A Philosopher Looks at Science

by Nancy Cartwright

What is science and what can it do? Nancy Cartwright here takes issue with three common images of that it amounts to the combination of theory and experiment; that all science is basically reducible to physics; and that science and the natural world which it pictures are deterministic. The author's innovative and thoughtful book draws on examples from the physical, life, and social sciences alike, and focuses on all the products of science – not just experiments or theories – and how they work together. She reveals just what it is that makes science ultimately reliable, and how this reliability is nevertheless still compatible with a view of nature as more responsive to human change than we might think. Her book is a call for greater intellectual humility by and within scientific institutions. It will have strong appeal to anyone who thinks about science and how it is practised in society.

Genres: Philosophy, Science

222 pages, Kindle Edition

Published June 30, 2022

Reviews

[Matthew Brown · Rating 4 out of 5]

The best introduction to Cartwright's approach to philosophy of science. Accessible to advanced undergrads. Could work in an intro class with a lot of scaffolding.

[Scott Would · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you want a view of science that is true to both its power and its limits, and to the richness of reality itself, this is a good place to start.

[E. · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was convinced by a Cartwright essay I read in graduate school of the limitations of scientific understanding as it relates to laws. This is a handy summary of her views developed over her career, on what science is and isn't, what it can and can't do, and why we should have humility.

[Andrew · Rating 2 out of 5]

I found this book to be an incredibly frustrating read. Cartwright avoids the demarcation problem of scientific philosophy (ie what constitutes science) and this allows her to write an entire book that actually says very little about science. She argues two central points:

1) Science isn't all physics

2) There is no real scientific method, just a dappled mechano set (take a drink every time you read this metaphor [edit: for the sake of your health, don't]) of methods.

While she cherry picks specific examples to convince the reader, often from social studies and economics (ie. not science, vide supra), she shows very little understanding of how scientists think about the work they do. She takes the view of an outsider and describes how she sees it from a deliberately limited vantage point without really engaging with how the science is actually working when you take into account the tacit knowledge, assumptions and bureaucratic BS that scientists work with.

As a scientist first and philosopher second, I can't help but see this as an exemplar of the reasons why scientists rarely take the time to pay attention to philosophy any more. She exemplifies the attitude that it is enough to construct a cogent argument, actual rigorous defence of said argument and working towards revealing the truth about her topic is not a concern. I did not find this enlightening nor engaging. Repetitive metaphors, needless personification of abstract concepts and narratives built upon misconstrued events abound. Best stick to Popper and Kuhn if you want to understand science.

[Paul Robinson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book has the very modest objective of showing that physics cannot explain everything and that reductionist views of reality do not work. It does a great job of showing physics needs help even in its own realm and that scientific research today always requires the assistance of multiple disciplines. It also brings home how rich and complex reality is in relation to our limited human minds.

At the same time, there is no positive presentation of how a philosopher situates science in relation to other intellectual disciplines, nor the ways in which a philosopher understands what science cannot teach him. This is an area where Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophy excels and it would have been nice to see some of its notions providing bearings and clarity to the reader.

Lastly, Mrs. Cartwright seemingly could not resist using examples that she must have known would have caused distraction from her message, because they cannot be separated from politics. She urges intellectual humility at the end of the book and provides us her exemplar of that shining virtue: Dr. Anthony Fauci.