The Golem (Canto Classics): What You Should Know About Science

by Harry Collins, Trevor Pinch

Harry Collins and Trevor Pinch liken science to the Golem, a creature from Jewish mythology, powerful yet potentially dangerous, a gentle, helpful creature that may yet run amok at any moment. Through a series of intriguing case studies the authors debunk the traditional view that science is the straightforward result of competent theorisation, observation and experimentation. The very well-received first edition generated much debate, reflected in a substantial new Afterword in this second edition, which seeks to place the book in what have become known as 'the science wars'.

Genres: Science, Nonfiction, Philosophy, History Of Science, History, Technology, Social Science

214 pages, Paperback

First published June 1, 1992

Reviews

[heptagrammaton · Rating 5 out of 5]

What our case studies how is that there is no logic of scientific discovery. Or, rather, if there is such a logic, it is the logic of everyday life.

It is a great shame that The Golem isn't more famous as a work of popular science than this is.
   This is a great brief introduction to the fuzziness and ambiguity of experimental science and method.


notes on the book as a physical object:
It seems that the old Canto editions used to be significantly than the Canto Classics Cambridge University Press currently (since about 2014?) publishes, with their minimalist photography covers and sans serif titles (which I personally find soulless and drab and more suited to secondary school textbooks and self-published poetry.)
   If given the choice, I advise going with the vintage option: the paper is a smooth cream colour which is much easier on the eyes than the stark bluish white of modern printings. And it is sewn – though the signatures are hard to make out.
   (My copy of The Golem a 2000 reprint and my conclusions here are drawn overwhelmingly based on its favourable comparison with the one other Canto book I have on my shelf, which is a 2018 print. I am unaware of any variation of print quality within each series, which is possible.)

[Edmund · Rating 4 out of 5]

What an origin story for an academic specialism this would be. At the start of the year, when I first encountered the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge, my flatmates were treated to long diatribes about how it was mere ‘sniping at the sidelines’ and represented everything I dislike about esoteric, turgid, and pointless academia.

um…well here we are, having just powered through The Golem cover to cover in the National Library of Scotland.

The turning point in my journey with SSK was realising that its purpose is not to undermine science, but merely to understand it for what it is: a process of knowledge creation like other academic disciplines. Science is not God; it is not a ‘special discipline’. Facts do not speak for themselves, they require interpretation. Therefore science is a social exercise.

And interestingly in the case of The Golem, there have been many, many times in science where the facts have been contested between scientists, or later superseded. The case studies in the book show how chaotic and muddled new scientific discoveries can be.

There is nothing wrong with this; the only sin is not knowing that it is always thus.

[Bryn · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this one for a course at school this year and I would recommend it to others interested in the generation of scientific truths (and scientific flops). Some interesting stand alone history-of-science stories that also provide a good pause to think about "science" in general.

[Rhys · Rating 4 out of 5]

The authors, Collins and Pinch, first published The Golem in 1993 with a second edition released in 1998 and republished in 2014. The continued interest in the book is fascinating, since it is without a doubt an odd book. In mediaeval tradition the golem is a creature of clay animated by having the Hebrew word ‘EMETH’ (‘truth’) inscribed on its forehead – it is truth that drives it on. The authors emphasize that this does not mean that the golem understands the truth, but only that it pursues it. Collins and Pinch show that a golem is not an evil creature (it is our creation) but it is a little daft and clumsy at times. Golem Science is a metaphor describing the scientific process as it is embedded in a society comprised of other processes and other truth-claims.

The Golem shares a number of cases of science at the fringe of its ability to prove theories through experimentation. Examples include experiments of transferring memory from one animal to another; experiments to prove the theory of relativity; cold fusion; determining the origins of life; gravitational waves and others.

In each of these cases, the science used to prove the theory was found lacking. Either the data was selected to match theoretical results (as in the case of Eddington’s measurements to prove Einstein's theory); the experiments were impossible to replicate by other scientists due to complexity or cost; or the reputation of the scientists and labs were used to settle conflicts in experimental results, rather than the data itself.

The reader might come to the conclusion that science is not credible (particularly with complex or difficult to measure problems). Collins and Pinch argue that this is not the conclusion to make from The Golem. The authors want to make the case that “scientists are neither Gods nor charlatans; they are merely experts, like every other expert on the political stage” (143). The argue that we need to see science ‘as expertise rather than as certain knowledge’. They also caution that this does not mean that non-experts should have influence on scientific understanding - only that “Science is part of a culture that belongs to all of us” (152).

What the authors don’t really explain is what pushes scientists to take the position that they provide certain knowledge. It may be caused by expertise-for-hire that uses the foundation of the scientific method against science itself: the idea of certainty being quite different in science than in other domains, like politics. Collins and Pinch say that scientists taking a ‘fundamentalist’ approach to science as being “revealed, hierarchical, exhaustive, exclusive, omnipotent and infallible” (152) in fact exposes these scientists to damaging critique and causes public confusion.

Collins and Pinch use a metaphor of a rope for science: The separate strands of proof may in themselves be weak, but the rope assembled from these strands will be strong. There are clear lessons in this book for climate scientists overstepping their role as experts when implying certainty, as this has allowed critics to obfuscate the science in the political domain. Scientists (and the public) should accept that science can be clumsy and daft at times, but trust the process to continue to pursue the truth.

[Pierre · Rating 3 out of 5]

Una de las tesis principales de este libro es que vale más conocer cómo funciona la ciencia que el contenido de esta y me parece que dicha tesis está muy bien argumentada en las pocas páginas de las que consta este libro. Haciendo uso de análisis de casos, los autores logran desenmascarar el Golem que es la ciencia y que normalmente se viste de Bella-estatua, aunque -hay que aclarar- dicha empresa no se torna nunca irracional ni intentan volvernos anticientíficos. Muy al contrario, hablar de cómo funciona la ciencia desde el fondo de ella (su relación con la política, con las instituciones, con la ciudadanía y con las individualidades y grupos de trabajo) hace de ésta una actividad menos idealizada y por lo tanto más 'racional', más al alcance de todos y no sólo de unos cuantos; incluso deja en claro lo magnífica que es la ciencia y los expertos que en ella surgen o que la hacen surgir. El aporte de estos sociólogos de la ciencia me parece de una ecuanimidad muy loable e imprescindible para cualquier científico, filósofo o ciudadano activo pero no para aquellos escépticos que ven en la ciencia una sólo actividad falaz.

[Petra]

For research so I'm leaving this unrated. For Collins and Pinch science is a golem - a monster that can be used for both bad and good. The writers go through seven science cases, trying to show that the process of getting the right knowledge isn't always as simple. As I don't know a lot about science in theoretical level, I must say that this needed a lot of background research despite having studied the history of science quite a lot. It isn't the most accessible of the books but I really liked how Collins and Pinch used cases from history of science to prove their own points.

[Frederick Widdowson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read this book. It is easy to understand and will help you understand better the true nature of science and how it actually works without the politics and the propaganda you get in the media and from celebrities like Bill Nye. This is an important book.

[Tim · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is not an attack on pseudoscience, but a brilliant expose on how science is not an exact science. I must read for actual scientists.

[Vince · Rating 4 out of 5]

Collins and Pinch offer a short series of case-studies to demonstrate that science in practice is a messy affair of controversy, ideology, and people-politics. The Golem seeks to help non-scientists move from the popular reverence and awe toward Capital-S "Science" to a position that understands that science in practice rarely occurs as science in theory suggests.

Their point is useful to anyone looking to beware of fundamentalism wherever it may appear - and it certainly appears in Science wearing very similar attitudes as its religious counterpart. The Golem aims at rehumanizing scientists and their practice, and not to discredit science as a whole.

This little book generated significant controversy in the mid-late 1990s which the authors analyze and discuss in an Afterward. Ironically, having worked my way down my reading stack through The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks and The Poisoner's Handbook, both of which chronicle the very human side of science with all its attendant warts, The Golem's point seems obvious.

I'm looking forward to trying out the sequels "The Golem at Large: What you Should Know about Technology" and "Dr. Golem: How to Think about Medicine." Though I have to admit that Collins' recent work on Expertise ("Rethinking Expertise" and "Tacit and Explicit Knowledge") may move ahead of Golem sequels on my reading list.

[Andrew Jones · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ehh…school book.

[Durgesh · Rating 5 out of 5]

Quick Read to generate curiosity in science and creatures of world.

[Harry · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nice and easy to read collection of episodes from the history of science. Some good examples to think with as well.

[Gareth]

The Golem takes the form of case histories of some of science's defining moments (Eddington's 'proof' of Einstein's relativity) and some less well-known ones (the sex-life of lizards). The main point is to show how such discoveries and advancements aren't the result of pure logical and experimental method, but occur in conjunction with other factors. Often, controversies are not categorically settled, but things simply move on - due to lack of funding, new discoveries in other fields, etc. Pinch and Collins are not sceptical about scientific advance, however, but merely wish to show (like Thomas Kuhn) how it may not be a completely rational process (as its cheerleaders would have us believe). Very readable and fascinating - a great book.

Gareth Southwell is a philosopher, writer and illustrator.

[Abdul Alhazred · Rating 5 out of 5]

An antidote to the hagiography of science that dispels the idea of clear cut and definitive experiments that change knowledge as we know it. Familiar topics like Pasteur's experiments on spontaneous generation and Einstein's predictions vs Newton's models are made more clear by explaining how they were less clear than we're led to believe. In a world surrounded by half baked studies and media headline manipulation, this is more important than ever. Even the "definitive" experiments weren't, and were instead manipulated, interpreted and lobbied for.
The book balances these heroic triumphs of science with lesser known failures, and shows the similarities in the mire of uncertainty. It's the sausage making of advancing scientific understanding and it's ugly.

[Michael Burnam-Fink · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this book, Collins and Pinch explore several scientific controversies, ranging from settled historical examples like the non-spontaneous generation of life in sterilized mediums, and various proofs of relativity, to modern examples of experimenter's regress in the detection of gravity waves, solar neutrinos, and cold fusion. They amply show that science is a human endeavor, and at the cutting edge it is the human qualities and foibles that matter. As an exploration of relatively non-political controversies, this would make a great introduction to the messiness of real science in an intro STS course (which is in fact where I read it). A deserved classic.

[Frederick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting work that shows that some of the most famous experiments in the past that "proved" such things as relativity were really not what they seemed. Scientific conclusions are as much a facet of culture, ambition, and ego as they are of truth. The book shines a light on some of the falsehoods we are taught in textbooks in school all the while uplifting science as a noble endeavor. The authors walk this tightrope very well. Its worth the read, particularly if you are NOT a scientist.

[Erik · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent antidote to ultra-rational scientism. Give several case studies of high profile scientific theories where the make or break factor was not contained in the data points at all.

Fairly fast reading, and not a lot of background knowledge required about the subjects (from lizard sex to gravity waves).

[John Carter McKnight · Rating 4 out of 5]

Engaging, readable sociology of science. The case studies are drawn from physics and biology and are interesting, readable and illustrative. The most interesting part, however, is the Afterword, in which the authors discuss the book's reception in the scientific community and subsequent debate over contrasting meanings and standards of truth between physics and sociology.

[Raheem · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Golem" is a fascinating look at how science is actually done, from high-powered physics to the sex life of lizards.

The examples are compelling and the writing is clear without being overly pedantic. You will end up with much better appreciation for the complex, often messy, and beautiful world of scientific research.

Highly recommended.

[David Westerveld · Rating 5 out of 5]

Science is done by humans and hence has all the characteristics that humans bring into everything they do. A fascinating look at how science really works without the mythical godlike status it is sometimes given in popular culture. Highly recommend for anyone who wants to better know and understand science as a source of truth.

[Luaba · Rating 4 out of 5]

A series of short stories that helps the non scientist like myself, become more aware of how the scientific community approach and deals with new and ground breaking experiment. The author also manage to walk that fine line between being too jargon heavy and accessible to the laymen.

[Ben Gallman]

If I had to give an explanation of what I thought of Science I would point to this.

[Rebecca · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great explanation of why scientists sometimes screw up.

[Curtis Jensen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read this book a long time ago for a college class. It has much more application today than it did back then.

[Arron · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent book, nearly five-stars. Worth reading for anyone interested even remotely in science, knowledge, or epistemology.

[Tara Maree · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great read. Gives an interesting perspective on science.

[Mark Z · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book. Anyone who studies science, or its history, philosophy, or sociology should read this.