The book competently reviews the historical thinkers on the philosophy of science. But the language is dense and the reading is difficult. The phrase ”science method” is frequently used without a definition of “science” leaving the reader to equate the two; how is “science method” different from a “method”? The word scientist is used without a definition; who is a scientist and what makes them a scientist? Since the book presents a changing understanding of “science method” then a definition of science and who is scientist must like-wise historically fluctuate.