Science and Anti-Science

by Gerald Holton

What is good science? What goal--if any--is the proper end of scientific activity? Is there a legitimating authority that scientists mayclaim? Howserious athreat are the anti-science movements? These questions have long been debated but, as Gerald Holton points out, every era must offer its own responses. This book examines these questions not in the abstract but shows their historic roots and the answers emerging from the scientific and political controversies of this century. Employing the case-study method and the concept of scientific thematathat he has pioneered, Holton displays the broad scope of his insight into the workings of from the influence of Ernst Mach on twentiethcentury physicists, biologists, psychologists, and other thinkers to the rhetorical strategies used in the work of Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, and others; from the bickering between Thomas Jefferson and the U.S. Congress over the proper form of federal sponsorship of scientific research to philosophical debates since Oswald Spengier over whether our scientific knowledge will ever be "complete." In a masterful final chapter, Holton scrutinizes the "anti-science phenomenon," the increasingly common opposition to science as practiced today. He approaches this contentious issue by examining the world views and political ambitions of the proponents of science as well as those of its opponents-the critics of "establishment science" (including even those who fear that science threatens to overwhelm the individual in the postmodern world) and the adherents of "alternative science" (Creationists, New Age "healers," astrologers). Through it all runs the thread of the author's deep historical knowledge and his humanistic understanding of science in modern culture. Science and Anti-Science will be of great interest not only to scientists and scholars in the field of science studies but also to educators, policymalcers, and all those who wish to gain a fuller understanding of challenges to and doubts about the role of science in our lives today.

Genres: Philosophy, Science

215 pages, Hardcover

First published October 1, 1993

About the author

Gerald James Holton (1922-) is Mallinckrodt prof. of physics and prof. of the hist. of science at Harvard University

Reviews

[Yofish · Rating 2 out of 5]

I saw this in a bookstore around 12 years ago. My local library didn’t have it, so it took me a while to get around to reading it. Now I can’t really figure out why it struck me at all.

It is not really a book---it is a series of essays, all about the philosophy of science. Only the last one really struck me as useful or interesting.

I can’t imagine enjoying the rest of this book without a deep grounding in the philosophy of science. It’s way too bookish for the lay reader.

Read the essays in reverse order, if you must---there’s no reason for any ordering at all, really.

The first essay is the longest, and I think it’s about how Ernst Mach’s ideas around the turn of the 20th century really changed everything. And that his ideas are all “obvious” to us now. Of course, I had to go check Wikipedia to understand at all what his views actually are, as Holton didn’t really explain it. There’s a lot of that in the book; he can’t be bothered to explain to his readers what the heck he’s talking about.

The last essay is the only thing that’s worth anything (to me). It goes a little into how the forces of “anti-science” act, and how there are actually several schools. That is, several ways in which one can be anti-science.

[Sergei Moska · Rating 2 out of 5]

A pretty confused book, with six very uneven chapters. The chapters really aren't clearly connected to each other - it's not clear if the author is trying to make a sustained argument, or is opining about the modern history of science in general. What's more, some of his arguments are really poorly supported, or poorly laid out. What he takes to be a radical alternative to the Newtonian and Baconian perspectives on science, the "Jeffersonian Research Program", is not well explained, and it's not at all clear that it could not be subsumed under one of the two other programs.

I did come out of reading this with a greater understanding of the development of the American scientific tradition, though, as well as with an appreciation of some of the concerns of proponents of Enlightenment values, so this book was not a waste of time

[Russ · Rating 1 out of 5]

Review ? Simple ! A 'wafwot'in every sense. He is lost.

"What is good science? What goal--if any--is the proper end of scientific activity?" "Is there a legitimating authority that scientists may claim? " Uh huh.

This book only serves to suggest to readers that there ARE questions as to the.. 'legitimacy' of science!! How ludicrous.