'd known he was difficult to be with, and had assumed it was because of the frustrations of building his machines. Snyder paints the much more human possibility that he loved his wife dearly, and when she died he was unable to express his grief and became the bitter angry man we know him as. I could dislike the Charles Babbage who was an unreasonable man, but I sympathize with the heart-broken husband.
Babbage, indeed, was an unpleasant yet compelling character. His behaviour, whatever its origins, reminded me of programmers I have known: prickly, convinced they are right (even worse--sometimes they are!), and whose attitude sabotages anything involving other people. All the while, they're staggeringly brilliant and even their side projects are genius.
This is as much a book about ideas as it is about people: how is science to be conducted, should the government fund it, what should science organizations do, how do we reconcile science and religion, the value of precision. The four men formed the Philosophical Breakfast Club to promote Baconian views of science as a structured inductive data-driven practice. They practiced science, wrote books about it, changed the professional landscape, and between them had tremendous influence.
It's a good read but long, and eyes may glaze unless one's passion for the history of science burns with a bright flame. I enjoyed it and took a lot away, as you're about to see.
Things I liked or learned (dodgy numbering b/c I had to delete some to fit goodreads review limit size):
1) Coleridge rejected "natural philosopher" as a job title because it implied armchairs instead of apparatus. Whewell suggested "by analogy with artist, we may form scientist". C. caused that word to exist!
2) "navvie" is a contraction of "navigator"--the people who built the canals. Only later did it come to mean railway workers.
3) Canals were lined with "puddle", a clay mixed with water that was pounded down tight by cattle or men tramping back and forth on it for weeks.
5) Forming a society or club was like starting a mailing list or a Google Code project.
6) Bacon was the father of observations and induction, which is coming back to life with the new big-data world of science. Spider spins out of own substance, deducing from what he already knows. Ant piles up facts haphazardly but doesn't explain with theories. Honey-bee collects and digests the pollen, making something new.
7) Babbage, shining student, chose to defend the assertion "God is a material agent" in an oral exam--without warning his investigator of this. He was "sent down", prevented from taking honours.
8) Babbage didn't tell his good friend Herschel about his wife for months, because he thought the news would be "uninteresting" to him.
9) Herschel was so drunk when he visited Stonehenge that he wrote that he "saw not a single stone.--May his Satanic Majesty fetch me quickly if I know whether it is made of stone or cheese."
10) Whewell wrote out a series of joke exam questions, one of which was "to determine the least possible quantity of material out of which the modern dress of a fashionable female can be constructed."
11) Jacques de Vaucanson created, in 1737, a mechanical duck that seemed to eat and shit.
12) Babbage's belief in the utility of his difference engine wasn't universal, many thought the error-riddled log tables were good enough. Babbage, Whewell, Jones, and Herschel believed that science required accuracy and precision. I think of this as an early version of the "better data beats more data" motto.
13) Malthus was young when he wrote his book. Welfare was a hot topic then, as now. Malthus = "there's no point in helping them, they'll just keep breeding until there's too many to help".
14) Bacon believed science should bring about "the relief of man's estate", ie work in the public good.
15) Economics was (and still is, dammit) full of theoretical derivations disconnected from experience. Jones gathered economic data from around the world to disprove the conclusions and axioms of the leading economist, Ricardo.
16) Just as a drop of water, when viewed through a microscope, is found to teem with life, Jones believed that history--when viewed correctly--"teems everywhere with facts" which can be used in constructing economic theories.
18) A worker was required to sell all of his belongings, including the furniture from his house and the tools of his trade, in order to receive relief in the workhouse. This made it impossible for a man to leave the workhouse and take up his trade again, as he could not earn the money to buy back those tools while in the workhouse, and thus reduced him to permanent "servitude".
20) Whewell coined the term "uniformitarianism" and "catastrophism" for the two camps about whether things changed slowly or all-at-once on the Earth.
21) Darwin admitted to his friend Thomas Henry Huxley that "I sometimes think that general and popular Treatises are almost as important for the progress of science as the original work."
22) Babbage took and urged others to take factory tours. "Those who enjoy leisure can scarcely find a more interesting and instructive pursuit than the examination of the workshops of their country."
23) Babbage wrote on economics and manufacturing, identifying globalisation and the growing importance of factories. He advocated the penny post (sender-pays postage).
24) Babbage attacked the Royal Society, naming names and making accusations. "I hope to teach even chartered and ancient bodies a lesson that may in future prevent them from studiously neglecting and then insulting any individual amongst them. . . . I will make them writhe if they do not reform. In short my volume will be a receipt in full for the amount of injuries I have received."
25) Babbage, having engineered the overthrow of the old regime at the Royal Society and his friend John Herschel on the ballot, proceeded to tell people they didn't have to vote, it was all in the bag. Herschel lost by eight votes. Babbage then founded BAAS and roped Whewell and Herschel into doing most of the work.
26) Economics has always been prone to political shoutiness. At the 1835 BAAS Statistical group meeting, Alexis de Tocqueville, visiting from France soon after publishing the first volume of "Democracy in America", was there to witness the melee that broke out among some members of the crowd. Eventually the BAAS resolved the problem by assigning the section meetings of the Statistical Section to small rooms, withholding grant monies, and confining the published notices of statistical papers to mere tables of numbers, thus contravening the possibility of controversial political conclusions. Babbage and Jones founded a separate London Statistical Society, which was in turn plagued by "rancor and unruliness" and again resorted to "facts divorced from all theory". Whewell explained to Quetelet that "they would go on better if they had some zealous *theorists* among them ... Unconnected facts are of comparatively small value."
27) The British Association made science a public activity, with lots of demonstrations at meetings. They let in women (Royal Society didn't), and the sale of "ladies tickets" to the evening lectures became a major source of revenue for the association.
28) BAAS instituted grants, whereas Royal Society only offered prizes. Difference is that you can fund work to be done with a grant, whereas a prize only rewards work already done. Ironic that today, X-Prize and similar prizes are all in vogue as an attempt to inspire work you don't have to pay for.
29) Christ they were an in-bred crony lot! Whewell recommended Babbage get money. He got money from the BAAS. He reviewed Herschel's book and praised it, etc.
30) By 1835 an anonymous critic was calling the meetings "extensive humbugs", noting that "with the aid of concerts and balls, beautiful women, sound claret and strong whiskey, the sages [make] out remarkably well." For their part, the philosophers had set themselves up for criticisms on this count: in a letter to Lord Milton right before the York meeting, Harcourt ventured to end with the reminder that "philosophers are very fond of venison," asking whether Milton could supply some for the meeting from his estate. After the Liverpool meeting in 1837, a slightly dazed Sedgewick wrote to the wife of Charles Lyell that "mountains of venison and oceans of turtle" were on hand to feed the hungry savants. "Were ever philosophers so fed before?" Sedgewick mused. "Twenty-hundred-weight of turtle were sent to fructify in the hungry stomachs of the sons of science!" It would not be long before the society found itself ridiculed for the display of gastronomical science at each fo the meetings. The editor of the Quarterly Review attacked the "gastropatetic turtle-philia" of the Association. Comparisons with Foo Camp and the Hackers Conference left to the reader :-)
31) Herschel spent years in South Africa, and loved it. Darwin travelled out to see "the great Man" (Herschel) when Beagle came past in 1838.
32) Must investigate the "camera lucida", which facilitates tracing and was the primary pictorial recording device of science until photography.
33) Whewell studied tides. The only people who systematically observed the times of the high and low tides were havormasters, and they tended to keep their information as closely guarded secrets: few accurate tide tables based on long-term observations were published and made readily available. The Royal Navy had no such information; captains were responsible for trying to gain the information on their own, by contacting harbormasters and hoping to get useful information from them--usually by paying them bribes to share the knowledge.
34) Beaufort of the Beaufort scale was the man who approved Darwin for the Beagle trip.
35) Whewell wrote to Jones, "You know as well as I do that those who theorize rightly are in the end the lords of the earth."
36) There was no cadastral survey of the UK in Jones's time, though he wanted one and proposed it and estimated its cost. He was responsible for settling differences in tithe calculations, which were land taxes for church and thus relied on accurate measurement of land. Again, the need for precision. Again, government didn't appreciate it even though In one such map, two fields were represented as nearly the same size, although in reality one was 3.5 acres and the other only .75 acre.
37) Babbage threw huge parties. He had a party trick, with a smaller demo version of his machine rigged to count in ones to 100 then in twos. Darwin: "Lyell says Babbage's parties are the best in the way of literary people in London--and that there is a good mixture of pretty women!"
38) Whewell to Jones: "while you work for years in the elaboration of slowly developing ideas, I take the first buds of thought and make a nosegay out of them."
39) Babbage's devotion to inductive reasoning took second place to the deductive character of his calculator. This put him and Whewell in opposition after Whewell wrote a volume in the "Bridgewater Treatises" series attempting to show religion and science weren't in opposition and dumping on mathematicians in the process, prompting Babbage to retaliate with an unauthorized ninth volume in the series praising deductive reasoning and showing how it was the true way God worked and so on. This was the major wedge between them and Babbage never seemed part of the club again afterward.
40) Babbage estimated the rate of the analytic engine at 1IPS.
41) Herschel used his past chemical work to "fix" the developed images from photography, and eventually was lauded as a father of photography. It's amazing how much of it was in the air: Herschel had done the chemistry a decade or two earlier, Daguerre was chasing similar effects (different chemistry, different stock) in France, and Talbot (the inventor of the image-to-negative-to-print method) was in a race with Daguerre.
42) Herschel coined the term "photography"
43) There is no item 43.
43) There are two item 43s.
44) James Ross (of "Ross Ice Shelf" fame) took two boats to the South Pole: "Erebus" and "Terror".
45) In 1840, William Herschel's 40-foot telescope was dismantled. The tube was then sealed, and laid horizontally on three stone piers in the garden at Observatory House in Slough. Today nothing remains but a monument to the Herschels on Windsor Road, near where the house once stood.
46) Kepler's mentor and employer, the Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe, had made the extraordinarily precise and accurate observations of Mars later used by kepler. Yet even Brahe did not colligate these data using the concept of an ellipse--he continued to "see" the orbit as circular. The revolutionary aspect of Kepler's discovery was not making the observations of the planet's positions--though these were a necessary precondition for the discovery--but putting these together using the new concept of an ellipse.
47) Augustus De Morgan composed "The Astronomer's Drinking Song", sung at the dinners of the old Mathematical Society, one stanza of which is:
De Morgan added a footnote to this stanza, explaining that "Dr Whewell, when I communicated this song to him," stated his opinion that drinking a bottle of wine a day "was a very good idea, of which too little was made."
48) Ada didn't write the Bernoulli sequence generator, but she requested Babbage to write it and found bugs in his implementation. She recognized the potential for abstract symbol manipulation, which Babbage never did. "The engine can arrange and combine it numerical quantities exactly as if they were letters or any other general symbols; and in fact it might bring out its results in algebraic notation, were provisions made accordingly."
49) John Couch Adams, who almost discovered Neptune (he predicted its existence and calculated its path, but the Royal Astronomer didn't get on the case before the French found it), was offered a knighthood but declined it. It was difficult to be a knight without an income that could support the upturn in social rank. He wouldn't be able to coach students at Cambridge, and he'd need a more expensive-to-upkeep wife.
50) Babbage: "Propose to an Englishman any ... instrument, however admirable, and you will observe that the whole effort of the English mind is directed to find a difficulty, defect, or an impossibility in it. If you speak to him of a machine for peeling a potato, he will pronounce it impossible; if you peel a potato with it before his eyes, he will declare it useless, because it will not slice a pineapple."
51) Herschel became Master of the Mint, following in Newton's footsteps. The job had changed to management and paper-pushing, and it nearly killed him.
52) An American newspaper reporter, Richard Adams Locke, fabricated a story about Herschel seeing "bat-men" on the surface of the moon, even ran excerpts of a bogus article. The next installment described the discovery of strange creatures on the moon: animals resembling small reindeer, moose, elk, horned bears, and bipedal beavers that carried their young in their arms "just like humans". Finally, in the fourth article, it was revealed that Herschel had observed "flocks of large winged creatures" that greatly resembled men, with flesh-colored faces and large, broad foreheads. These "Vespertilio-homo", or bat-men, had been observed in groups, gesticulating with each other, as if engaged in rational conversation. Edgar Allan Poe: "decidedly the greatest hit in the way of sensation ... ever made by any similar fiction". Publisher claimed was selling 20k copies/day. But by the start of 1837, a now-exasperated Herschel told his aunt, "I have been pestered from all quarters with that ridiculous hoax about the Moon--in English French Italian and German!"
53) Babbage was a cryptographer of use to the British government. A lone draft of a government doc related to cryptography was found in his papers, and Snyder proposes he never wrote about cryptography because his skills were too valuable to the government. He was fabulous talented at ciphers.
54) The great "Dear Charlie, write no more. Our cipher is discovered!" story.
55) Darwin spent so many hours, for so many years, on barnacles, that his children grew up believing that all fathers studied barnacles. "Where does your father do his barnacles?" one of his sons asked a young friend.
56) Herschel published repeatedly and forcefully against "Declaration on Science and Religion" which would have put theological restraints on scientific inquiry. De Morgan: "So honey-bees have stings as well as wasps!"
57) Whewell: "And though such machinery can only collect facts at first, collected facts will suggest discoveries, especially now that we know in a good degree the way of extracting laws from facts."
58) Herschel cooked steak and eggs in South Africa, without a stove, "by simple exposure to the sun in a box covered with a pane of window-glass, and placed in another box so covered."
59) When Babbage's work stopped abruptly for a time, he was chastised by one of his friends, the Countess Teleki, for having committed a kind of "moral murder, and an injury to the whole human race!" Babbage replied testily that her conclusion "rests entirely on the hypothesis that I care for `the whole human race'."
60) Babbage's confrontational style failed against the organ grinders, who kept him awake and pursued him through the city. It was asymmetric warfare: many grinders, one Babbage. He only won by raising the problem's profile so high that others who were afflicted joined him, and he got a law change forcing them to move on if asked. De Morgan to Herschel: "Babbage's Act has passed, and he *is* a public benefactor. A grinder went away from my house at the first word." Nonetheless, Babbage's last hours were spent to the sounds of organ grinders. Babbage on deathbed to his son: "it's a long time coming".
I enjoyed "Age of Wonder" by Richard Holmes. This book is less easy a read than that, but you'll recognize some characters! Joseph Banks makes an appearance, and one of the leading characters is John Herschel, the son of "Age of Wonder"'s William Herschel. John is a much more likeable chap--he's the aristocrat of the group, coming from scientific gentry, and his friends repeatedly wheel him in as the big gun to bring to bear on the political problems they're having with their projects.
One of the big revelations for me is what a king-sized ass Charles Babbage was. Not just brusque, but the wielder of the sort of bullheaded rudeness that pretty much guarantees you have no friends. And, sure enough, even his schooltime friends kept him at a distance. I'd known he was difficult to be with, and had assumed it was because of the frustrations of building his machines. Snyder paints the much more human possibility that he loved his wife dearly, and when she died he was unable to express his grief and became the bitter angry man we know him as. I could dislike the Charles Babbage who was an unreasonable man, but I sympathize with the heart-broken husband.
Babbage, indeed, was an unpleasant yet compelling character. His behaviour, whatever its origins, reminded me of programmers I have known: prickly, convinced they are right (even worse--sometimes they are!), and whose attitude sabotages anything involving other people. All the while, they're staggeringly brilliant and even their side projects are genius.
This is as much a book about ideas as it is about people: how is science to be conducted, should the government fund it, what should science organizations do, how do we reconcile science and religion, the value of precision. The four men formed the Philosophical Breakfast Club to promote Baconian views of science as a structured inductive data-driven practice. They practiced science, wrote books about it, changed the professional landscape, and between them had tremendous influence.
It's a good read but long, and eyes may glaze unless one's passion for the history of science burns with a bright flame. I enjoyed it and took a lot away, as you're about to see.
Things I liked or learned (dodgy numbering b/c I had to delete some to fit goodreads review limit size):
1) Coleridge rejected "natural philosopher" as a job title because it implied armchairs instead of apparatus. Whewell suggested "by analogy with artist, we may form scientist". C. caused that word to exist!
2) "navvie" is a contraction of "navigator"--the people who built the canals. Only later did it come to mean railway workers.
3) Canals were lined with "puddle", a clay mixed with water that was pounded down tight by cattle or men tramping back and forth on it for weeks.
5) Forming a society or club was like starting a mailing list or a Google Code project.
6) Bacon was the father of observations and induction, which is coming back to life with the new big-data world of science. Spider spins out of own substance, deducing from what he already knows. Ant piles up facts haphazardly but doesn't explain with theories. Honey-bee collects and digests the pollen, making something new.
7) Babbage, shining student, chose to defend the assertion "God is a material agent" in an oral exam--without warning his investigator of this. He was "sent down", prevented from taking honours.
8) Babbage didn't tell his good friend Herschel about his wife for months, because he thought the news would be "uninteresting" to him.
9) Herschel was so drunk when he visited Stonehenge that he wrote that he "saw not a single stone.--May his Satanic Majesty fetch me quickly if I know whether it is made of stone or cheese."
10) Whewell wrote out a series of joke exam questions, one of which was "to determine the least possible quantity of material out of which the modern dress of a fashionable female can be constructed."
11) Jacques de Vaucanson created, in 1737, a mechanical duck that seemed to eat and shit.
12) Babbage's belief in the utility of his difference engine wasn't universal, many thought the error-riddled log tables were good enough. Babbage, Whewell, Jones, and Herschel believed that science required accuracy and precision. I think of this as an early version of the "better data beats more data" motto.
13) Malthus was young when he wrote his book. Welfare was a hot topic then, as now. Malthus = "there's no point in helping them, they'll just keep breeding until there's too many to help".
14) Bacon believed science should bring about "the relief of man's estate", ie work in the public good.
15) Economics was (and still is, dammit) full of theoretical derivations disconnected from experience. Jones gathered economic data from around the world to disprove the conclusions and axioms of the leading economist, Ricardo.
16) Just as a drop of water, when viewed through a microscope, is found to teem with life, Jones believed that history--when viewed correctly--"teems everywhere with facts" which can be used in constructing economic theories.
18) A worker was required to sell all of his belongings, including the furniture from his house and the tools of his trade, in order to receive relief in the workhouse. This made it impossible for a man to leave the workhouse and take up his trade again, as he could not earn the money to buy back those tools while in the workhouse, and thus reduced him to permanent "servitude".
20) Whewell coined the term "uniformitarianism" and "catastrophism" for the two camps about whether things changed slowly or all-at-once on the Earth.
21) Darwin admitted to his friend Thomas Henry Huxley that "I sometimes think that general and popular Treatises are almost as important for the progress of science as the original work."
22) Babbage took and urged others to take factory tours. "Those who enjoy leisure can scarcely find a more interesting and instructive pursuit than the examination of the workshops of their country."
23) Babbage wrote on economics and manufacturing, identifying globalisation and the growing importance of factories. He advocated the penny post (sender-pays postage).
24) Babbage attacked the Royal Society, naming names and making accusations. "I hope to teach even chartered and ancient bodies a lesson that may in future prevent them from studiously neglecting and then insulting any individual amongst them. . . . I will make them writhe if they do not reform. In short my volume will be a receipt in full for the amount of injuries I have received."
25) Babbage, having engineered the overthrow of the old regime at the Royal Society and his friend John Herschel on the ballot, proceeded to tell people they didn't have to vote, it was all in the bag. Herschel lost by eight votes. Babbage then founded BAAS and roped Whewell and Herschel into doing most of the work.
26) Economics has always been prone to political shoutiness. At the 1835 BAAS Statistical group meeting, Alexis de Tocqueville, visiting from France soon after publishing the first volume of "Democracy in America", was there to witness the melee that broke out among some members of the crowd. Eventually the BAAS resolved the problem by assigning the section meetings of the Statistical Section to small rooms, withholding grant monies, and confining the published notices of statistical papers to mere tables of numbers, thus contravening the possibility of controversial political conclusions. Babbage and Jones founded a separate London Statistical Society, which was in turn plagued by "rancor and unruliness" and again resorted to "facts divorced from all theory". Whewell explained to Quetelet that "they would go on better if they had some zealous *theorists* among them ... Unconnected facts are of comparatively small value."
27) The British Association made science a public activity, with lots of demonstrations at meetings. They let in women (Royal Society didn't), and the sale of "ladies tickets" to the evening lectures became a major source of revenue for the association.
28) BAAS instituted grants, whereas Royal Society only offered prizes. Difference is that you can fund work to be done with a grant, whereas a prize only rewards work already done. Ironic that today, X-Prize and similar prizes are all in vogue as an attempt to inspire work you don't have to pay for.
29) Christ they were an in-bred crony lot! Whewell recommended Babbage get money. He got money from the BAAS. He reviewed Herschel's book and praised it, etc.
30) By 1835 an anonymous critic was calling the meetings "extensive humbugs", noting that "with the aid of concerts and balls, beautiful women, sound claret and strong whiskey, the sages [make] out remarkably well." For their part, the philosophers had set themselves up for criticisms on this count: in a letter to Lord Milton right before the York meeting, Harcourt ventured to end with the reminder that "philosophers are very fond of venison," asking whether Milton could supply some for the meeting from his estate. After the Liverpool meeting in 1837, a slightly dazed Sedgewick wrote to the wife of Charles Lyell that "mountains of venison and oceans of turtle" were on hand to feed the hungry savants. "Were ever philosophers so fed before?" Sedgewick mused. "Twenty-hundred-weight of turtle were sent to fructify in the hungry stomachs of the sons of science!" It would not be long before the society found itself ridiculed for the display of gastronomical science at each fo the meetings. The editor of the Quarterly Review attacked the "gastropatetic turtle-philia" of the Association. Comparisons with Foo Camp and the Hackers Conference left to the reader :-)
31) Herschel spent years in South Africa, and loved it. Darwin travelled out to see "the great Man" (Herschel) when Beagle came past in 1838.
32) Must investigate the "camera lucida", which facilitates tracing and was the primary pictorial recording device of science until photography.
33) Whewell studied tides. The only people who systematically observed the times of the high and low tides were havormasters, and they tended to keep their information as closely guarded secrets: few accurate tide tables based on long-term observations were published and made readily available. The Royal Navy had no such information; captains were responsible for trying to gain the information on their own, by contacting harbormasters and hoping to get useful information from them--usually by paying them bribes to share the knowledge.
34) Beaufort of the Beaufort scale was the man who approved Darwin for the Beagle trip.
35) Whewell wrote to Jones, "You know as well as I do that those who theorize rightly are in the end the lords of the earth."
36) There was no cadastral survey of the UK in Jones's time, though he wanted one and proposed it and estimated its cost. He was responsible for settling differences in tithe calculations, which were land taxes for church and thus relied on accurate measurement of land. Again, the need for precision. Again, government didn't appreciate it even though In one such map, two fields were represented as nearly the same size, although in reality one was 3.5 acres and the other only .75 acre.
37) Babbage threw huge parties. He had a party trick, with a smaller demo version of his machine rigged to count in ones to 100 then in twos. Darwin: "Lyell says Babbage's parties are the best in the way of literary people in London--and that there is a good mixture of pretty women!"
38) Whewell to Jones: "while you work for years in the elaboration of slowly developing ideas, I take the first buds of thought and make a nosegay out of them."
39) Babbage's devotion to inductive reasoning took second place to the deductive character of his calculator. This put him and Whewell in opposition after Whewell wrote a volume in the "Bridgewater Treatises" series attempting to show religion and science weren't in opposition and dumping on mathematicians in the process, prompting Babbage to retaliate with an unauthorized ninth volume in the series praising deductive reasoning and showing how it was the true way God worked and so on. This was the major wedge between them and Babbage never seemed part of the club again afterward.
40) Babbage estimated the rate of the analytic engine at 1IPS.
41) Herschel used his past chemical work to "fix" the developed images from photography, and eventually was lauded as a father of photography. It's amazing how much of it was in the air: Herschel had done the chemistry a decade or two earlier, Daguerre was chasing similar effects (different chemistry, different stock) in France, and Talbot (the inventor of the image-to-negative-to-print method) was in a race with Daguerre.
42) Herschel coined the term "photography"
43) There is no item 43.
43) There are two item 43s.
44) James Ross (of "Ross Ice Shelf" fame) took two boats to the South Pole: "Erebus" and "Terror".
45) In 1840, William Herschel's 40-foot telescope was dismantled. The tube was then sealed, and laid horizontally on three stone piers in the garden at Observatory House in Slough. Today nothing remains but a monument to the Herschels on Windsor Road, near where the house once stood.
46) Kepler's mentor and employer, the Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe, had made the extraordinarily precise and accurate observations of Mars later used by kepler. Yet even Brahe did not colligate these data using the concept of an ellipse--he continued to "see" the orbit as circular. The revolutionary aspect of Kepler's discovery was not making the observations of the planet's positions--though these were a necessary precondition for the discovery--but putting these together using the new concept of an ellipse.
47) Augustus De Morgan composed "The Astronomer's Drinking Song", sung at the dinners of the old Mathematical Society, one stanza of which is:
When Ptolemy, now long ago,
Believed the earth stood still, sir,
He never would have blundered so,
Had he but drunk his fill, sir;
He'd then have felt it circulate,
And would have learned to say, sir,
The true way to investigate
Is to drink your bottle a day, sir!
De Morgan added a footnote to this stanza, explaining that "Dr Whewell, when I communicated this song to him," stated his opinion that drinking a bottle of wine a day "was a very good idea, of which too little was made."
48) Ada didn't write the Bernoulli sequence generator, but she requested Babbage to write it and found bugs in his implementation. She recognized the potential for abstract symbol manipulation, which Babbage never did. "The engine can arrange and combine it numerical quantities exactly as if they were letters or any other general symbols; and in fact it might bring out its results in algebraic notation, were provisions made accordingly."
49) John Couch Adams, who almost discovered Neptune (he predicted its existence and calculated its path, but the Royal Astronomer didn't get on the case before the French found it), was offered a knighthood but declined it. It was difficult to be a knight without an income that could support the upturn in social rank. He wouldn't be able to coach students at Cambridge, and he'd need a more expensive-to-upkeep wife.
50) Babbage: "Propose to an Englishman any ... instrument, however admirable, and you will observe that the whole effort of the English mind is directed to find a difficulty, defect, or an impossibility in it. If you speak to him of a machine for peeling a potato, he will pronounce it impossible; if you peel a potato with it before his eyes, he will declare it useless, because it will not slice a pineapple."
51) Herschel became Master of the Mint, following in Newton's footsteps. The job had changed to management and paper-pushing, and it nearly killed him.
52) An American newspaper reporter, Richard Adams Locke, fabricated a story about Herschel seeing "bat-men" on the surface of the moon, even ran excerpts of a bogus article. The next installment described the discovery of strange creatures on the moon: animals resembling small reindeer, moose, elk, horned bears, and bipedal beavers that carried their young in their arms "just like humans". Finally, in the fourth article, it was revealed that Herschel had observed "flocks of large winged creatures" that greatly resembled men, with flesh-colored faces and large, broad foreheads. These "Vespertilio-homo", or bat-men, had been observed in groups, gesticulating with each other, as if engaged in rational conversation. Edgar Allan Poe: "decidedly the greatest hit in the way of sensation ... ever made by any similar fiction". Publisher claimed was selling 20k copies/day. But by the start of 1837, a now-exasperated Herschel told his aunt, "I have been pestered from all quarters with that ridiculous hoax about the Moon--in English French Italian and German!"
53) Babbage was a cryptographer of use to the British government. A lone draft of a government doc related to cryptography was found in his papers, and Snyder proposes he never wrote about cryptography because his skills were too valuable to the government. He was fabulous talented at ciphers.
54) The great "Dear Charlie, write no more. Our cipher is discovered!" story.
55) Darwin spent so many hours, for so many years, on barnacles, that his children grew up believing that all fathers studied barnacles. "Where does your father do his barnacles?" one of his sons asked a young friend.
56) Herschel published repeatedly and forcefully against "Declaration on Science and Religion" which would have put theological restraints on scientific inquiry. De Morgan: "So honey-bees have stings as well as wasps!"
57) Whewell: "And though such machinery can only collect facts at first, collected facts will suggest discoveries, especially now that we know in a good degree the way of extracting laws from facts."
58) Herschel cooked steak and eggs in South Africa, without a stove, "by simple exposure to the sun in a box covered with a pane of window-glass, and placed in another box so covered."
59) When Babbage's work stopped abruptly for a time, he was chastised by one of his friends, the Countess Teleki, for having committed a kind of "moral murder, and an injury to the whole human race!" Babbage replied testily that her conclusion "rests entirely on the hypothesis that I care for `the whole human race'."
60) Babbage's confrontational style failed against the organ grinders, who kept him awake and pursued him through the city. It was asymmetric warfare: many grinders, one Babbage. He only won by raising the problem's profile so high that others who were afflicted joined him, and he got a law change forcing them to move on if asked. De Morgan to Herschel: "Babbage's Act has passed, and he *is* a public benefactor. A grinder went away from my house at the first word." Nonetheless, Babbage's last hours were spent to the sounds of organ grinders. Babbage on deathbed to his son: "it's a long time coming".
April 5, 2021
Laura Snyder has written an utterly captivating book about four men of science—William Whewell, John Herschel, Richard Jones, and Charles Babbage. All born within a span of four years in the 1790s, and all attending Cambridge University at one point or another, they found themselves naturally drawn together as friends. Additionally, their overlapping thoughts about the advancement of science led them to establish a Philosophical Breakfast Club in the early nineteenth century as a forum for discussion, debate, and the development of ideas. But their particular club would differ in critically important ways from other contemporary clubs of the era.
Prevailing thinking about science was characterized by: a select few clergymen who would tinker and potter experimentally; the wealthy, whose interest in science didn’t go beyond mechanical inventions that served as amusing party tricks; and royalty whose patronage of science was no more than a feather in their cap. These approaches to science were haphazard with no firm method driving their actions. Furthermore, no action was connected to results, and the benefits were vague and esoteric. Whewell, Herschel, Jones, and Babbage were determined to formalize investigation into the laws of nature with a systematic, inductive method attributable to their common hero, Francis Bacon. In addition, their mission was to improve the lives of common men and women and to render the world a better place when they left it.
These four men were gifted, highly-intelligent polymaths, studying—and mastering—multiple disciplines, including physics, astronomy, mechanics, economics, chemistry, and all aspects of mathematics. I was surprised to learn that the word “scientist” did not exist before 1833, when Whewell coined it, and that it was criticized by other men of science as barbaric because it was a Greek-Latin hybrid! The concept of “consilience” is also attributed to him, meaning the inductions drawn from one class of facts coincide with inductions from a different class.
Whewell and Herschel were probably the first practitioners (ignorant of the modern term) of “crowd-sourcing” when they gathered global data on astronomy and the tides to map the galaxies of space and the high tides around Great Britain. Jones’s accurate mapping of hamlets and parishes resolved many problems associated with the system of tithing practiced by the landed gentry. Although Babbage invented the Difference Engine, a complex mechanical device for calculating values of polynomial functions using finite differences, it was his Analytical Engine that recognizes him as “father of the computer,” since this was more in line with general purpose computing.
In elegant, extraordinarily accessible language, author Snyder comprehensively tracks the careers and vast accomplishments of Whewell, Herschel, Jones, and Babbage. Along the way, of course, we meet many other scientists who often benefitted from the pioneering work of the four. For example, Snyder does a near-perfect job of describing Charles Darwin’s complicated thinking behind his theory of evolution; similarly, her vignette on Ada Lovelace assisting Babbage’s work is fascinating.
In summary, Laura Snyder recounts an engrossing tale of four multi-dimensional men, whose mutual trust engendered strong bonds of friendship. Nothing was too much for one man to do for the other three: they genuinely encouraged efforts, unselfishly promoted careers, and always provided honest feedback. And these were busy men: as well as their scientific experiments, they were prolific authors of books that became standard texts. Yet Snyder never fails to humanize them in authentic fashion beyond their professions—through marriages, births of children, loss of loved ones, and ultimately, aging and death.
Prevailing thinking about science was characterized by: a select few clergymen who would tinker and potter experimentally; the wealthy, whose interest in science didn’t go beyond mechanical inventions that served as amusing party tricks; and royalty whose patronage of science was no more than a feather in their cap. These approaches to science were haphazard with no firm method driving their actions. Furthermore, no action was connected to results, and the benefits were vague and esoteric. Whewell, Herschel, Jones, and Babbage were determined to formalize investigation into the laws of nature with a systematic, inductive method attributable to their common hero, Francis Bacon. In addition, their mission was to improve the lives of common men and women and to render the world a better place when they left it.
These four men were gifted, highly-intelligent polymaths, studying—and mastering—multiple disciplines, including physics, astronomy, mechanics, economics, chemistry, and all aspects of mathematics. I was surprised to learn that the word “scientist” did not exist before 1833, when Whewell coined it, and that it was criticized by other men of science as barbaric because it was a Greek-Latin hybrid! The concept of “consilience” is also attributed to him, meaning the inductions drawn from one class of facts coincide with inductions from a different class.
Whewell and Herschel were probably the first practitioners (ignorant of the modern term) of “crowd-sourcing” when they gathered global data on astronomy and the tides to map the galaxies of space and the high tides around Great Britain. Jones’s accurate mapping of hamlets and parishes resolved many problems associated with the system of tithing practiced by the landed gentry. Although Babbage invented the Difference Engine, a complex mechanical device for calculating values of polynomial functions using finite differences, it was his Analytical Engine that recognizes him as “father of the computer,” since this was more in line with general purpose computing.
In elegant, extraordinarily accessible language, author Snyder comprehensively tracks the careers and vast accomplishments of Whewell, Herschel, Jones, and Babbage. Along the way, of course, we meet many other scientists who often benefitted from the pioneering work of the four. For example, Snyder does a near-perfect job of describing Charles Darwin’s complicated thinking behind his theory of evolution; similarly, her vignette on Ada Lovelace assisting Babbage’s work is fascinating.
In summary, Laura Snyder recounts an engrossing tale of four multi-dimensional men, whose mutual trust engendered strong bonds of friendship. Nothing was too much for one man to do for the other three: they genuinely encouraged efforts, unselfishly promoted careers, and always provided honest feedback. And these were busy men: as well as their scientific experiments, they were prolific authors of books that became standard texts. Yet Snyder never fails to humanize them in authentic fashion beyond their professions—through marriages, births of children, loss of loved ones, and ultimately, aging and death.
January 4, 2016
Gli anni d’oro della scienza, mi verrebbe quasi da dire.
La scienza non era ancora specializzata come sarebbe diventata poco dopo -e grazie anche all’opera di questi quattro ragazzi-, e Herschel e Whewell ne erano gli emblemi viventi. Astronomia, ottica, lingue, matematica, fisica, chimica, botanica… non c’era ramo della scienza nel quale i due geni non fossero ferrati e dove non facessero esperimenti innovativi.
E non erano scienziati, questo termine nascerà solo grazie a Whewell ormai all’apice della carriera e sarà utilizzato molto tempo dopo.
Erano filosofi naturali, in un’Inghilterra che limitava l’accesso alle prestigiose università solo a chi era della giusta religione, e legava la carriera accademica ai voti religiosi e al celibato.
Un’Inghilterra che finanziava ben poco la ricerca, non prevedeva stipendi o onoreficenze. Un’Inghilterra in linea col resto del mondo.
E in questi anni cambia tutto.
Scoperte epocali, una mole mostruosa di scienziati geniali in collegamento tra di loro malgrado le distanze e l’assenza degli strumenti di comunicazione moderni.
La nascita del computer.
I manifesti sul metodo induttivo e sul ruolo della scienza nel mondo, la necessità che si operi con lo scopo pratico di migliorare le condizioni di vita della gente.
La mappatura della volta celeste, impresa titanica svolta da Herschel.
Il primo grande caso di collaborazione globale tra scenziati di diverse nazionalità, per realizzare una mappatura mondiale delle maree e poterle studiare realmente.
La rivoluzione catastale inglese.
La nascita delle nuove teorie di scienza economica.
Il rapporto tra la scienza e la religione, i primi attriti tra i due.
La nascita della fotografia.
La scoperta di nuovi pianeti, di galassie, di comete.
E in mezzo a questo tripudio di innnovazioni e di scienza, tra nomi che tutti hanno imparato a conoscere sui libri di testo -Faraday, Talbot, Maxwell…- ci sono anche le vite dei quattro.
Le loro origini, i loro sogni, la loro vita privata. I rapporti tra di loro e con gli altri studiosi.
Una bella lettura, anche se in alcuni casi diventa abbastanza pesante. Un saggio romanzato.
Ma riesce a far sognare di un’epoca in cui realmente ogni giorno sembravano nascere nuove invenzioni. Un’epoca che avrebbe benissimo potuto generare scenari steam-punk.
La scienza non era ancora specializzata come sarebbe diventata poco dopo -e grazie anche all’opera di questi quattro ragazzi-, e Herschel e Whewell ne erano gli emblemi viventi. Astronomia, ottica, lingue, matematica, fisica, chimica, botanica… non c’era ramo della scienza nel quale i due geni non fossero ferrati e dove non facessero esperimenti innovativi.
E non erano scienziati, questo termine nascerà solo grazie a Whewell ormai all’apice della carriera e sarà utilizzato molto tempo dopo.
Erano filosofi naturali, in un’Inghilterra che limitava l’accesso alle prestigiose università solo a chi era della giusta religione, e legava la carriera accademica ai voti religiosi e al celibato.
Un’Inghilterra che finanziava ben poco la ricerca, non prevedeva stipendi o onoreficenze. Un’Inghilterra in linea col resto del mondo.
E in questi anni cambia tutto.
Scoperte epocali, una mole mostruosa di scienziati geniali in collegamento tra di loro malgrado le distanze e l’assenza degli strumenti di comunicazione moderni.
La nascita del computer.
I manifesti sul metodo induttivo e sul ruolo della scienza nel mondo, la necessità che si operi con lo scopo pratico di migliorare le condizioni di vita della gente.
La mappatura della volta celeste, impresa titanica svolta da Herschel.
Il primo grande caso di collaborazione globale tra scenziati di diverse nazionalità, per realizzare una mappatura mondiale delle maree e poterle studiare realmente.
La rivoluzione catastale inglese.
La nascita delle nuove teorie di scienza economica.
Il rapporto tra la scienza e la religione, i primi attriti tra i due.
La nascita della fotografia.
La scoperta di nuovi pianeti, di galassie, di comete.
E in mezzo a questo tripudio di innnovazioni e di scienza, tra nomi che tutti hanno imparato a conoscere sui libri di testo -Faraday, Talbot, Maxwell…- ci sono anche le vite dei quattro.
Le loro origini, i loro sogni, la loro vita privata. I rapporti tra di loro e con gli altri studiosi.
Una bella lettura, anche se in alcuni casi diventa abbastanza pesante. Un saggio romanzato.
Ma riesce a far sognare di un’epoca in cui realmente ogni giorno sembravano nascere nuove invenzioni. Un’epoca che avrebbe benissimo potuto generare scenari steam-punk.
October 12, 2022
Brillante ensayo en la que Laura J. Snyder, utilizando un estilo que me atrevería a definir como de documental, nos ilustra sobre la vida de cuatro brillantes filósofos naturales, William Whewell, Charles Babbage, John Herschel y Richard Jones, que se propusieron en sus iniciales desayunos filosóficos cambiar el camino de lo que en ese momento aún no se denominaba ciencia. A través de una mezcla de ciencia, tecnología, historia, vida social, incluso amorosa e íntima, documentada en las numerosas cartas y otros textos que se intercambiaron entre ellos y con otros personajes de la época, incluyendo otros científicos, artistas, y políticos, se reconstruye una época apasionante, llena de descubrimientos y logros y cambios incluso institucionales, que transformaron el mundo. El estilo de LJS es ágil, en el que sabe medir los tiempos que dedica a cada uno de los asuntos que trata, que no son pocos, despertando un interés que invita a profundizar en ellos mediante otras lecturas.
June 6, 2011
I thought the author stretched the facts to say these four changed the world. They made important contributions to science and science education but I don't get the change the world part. I enjoyed the book and it gives a different viewpoint on the Royal Society than what I'd gotten from some other books about science in that time frame. I liked the historical perspective. But, I'd sure rather live in time than in theirs.
March 30, 2015
Science, philosophy, literature, politics, and religion all play a part in the history of the development of the science professional. A nice view of the culture and world during this time period.
June 18, 2016
The best popular book about John Herschel's life out there right now is not about him only. It's about him and three friends-- William Whewell, Richard Jones, and Charles Babbage-- who attended Cambridge together and, as Laura Snyder's subtitle has it, "transformed science and changed the world." With the exception of perhaps Babbage (the most irascible of the bunch) not many people have heard of the others, but Snyder brings them to life using their published works and unpublished correspondence to build a compelling, interwoven narrative of their lives and work.
The book is episodic, dipping into their lives at various points, highlighting their incredibly varied careers. Whewell functions as a center of sorts, probably due to the fact that he was the focus of some of Snyder's previous research. She covers his rise from humble beginnings to centrality in the British scientific community of the mid-1800s as master of Trinity College, Cambridge; his seminal works that established the field of the history and philosophy of science; and his pioneering of big, government-funded science with his program of organizing worldwide tide observations.
Jones, perhaps the most obscure of the bunch, steps slightly out of the shadows with Snyder's rounded personal portrait and outline of his work: establishing a political economy in the context of the work of Malthus and Ricardo but inductive and empirical in opposition to their deductive approach. In Babbage we get a glimpse of his stormy disposition and even stormier relationship with the British government and many of his scientific peers, the design and partial construction of his famous computing machines, and some discussion on his work on cryptography. Finally, Herschel, the most polyvalent of all-- Snyder gives here a good sketch of his astronomical career, his early chemical investigations, and his pioneering work on photography.
What holds these disparate characters and their wide-ranging interests together, besides their friendship and the slew of letters that passed between them for decades? Snyder's organizing theme is that in their student days at Cambridge they formed a Philosophical Breakfast Club (always capitalized in her account) with a self-conscious and self-declared purpose to transform science by professionalizing it and establishing true Baconian induction as its methodology. Thought it makes a good narrative umbrella, I think her Breakfast Club is largely a narrative device. It's certainly true that Babbage, Herschel, Whewell, and Jones (along with others) met regularly for breakfasts at Cambridge and reflected fondly on these memories in later days, but they never talk about it (and certainly never title it) as such an organized society in their letters (not as they do the Analytical Society, for example, which Herschel and Babbage were instrumental in forming around this same time). She's reified their socializations into something more for the same of her narrative, which is an understandable creation. Popular narratives need something to hang together on.
I think she's on more stable ground with her emphasis on the Baconian approach in their scientific careers (at least those of Whewell, Jones, and Herschel). Though they didn't make a clear manifesto in their student days, they did carry out this program in their work and writings throughout their lives. Whewell and Herschel especially advanced and even defined this approach for their generation. Snyder emphasizes the influence of their work on Darwin and in an afterward holds up Maxwell as an embodiment of their approach, illustrating their influence on science even though no theories bear the names of Herschel or Whewell.
Snyder's claims as to the role of the Breakfast Club on the professionalization of science are a bit fuzzier. Snyder does an excellent job showing how the practice of science changed in Britain during the lifetime of these men, but here it's more difficult to trace these transformations to the work of these four men alone. Whewell did originally coin the term "scientist," and promoted large-scale government-sponsored investigations, and Babbage and Herschel both worked to reform the Royal Society of London, and all three were eventually influential in the British Association for the Advancement of Science-- but they were certainly not alone in this and even among themselves had quite distinct differences of opinion. Snyder, for instance, points out that Herschel continually resisted greater government involvement and sponsorship of science. She also recognizes that all four would have been dismayed by the fragmentation of knowledge that professionalization and specialization in science has resulted in.
The only real danger here is that her account is so Anglo-centric. A general reader might be excused after reading this to assume from Snyder's book that the transformation of natural philosophy into modern science came about entirely in a British context. This certainly is not the entire story, but apart from some discussion of the influence of Kant's philosophy and a meeting of European scientists being the germ for Babbage's original proposal for the BAAS, we get very little discussion of the context of the Breakfast Club's work in light of a wider European scene. The rise of professional chemistry in Germany and the restructuring of the German university system, the birth of French analysis in the classrooms of Parisian artillery academies-- these are just a couple things happening on the periphery of Snyder's British story that feed into the overall professionalization of science (which actually was a bit slower in Britain than elsewhere). A nod in this direction and some discussion of whether Herschel and company were influenced or helped influence these wider trends would have been helpful for general readers.
In all though, for a popularization of the science during this period and for portraits of the men who were influential in many of these changes, this is a great book and an ideal place to start if you're interested in digging deeper into any of the various topics or individuals explored.
The book is episodic, dipping into their lives at various points, highlighting their incredibly varied careers. Whewell functions as a center of sorts, probably due to the fact that he was the focus of some of Snyder's previous research. She covers his rise from humble beginnings to centrality in the British scientific community of the mid-1800s as master of Trinity College, Cambridge; his seminal works that established the field of the history and philosophy of science; and his pioneering of big, government-funded science with his program of organizing worldwide tide observations.
Jones, perhaps the most obscure of the bunch, steps slightly out of the shadows with Snyder's rounded personal portrait and outline of his work: establishing a political economy in the context of the work of Malthus and Ricardo but inductive and empirical in opposition to their deductive approach. In Babbage we get a glimpse of his stormy disposition and even stormier relationship with the British government and many of his scientific peers, the design and partial construction of his famous computing machines, and some discussion on his work on cryptography. Finally, Herschel, the most polyvalent of all-- Snyder gives here a good sketch of his astronomical career, his early chemical investigations, and his pioneering work on photography.
What holds these disparate characters and their wide-ranging interests together, besides their friendship and the slew of letters that passed between them for decades? Snyder's organizing theme is that in their student days at Cambridge they formed a Philosophical Breakfast Club (always capitalized in her account) with a self-conscious and self-declared purpose to transform science by professionalizing it and establishing true Baconian induction as its methodology. Thought it makes a good narrative umbrella, I think her Breakfast Club is largely a narrative device. It's certainly true that Babbage, Herschel, Whewell, and Jones (along with others) met regularly for breakfasts at Cambridge and reflected fondly on these memories in later days, but they never talk about it (and certainly never title it) as such an organized society in their letters (not as they do the Analytical Society, for example, which Herschel and Babbage were instrumental in forming around this same time). She's reified their socializations into something more for the same of her narrative, which is an understandable creation. Popular narratives need something to hang together on.
I think she's on more stable ground with her emphasis on the Baconian approach in their scientific careers (at least those of Whewell, Jones, and Herschel). Though they didn't make a clear manifesto in their student days, they did carry out this program in their work and writings throughout their lives. Whewell and Herschel especially advanced and even defined this approach for their generation. Snyder emphasizes the influence of their work on Darwin and in an afterward holds up Maxwell as an embodiment of their approach, illustrating their influence on science even though no theories bear the names of Herschel or Whewell.
Snyder's claims as to the role of the Breakfast Club on the professionalization of science are a bit fuzzier. Snyder does an excellent job showing how the practice of science changed in Britain during the lifetime of these men, but here it's more difficult to trace these transformations to the work of these four men alone. Whewell did originally coin the term "scientist," and promoted large-scale government-sponsored investigations, and Babbage and Herschel both worked to reform the Royal Society of London, and all three were eventually influential in the British Association for the Advancement of Science-- but they were certainly not alone in this and even among themselves had quite distinct differences of opinion. Snyder, for instance, points out that Herschel continually resisted greater government involvement and sponsorship of science. She also recognizes that all four would have been dismayed by the fragmentation of knowledge that professionalization and specialization in science has resulted in.
The only real danger here is that her account is so Anglo-centric. A general reader might be excused after reading this to assume from Snyder's book that the transformation of natural philosophy into modern science came about entirely in a British context. This certainly is not the entire story, but apart from some discussion of the influence of Kant's philosophy and a meeting of European scientists being the germ for Babbage's original proposal for the BAAS, we get very little discussion of the context of the Breakfast Club's work in light of a wider European scene. The rise of professional chemistry in Germany and the restructuring of the German university system, the birth of French analysis in the classrooms of Parisian artillery academies-- these are just a couple things happening on the periphery of Snyder's British story that feed into the overall professionalization of science (which actually was a bit slower in Britain than elsewhere). A nod in this direction and some discussion of whether Herschel and company were influenced or helped influence these wider trends would have been helpful for general readers.
In all though, for a popularization of the science during this period and for portraits of the men who were influential in many of these changes, this is a great book and an ideal place to start if you're interested in digging deeper into any of the various topics or individuals explored.
November 11, 2022
Interesting history of scientific thought and "scientist", but the book is a little boring
December 24, 2017
This book is excellent. As the title suggests, this book is fundamentally four interwoven biographies of British natural philosophers who met at Cambridge University in 1811 and had breakfast together. They decided to do it weekly. It didn't last for long, but the friendships forged there lasted a lifetime. They decided that natural philosophy should be a profession of paid intellectuals and that the direction it would take would use the philosophy of Francis Bacon as its guiding light.
Natural philosophy had been simply a pastime of some of the royalty, a pastime of some of the bourgeoisie, and the occupation of the few that the royalty or bourgeoisie would sponsor. The only employments of paid intellectuals were as attorneys or as clergy. So in addition to being a collection of biographies, this book is also the story of how natural philosophy morphed into something new called "science" and a new profession, scientist, evolved.
This book is very much like "The Age of Wonder" by Richard Holmes, which I reviewed previously. It could be viewed as its sequel. In fact, handing the two of them together to a graduating high school senior as a graduation gift might be a good idea.
Natural philosophy had been simply a pastime of some of the royalty, a pastime of some of the bourgeoisie, and the occupation of the few that the royalty or bourgeoisie would sponsor. The only employments of paid intellectuals were as attorneys or as clergy. So in addition to being a collection of biographies, this book is also the story of how natural philosophy morphed into something new called "science" and a new profession, scientist, evolved.
This book is very much like "The Age of Wonder" by Richard Holmes, which I reviewed previously. It could be viewed as its sequel. In fact, handing the two of them together to a graduating high school senior as a graduation gift might be a good idea.
December 20, 2010
This scholarly but very accessible history of science in the early nineteenth century centers on four young Cambridge undergraduates, William Whewell, Charles Babbage, John Herschel, and Richard Jones, who meet for breakfast on Sundays in 1812 to discuss their passion for “natural philosophy” (science) and their equally strong passion to reform how science is done. They are strong admirers of Francis Bacon, who emphasized an inductive methodology whereby data is gathered and observations made that lead to theories being developed that can then be further tested. This contrasted with the standard science methodology of the time, which was deductive and depended more on logic than observation, hence the common term “natural philosophy”. The young men also want science to emphasize work that will help mankind. Such idealism has been common in young people throughout history, but these four men do not give up their dreams, and they each play important roles in a transformation of science that significantly shaped our modern world.
Like most people interested in science, I had heard of Babbage, the father of the present-day computer, and the Herschel family of astronomers. Whewell is a less familiar name, but he is revered enough to have his statue facing that of Francis Bacon at Trinity College in Cambridge, an honor that would no doubt please him immensely. I never heard of Jones, although his treatise on economics criticizing Ricardo and calling for the use of statistics was very influential.
The book discusses the lives of these men and their activism in the name of modernizing science within a broader discussion of the major developments in science in the first half of the nineteenth century. It may be astonishing to a modern reader, but in the period when they lived, little thought seemed to have been given to combining theory and experience by using individual observations to develop general formulae or predictions, even in practical matters such as timing of tides. The chapter on forming the British Association for the Advancement of Science in reaction to the Royal Society is a fascinating glimpse of academic and professional politics of the nineteenth century. Some things never change! A chapter is devoted to the ever-ongoing disputes about the relation of science to religion, which caused quite a rift between Babbage and Whewell. There are also sections on specific scientific fields, such as Babbage’s quest to build the first computer and the work of various members of the group on astronomy, tides, the mapping of the earth, the development of photography, and even cryptology. Babbage’s project has interest far beyond its visionary anticipation of today’s computers. Babbage saw his Difference Engine as an analogy to the way God might interact with the world, and Darwin attended a demonstration of the Engine soon after finishing his voyage on the Beagle that introduced him to the notion of God as a divine programmer. There is some entertaining discussion of the astronomical work of the time, such as the discovery of Neptune, and I especially enjoyed the chapter on economics and was amused by their belief that economics would be a good subject to address as their first major example of how Baconian induction could be applied to science. This first attempt to put economics into a mathematical form proved to be somewhat more difficult than anticipated!
Like many of the best books of its type, The Philosophical Breakfast Club is a mixture of broad themes, such as the reform of science that the quartet so passionately pursued, and fascinating smaller details, such as the fact that Whewell originated the term ”scientist” (after the poet Coleridge objected to continued use of the term “natural philosopher”), as well as the terms “uniformitarianism” for Lyell’s geological theory,” Eocene”, “Miocene”, and “Pliocene” for historical epochs, and “ion”, “cathode”, and “anode”. Some of the vignettes are quite humorous, such as a description of Lord Byron’s pet bear.
I acknowledge the validity of the observation by several reviewers that there are some distracting digressions, but they were interesting, so I did not consider them a flaw.
If you are interested in history, science, or how scientific methodology developed, The Philosophical Breakfast Club is well worth your time.
Like most people interested in science, I had heard of Babbage, the father of the present-day computer, and the Herschel family of astronomers. Whewell is a less familiar name, but he is revered enough to have his statue facing that of Francis Bacon at Trinity College in Cambridge, an honor that would no doubt please him immensely. I never heard of Jones, although his treatise on economics criticizing Ricardo and calling for the use of statistics was very influential.
The book discusses the lives of these men and their activism in the name of modernizing science within a broader discussion of the major developments in science in the first half of the nineteenth century. It may be astonishing to a modern reader, but in the period when they lived, little thought seemed to have been given to combining theory and experience by using individual observations to develop general formulae or predictions, even in practical matters such as timing of tides. The chapter on forming the British Association for the Advancement of Science in reaction to the Royal Society is a fascinating glimpse of academic and professional politics of the nineteenth century. Some things never change! A chapter is devoted to the ever-ongoing disputes about the relation of science to religion, which caused quite a rift between Babbage and Whewell. There are also sections on specific scientific fields, such as Babbage’s quest to build the first computer and the work of various members of the group on astronomy, tides, the mapping of the earth, the development of photography, and even cryptology. Babbage’s project has interest far beyond its visionary anticipation of today’s computers. Babbage saw his Difference Engine as an analogy to the way God might interact with the world, and Darwin attended a demonstration of the Engine soon after finishing his voyage on the Beagle that introduced him to the notion of God as a divine programmer. There is some entertaining discussion of the astronomical work of the time, such as the discovery of Neptune, and I especially enjoyed the chapter on economics and was amused by their belief that economics would be a good subject to address as their first major example of how Baconian induction could be applied to science. This first attempt to put economics into a mathematical form proved to be somewhat more difficult than anticipated!
Like many of the best books of its type, The Philosophical Breakfast Club is a mixture of broad themes, such as the reform of science that the quartet so passionately pursued, and fascinating smaller details, such as the fact that Whewell originated the term ”scientist” (after the poet Coleridge objected to continued use of the term “natural philosopher”), as well as the terms “uniformitarianism” for Lyell’s geological theory,” Eocene”, “Miocene”, and “Pliocene” for historical epochs, and “ion”, “cathode”, and “anode”. Some of the vignettes are quite humorous, such as a description of Lord Byron’s pet bear.
I acknowledge the validity of the observation by several reviewers that there are some distracting digressions, but they were interesting, so I did not consider them a flaw.
If you are interested in history, science, or how scientific methodology developed, The Philosophical Breakfast Club is well worth your time.
February 10, 2014
William Whewell's destiny changed between noon and 2 p.m. in in late 1808 or early 1809. The headmaster and parish curate knew William was destined for academic greatness and it was on lunch hour that he spoke to William's father. William's father was reluctant to give up his apprenticing son in the family business of carpentry, to study math and science. In the end, however, the offer was to good to pass up; William would be given a scholarship and then further help would come from all of the town.
All of Lancaster would contribute as they could to their rising star, William Whewell. Amongst the very well off students, William stood out: "a tall, ungainly youth, with grey worsted stockings and country-made shoes."
This book is the very meticulously researched story of four men who together brought about the scientific method of advancing science. William Whewell, Charles Babbage, John Herschel and Richard Jones. Each of these men is fascinating, brilliant and accomplished (not to mention good looking- Whewell found, to his surprise, he was something of a ladies' man) John Hercshel, only son of the famous astronomer, initially fought the idea of following in his father's footsteps.
Prior to their breakfast club there was in 1812, the Analytical Society attended by Babbage, Herschel, Whewell and many others. They met weekly to discuss mathematical papers.
Clubs, during this period in British history, were commonplace. There were reading clubs, country clubs, coffee-drinking clubs, dining clubs, cardplaying clubs... In fact, there were reported to be as many as twenty thousand men meeting in various clubs in London alone during the mid-eighteenth century. So the Philosophical Breakfast club was not unique for being a club. This Philosophical Breakfast Club was in one regard, just one more club. The astounding thing was it was made up of four amazing men, men who did not look at their lives as something to overcome but simply loved science, loved learning and could not be stopped.
The Breakfast Club met to eat (obviously breakfast), gossip, laugh and drink, ("more ale than coffee was drunk"). They met on Sunday mornings right after chapel. Breakfast clubs came to be all the rage and professors disliked them for their apparent frittering away of the day in what they considered idle discussion.
This is a book to be savored, the research that the author, Laura Snyder, has done is extensive and the details add such a depth to the time period and to the character of these men.
This book is thoroughly fascinating if you are a lover of science.
All of Lancaster would contribute as they could to their rising star, William Whewell. Amongst the very well off students, William stood out: "a tall, ungainly youth, with grey worsted stockings and country-made shoes."
This book is the very meticulously researched story of four men who together brought about the scientific method of advancing science. William Whewell, Charles Babbage, John Herschel and Richard Jones. Each of these men is fascinating, brilliant and accomplished (not to mention good looking- Whewell found, to his surprise, he was something of a ladies' man) John Hercshel, only son of the famous astronomer, initially fought the idea of following in his father's footsteps.
Prior to their breakfast club there was in 1812, the Analytical Society attended by Babbage, Herschel, Whewell and many others. They met weekly to discuss mathematical papers.
Clubs, during this period in British history, were commonplace. There were reading clubs, country clubs, coffee-drinking clubs, dining clubs, cardplaying clubs... In fact, there were reported to be as many as twenty thousand men meeting in various clubs in London alone during the mid-eighteenth century. So the Philosophical Breakfast club was not unique for being a club. This Philosophical Breakfast Club was in one regard, just one more club. The astounding thing was it was made up of four amazing men, men who did not look at their lives as something to overcome but simply loved science, loved learning and could not be stopped.
The Breakfast Club met to eat (obviously breakfast), gossip, laugh and drink, ("more ale than coffee was drunk"). They met on Sunday mornings right after chapel. Breakfast clubs came to be all the rage and professors disliked them for their apparent frittering away of the day in what they considered idle discussion.
This is a book to be savored, the research that the author, Laura Snyder, has done is extensive and the details add such a depth to the time period and to the character of these men.
This book is thoroughly fascinating if you are a lover of science.
October 2, 2011
I am baffled at how anyone could find this book dull. I read it with pleasure the whole way through. It's a brilliant book that shows how its subjects thought about what they were doing when they were doing science, gives us a broad view of the development of science and technology and the way English educational institutions handled them in the period between the napoleonic wars and the early Victorial age, and last, but not least, brought to life four brilliant creative people who were the last of great polymaths.
I heartily recommend this to anyone interested in the history of thought, science, technology, or of the period (which really needs a name) that stretches between the Regency and Victorian era, since that is when most of these men did their most interesting work.
That said, I occasionally felt that the author didn't entirely understand the science she was describing--especially the math involved with Babbage's machines--and I was horrified to see her describe Ovid as writing in the 7th century BC. One hopes that was a typo missed by a copyeditor who had become too interested in the text. (I have noticed that the professional copyeditors my publisher uses always miss errors that occur in the exciting parts of my books, especially the sex scenes.)
But those are nits. This is a book that deserved more attention than it looks like it received. It is in some ways, "The Lunar Men" vol 2 (with apologies to Jenny Uglow) though it stands completely on its own.
I heartily recommend this to anyone interested in the history of thought, science, technology, or of the period (which really needs a name) that stretches between the Regency and Victorian era, since that is when most of these men did their most interesting work.
That said, I occasionally felt that the author didn't entirely understand the science she was describing--especially the math involved with Babbage's machines--and I was horrified to see her describe Ovid as writing in the 7th century BC. One hopes that was a typo missed by a copyeditor who had become too interested in the text. (I have noticed that the professional copyeditors my publisher uses always miss errors that occur in the exciting parts of my books, especially the sex scenes.)
But those are nits. This is a book that deserved more attention than it looks like it received. It is in some ways, "The Lunar Men" vol 2 (with apologies to Jenny Uglow) though it stands completely on its own.
March 9, 2015
Excellent book about the tremendous influence on science of four men who met as students at Cambridge University: Charles Babbage, John Herschel, William Whewell, and Richard Jones. Just to mention a few of the stories that particularly struck me:
Whewell's work on tides which included what must have been the first global crowd-sourced science project in which he got people around the world to take tidal measurements every 15 minutes for the same two week period.
Herschel as one of the inventors of photography. I never would have guessed that the word "snapshot" was from the very earliest days of photography. I was also intrigued by the description of the camera lucida, which I had never heard of.
I was surprised to find that life on other planets was an accepted idea as it would have been wasteful of God to have created them and not populated them.
That even in the 1820's there was a mistrust of mathematics (because people couldn't understand it) that harmed the support of science.
I'm glad I got around to reading this. Highly recommended.
Whewell's work on tides which included what must have been the first global crowd-sourced science project in which he got people around the world to take tidal measurements every 15 minutes for the same two week period.
Herschel as one of the inventors of photography. I never would have guessed that the word "snapshot" was from the very earliest days of photography. I was also intrigued by the description of the camera lucida, which I had never heard of.
I was surprised to find that life on other planets was an accepted idea as it would have been wasteful of God to have created them and not populated them.
That even in the 1820's there was a mistrust of mathematics (because people couldn't understand it) that harmed the support of science.
I'm glad I got around to reading this. Highly recommended.
May 5, 2015
An enjoyable read about the men who were at center stage when natural philosophy became science and the age of specialization began. Generalists became a dying breed and the future belonged to botanists, physicists, computer scientists, geologists, etc. Mores the pity?
I particularly enjoyed the knowledge that Charles Darwin was a young man during these men's ascendance and that he undoubtedly followed them and their works very closely. It is likely that they made it easier for him to finally present his paradigm shifting theory to the world.
I particularly enjoyed the knowledge that Charles Darwin was a young man during these men's ascendance and that he undoubtedly followed them and their works very closely. It is likely that they made it easier for him to finally present his paradigm shifting theory to the world.
March 29, 2012
This book is just brilliant! Not only is it exceptionally well-written, but it is also a wonderful historical narrative on the history of "scientist" and the field surrounding it. It's amazing how much a person or a small group of people can change the course of history. I highly recommend this book.
March 20, 2015
This is a truly remarkable book -- Author Laura J. Snyder brings you "up close and personal" as modern science takes its first "baby steps" -- and makes you realize the tremendous POWER of the scientific approach, to have brought about such tremendous change in such a short amount of time! -- FIVE stars! -- Certainly recommended!
February 15, 2015
A couple of years on and I still love this book. It has led me down so many interesting spin-offs, such as Caroline Herschel's diaries. It still keeps having an impact. I will be reading an article or a new history book and something from Laura's history will come into view. Astonishing and remains so.
maybe-someday
March 20, 2011I think I'll like the way this book approaches what is to me a dry subject.
May 23, 2017
A lot of fascinating material on the history of science as well as the four central characters, but I felt the book needed a stronger editorial hand.
July 15, 2021
Cuenta la autora de este ensayo histórico la biografía de cuatro amigos y grandes científicos ingleses que consiguieron cambiar el concepto y el método utilizado hasta su época, s. XIX, actualizándolo y desarrollando lo que hoy se conoce como Ciencia.
A su vez nos traslada a la época en que vivieron, la Inglaterra victoriana, y a la vida universitaria del Cambridge del momento.
Después de describir esta vida universitaria, y las formas en que se optaban a los títulos, va centrando el relato en las innovaciones científicas y descubrimientos que revolucionaron el mundo a partir del siglo XVIII – XIX, y que tienen gran importancia todavía en la actualidad. Siendo la base de nuestro conocimiento científico – técnico.
Así, aúna el estudio de la historia de la ciencia de la época con la biografía de nuestros cuatro protagonistas: Herschel, Babbage, Whewell y Jones, y más someramente la de otros importantes hombres de ciencia de esa época. Con lo cual a través de ellos conoceremos datos y anécdotas sobre otros científicos imprescindibles para la Historia.
Con el paso de los capítulos va desarrollando los diferentes trabajos científicos que acometieron, generalmente con éxito, y la pre-claridad de sus ideas, aunque tardaron un tiempo en aceptar sus métodos. De esta manera nos informa que muchas disciplinas científicas actuales les deben sus bases.
Por otro lado también tuvieron que luchar contra la creencia gubernativa de que no era necesario sufragar el trabajo científico con dinero público. Así como las agrias disputas políticas entra la vieja y la nueva forma de hacer ciencia. Siendo participes en la creación de innumerables asociaciones científicas que todavía existen.
Y aunque nuestros cuatro protagonistas cultivaron su amistad durante toda su vida, también sufrieron agrios encontronazos que les llevó a descalificarse en varias de sus publicaciones. Todo ello por culpa de mezclar Religión y Ciencia, cosa habitual en la época. Pero ello conllevó a que hoy tengamos aceptadas verdades universales como la “Teoría de la evolución” de Darwin, salvo con algunas excepciones de fanáticos religiosos.
A estos científicos se les puede considerar humanistas al tocar casi todos los campos del saber, y con bastante éxito, marcando las pautas para su desarrollo posterior en la siglo XX.
Estructuralmente la obra divide sus capítulos en los diferentes campos del conocimiento que cultivaron, desde matemáticas o física hasta astronomía o la ciencia de las mareas. Empezando la obra con algunos aspectos biográficos que también se intercalan en el resto del ensayo, y termina con el final de sus vidas.
Personalmente recomiendo su lectura, en especial para aquellos amantes de la Ciencia y la Historia.
A su vez nos traslada a la época en que vivieron, la Inglaterra victoriana, y a la vida universitaria del Cambridge del momento.
Después de describir esta vida universitaria, y las formas en que se optaban a los títulos, va centrando el relato en las innovaciones científicas y descubrimientos que revolucionaron el mundo a partir del siglo XVIII – XIX, y que tienen gran importancia todavía en la actualidad. Siendo la base de nuestro conocimiento científico – técnico.
Así, aúna el estudio de la historia de la ciencia de la época con la biografía de nuestros cuatro protagonistas: Herschel, Babbage, Whewell y Jones, y más someramente la de otros importantes hombres de ciencia de esa época. Con lo cual a través de ellos conoceremos datos y anécdotas sobre otros científicos imprescindibles para la Historia.
Con el paso de los capítulos va desarrollando los diferentes trabajos científicos que acometieron, generalmente con éxito, y la pre-claridad de sus ideas, aunque tardaron un tiempo en aceptar sus métodos. De esta manera nos informa que muchas disciplinas científicas actuales les deben sus bases.
Por otro lado también tuvieron que luchar contra la creencia gubernativa de que no era necesario sufragar el trabajo científico con dinero público. Así como las agrias disputas políticas entra la vieja y la nueva forma de hacer ciencia. Siendo participes en la creación de innumerables asociaciones científicas que todavía existen.
Y aunque nuestros cuatro protagonistas cultivaron su amistad durante toda su vida, también sufrieron agrios encontronazos que les llevó a descalificarse en varias de sus publicaciones. Todo ello por culpa de mezclar Religión y Ciencia, cosa habitual en la época. Pero ello conllevó a que hoy tengamos aceptadas verdades universales como la “Teoría de la evolución” de Darwin, salvo con algunas excepciones de fanáticos religiosos.
A estos científicos se les puede considerar humanistas al tocar casi todos los campos del saber, y con bastante éxito, marcando las pautas para su desarrollo posterior en la siglo XX.
Estructuralmente la obra divide sus capítulos en los diferentes campos del conocimiento que cultivaron, desde matemáticas o física hasta astronomía o la ciencia de las mareas. Empezando la obra con algunos aspectos biográficos que también se intercalan en el resto del ensayo, y termina con el final de sus vidas.
Personalmente recomiendo su lectura, en especial para aquellos amantes de la Ciencia y la Historia.
February 1, 2023
This is a great book! It takes you through the story of how British science developed in the first half of the 19th century (well, some of the highlights, anyway) through the eyes of four of the most influential people involved – Charles Babbage, John Herschel, William Whewell and Richard Jones. These guys were all at Cambridge together in the early 1800s, which is where they formed the Philosophical Breakfast Club of the title. The book follows their individual careers, their friendship and the progress they made in achieving their early ideas about the development of science over the next 50 years. On the way, we get neat summaries of some of the key moments in science across the period – like the invention of photography, the first reliable tide tables, the discovery of Neptune and the Great Exhibition. So though it’s ostensibly about these four men, it’s actually about how the modern conception of science as a distinct group of professions dedicated to understanding the universe and improving our lives came about.
It’s so well written and zips along, and the personalities of the four main characters come across well – like a good story should, it got me invested in the four of them. They’re all blokes, of course (that was the power dynamic of the time), but the author is careful to make sure that the key role of women scientists like Caroline Herschel, Anna Atkins, Julia Margaret Cameron, Mary Somerville and the tragic Ada Lovelace is fully acknowledged.
Overall, a book that I would heartily recommend, and that delivers so much more than it promised on the cover – it’s so much more than a book about the discussions between four 19th century scientists whose names are, let’s face it, not familiar to most people today.
June 4, 2023
The book highlights the evolution in many scientific disciplines in the 19th century, focusing particularly on the four British scientists (philosophers, that is) who gathered and discussed the future of natural philosophy at Philosophical Breakfast Club, which had taken place "probably from the end of 1812 until the spring of 1813." Notice that the club was held only for a few months, and hence I'm not sure how fair this interesting perspective of scientific history is; as we see throughout the book, there are many important characters other than the four, and they all made meaningful contributions to various scientific achievements in the era while giving mutual influences with the four men. Thus, I personally see this book as just one of many ways of interpreting history, which inadequately consolidated dramas behind the scenes.
Eventually, the epilogue conveys how their diverse scientific activities differ from today's specialization-driven way of conducting science, which clearly distinguishes scientists and artists (i.e., humanity aspects). I agree with this observation, and we probably need more Philosophical Breakfast Club-type of activities regularly; the more I study the interdisciplinary fields, the greater need of discussing with other scholars and friends under a strong vision I feel. In that sense, the stories are motivating for us to establish a better intellectual life in a modern society dominated by specialized occupations. Specialization isn't a bad thing, but we need to be more comfortable with crossing the boundaries.
Eventually, the epilogue conveys how their diverse scientific activities differ from today's specialization-driven way of conducting science, which clearly distinguishes scientists and artists (i.e., humanity aspects). I agree with this observation, and we probably need more Philosophical Breakfast Club-type of activities regularly; the more I study the interdisciplinary fields, the greater need of discussing with other scholars and friends under a strong vision I feel. In that sense, the stories are motivating for us to establish a better intellectual life in a modern society dominated by specialized occupations. Specialization isn't a bad thing, but we need to be more comfortable with crossing the boundaries.
August 18, 2021
This is a book that I really enjoyed. Its author tells the story of 4 English people - William Whewell, John Herschel, Charles Babbage and Richard Jones - who in their philosophical breakfasts in their youth and inspired by the figure of Francis Bacon (scientific reformist of the seventeenth century), glimpsed the changes that had to be done in the so-called natural philosophy to satisfy the need to incorporate a scientific method that would guide the creation of new scientific theories based on evidence from measurements and data.
The scientific environment as it is known today, including the term "scientific", is largely due to the contribution of these 4 people, including the importance of public investment in science, recognition through honors, awards or benefits to outstanding research, the fact that people can graduate from a scientific career and dedicate themselves professionally to it, the promotion of international scientific collaboration (including rivalry) and the pillar of the concepts of precision and accuracy in the establishment of theories or applications.
The story also provides a broad context of science, primarily in late 18th and 19th century England. It was interesting to know the contributions of its protagonists in astronomy, photography, tidal science, cartography, crystallography, economics, etc., and their marked influence on other people in science who left their mark like Maxwell or Darwin.
The scientific environment as it is known today, including the term "scientific", is largely due to the contribution of these 4 people, including the importance of public investment in science, recognition through honors, awards or benefits to outstanding research, the fact that people can graduate from a scientific career and dedicate themselves professionally to it, the promotion of international scientific collaboration (including rivalry) and the pillar of the concepts of precision and accuracy in the establishment of theories or applications.
The story also provides a broad context of science, primarily in late 18th and 19th century England. It was interesting to know the contributions of its protagonists in astronomy, photography, tidal science, cartography, crystallography, economics, etc., and their marked influence on other people in science who left their mark like Maxwell or Darwin.
October 22, 2019
Sometimes, history stands at a tipping point, and all it needs is a good push. Decades of effort by four men helped have a huge impact on science, and how we view so many things, as well as making many discoveries on their own. Charles Babbage, the grandfather of the computer, John Herschel, son of a noted astronomer who made many discoveries on his own in several fields, William Whewell, polymath, philosopher, and coined the term "scientist," and Richard Jones, who essentially created what we now think of as economics. These four were brilliant on their own, met at Cambridge University, and worked together off and for decades.
There was some fascinating stuff in here, and a great deal I didn't know. I'm not rating it higher solely because there were a lot of odd side trips along the way. I'm not sure we needed biographical detail on almost everyone that comes up in the text. Their impact was widespread, through other scientists, notably Darwin among others.
Recommended for fans of history, science, and finding out how things work and how they came to be.
There was some fascinating stuff in here, and a great deal I didn't know. I'm not rating it higher solely because there were a lot of odd side trips along the way. I'm not sure we needed biographical detail on almost everyone that comes up in the text. Their impact was widespread, through other scientists, notably Darwin among others.
Recommended for fans of history, science, and finding out how things work and how they came to be.
February 9, 2020
‘The Philosophical Breakfast Club’ by Laura Snyder tells the story of four friends from the early 1800s who went to Cambridge and formed a group that met and discussed science. They were also instrumental is forming a new science organization that was not trapped in the older conventions. These men helped open the sciences to more than just the hobbiest.
Each of the four was famous for their endeavors. I enjoyed the first half of the book very much. Each man’s background and how they were able to establish themselves in their field. While they were leading figures, I wanted more of the science. Unfortunately for me, the later part of the book seemed to loose focus. We had, what seemed to be long sections on dinner parties, love interests, and cyphers.
I enjoyed the book, but not as much as I had hoped. If you are interested in the early sciences this book is very good.
Each of the four was famous for their endeavors. I enjoyed the first half of the book very much. Each man’s background and how they were able to establish themselves in their field. While they were leading figures, I wanted more of the science. Unfortunately for me, the later part of the book seemed to loose focus. We had, what seemed to be long sections on dinner parties, love interests, and cyphers.
I enjoyed the book, but not as much as I had hoped. If you are interested in the early sciences this book is very good.
February 24, 2019
Overall engaging and fun to read, but Snyder tries to oversell the contributions of her protagonists particularly that of Baggage's influence on Darwin's "On the Origin of Species" who attended his soirées. The facts presented in the book seem to imply that Whewell has a rigid attitude towards methods of science as well as religion, but Whewell is shown to be omniscient and the perfect human to have ever lived. He, like Babbage, has been excessively credited even for insignificant and highly speculative contributions. Lastly, it seems that Jones has been dragged along with the other three "super scientists" with no meaningful contributions to either science or its methods. He seems to pursue everything at Whewell's will.
September 8, 2022
He disfrutando mucho la lectura de El Club de los desayunos filosóficos. Es un libro de historia de la ciencia del siglo XIX, aunque se centra en William Whewell, Charles Babbage, John Herschel y Richard Jones. Estos fueron los últimos filósofos naturales, que no sólo estuvieron a la vanguardia de la modernización de la ciencia, sino que engendraron una nueva especie: el científico.
Una delicia leer sobre las ideas de Francis Bacon que fructificaron en un cambio de paradigma que continua hasta nuestros días. Especialmente interesante es la influencia de Babbage en Charles Darwin. La máquina diferencial y la descripción de Dios como un diseñador de leyes influyó en las ideas de Darwin y su teoría de la evolución.
Un libro fantástico.
Una delicia leer sobre las ideas de Francis Bacon que fructificaron en un cambio de paradigma que continua hasta nuestros días. Especialmente interesante es la influencia de Babbage en Charles Darwin. La máquina diferencial y la descripción de Dios como un diseñador de leyes influyó en las ideas de Darwin y su teoría de la evolución.
Un libro fantástico.
August 27, 2019
Ho comprato "Il club dei filosofi che volevano cambiare il mondo" convinta che fosse un romanzo, invece è una pedante biografia.
Questa cosa mi ha scocciato molto. Su Amazon, il libro è segnato come narrativa e dalla copertina e dalla trama sembrava proprio una versione romanzata della storia dei quattro scienziati, di romanzato in questo libro, però, non c'è proprio nulla!
Perché fuorviare così tanto il lettore!? Perché, altrimenti, molto probabilmente nessuno leggerebbe questo mattone di libro (mattone non per la lunghezza ma la pesantezza del testo!).
Questa cosa mi ha scocciato molto. Su Amazon, il libro è segnato come narrativa e dalla copertina e dalla trama sembrava proprio una versione romanzata della storia dei quattro scienziati, di romanzato in questo libro, però, non c'è proprio nulla!
Perché fuorviare così tanto il lettore!? Perché, altrimenti, molto probabilmente nessuno leggerebbe questo mattone di libro (mattone non per la lunghezza ma la pesantezza del testo!).
May 13, 2019
The transition from "natural philosopher" to "scientist" was well captured through the biographical lens of key players from the Victorian era. Covering a breadth of topics - inevitably, as Whewell is characterized as a "mathematician-mineralogist-architectural historian-linguist-classicist-physicist-geologist-historian-philosopher-theologian-mountainclimbing-poet" - the story remains engaging throughout. Also enjoyed how characters featured in PBS "Victoria" pop in the storyline.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 103 reviews