What do you think?
Rate this book
The March of Unreason: Science, Democracy, and the New Fundamentalism
In The March of Unreason , Dick Taverne expresses his concern that irrationality is on the rise in Western society, and argues that public opinion is increasingly dominated by unreflecting prejudice and an unwillingness to engage with factual evidence. Discussing topics such as genetically modified crops and foods, organic farming, the MMR vaccine, environmentalism, the precautionary principle, and the new anti-capitalist and anti-globalization movements, he argues that the rejection of the evidence-based approach nurtures a culture of suspicion, distrust, and cynicism, and leads to dogmatic assertion and intolerance. Science, with all the benefits it brings, is an essential part of a civilized and democratic it offers the most hopeful future for humankind.
320 pages, Paperback
First published March 17, 2005
7 people are currently reading
123 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
July 7, 2014
Politician and founder of the 'Sense for Science' charity, Dick Taverne is more than just a writer debunking some of the worrying trends of our time (from the anti-GMO hysteria to organic farming, and alternative medicine to the anti-vaccination campaigns). He is, above all, a convinced militant eager to push his opinions and convictions in the public arena for decision-making. You might not agree with all of his preaching (although I, personally, do) but, you'll have to recognise here his balanced argumentation and fair play. Gosh! He's dedicating whole chapters outlining in details the arguments of his opponents, before dismissing them one by one mercilessly! Clearly referenced, well researched and sticking to facts, and only facts, there's no room here for emotional prejudices. Everything is about the science involved, only the science and, indeed, that's the key word, the one the whole book revolves around; the importance of the science only. Dick Taverne, once again from the vantage point of a politician and policy maker, insists on the importance of the evidence based approach in our assessing of risks to make the decisions impacting on us all. No hysteria, no prejudice. Whose agreeing with him or, familiar with his pleas (in support of GM crops, questioning the supposed benefits of organic farming, laughing at complementary treatments etc.) won't find anything new here. However, and that's what makes him stand out from the bunch of our so much needed debunkers, he goes beyond the demolishing of bullshit to remind us of the dangers involved when ignoring scientific evidence when taking crucial decisions regarding key societal issues. Indeed, a scientific approach (evidence based, the ability to question everything) is the cornerstone of democracy and progress; once it flies out off the window to make space for irrational thinking, prejudices and superstitions it can only lead to a new dark age (just think about the devastating consequences of the reject of GM crops on the developing world or, the effects of the anti-vaccination campaigns so far ...). Thus, this book is more than pointing fingers at and denouncing some fantasies. It's a rallying call: to defend science is to defend democracy. A great insight, and a strong argumentation.
January 4, 2018
Books like this should be given to anyone before they fix their mind on an ideology. The book is a call for reason and does that job pretty well...if enough people care to read it.
November 18, 2012
A must read exploration of the fall of science in our society. How the European dominance was gain from the science that bloomed from the period of enlightenment (Bacon, Newton, and Locke). With our faith in alternative food medicine etc we are in grave danger of loosing the advantages we have gained from science. Could we go the same way as the Arabic world which was the centre of scientific knowledge until the Muslim faith demanded a devotion to dogma not truth. Nature does not now best! Death, disease, starvation and short life excluded.
November 22, 2020
Well, this was a pretty solid read but Dick Taverne presented a strong defence of science. Controversial? Oh yes. It would likely offend many but is clear, sound, and objective in its approach. I have previously written in various fora about what I have observed over the last decade or so as a drift away from scientific enlightenment to what perhaps could be classed as a new dark age where superstition and religious fundamentalism start to regain a sway on populations of course whipped along by the political right wing...and the political left- see below. I have expressed concerns about a lack of intelligent application of critical thought and analysis in our populations.
However, Dick Taverne addresses this whole issue so much more eloquently with a heavily cited/referenced book that shines a light on both eco-fundamentalism as well as religious fundamentalism and their threat to reason, logic, and science. What is interesting is he wrote this book in 2003. Casting ones mind back that was to the days of anti-globalisation and environmental linkages and the period when there was an interesting shift with the environmental alliances in the far right across to the far left. His book runs the argument of strong linkages between science, enlightenment and democracy and the threat from fundamentalists of all persuasions with an emphasis on eco-fundamanetalists with a relatively cursory (though informative) mention of religious fundamentalists across the main regions of the world. It would be fascinating to see this book written now where I see an increased shift to populism and non-evidence-based belief being treated as fact with an increased influence of faith (not fact) based religions on world governance. This book is very much a treatise on the importance of adherence to reason and is jam-packed with illustrations and instances of drift from fact-based understanding arising from the great enlightenment to faith-based beliefs as the rather dodgy foundation for a modern effective and fair society. Though written in 2003, there are lots of entries that ring true today. He very clearly defines the enemies of reason A quote from the epilogue- "Sociologists who talk of the need to take into account 'unknown unknowns' in assessing risk should be laughed out of court. The nihilists who say there is no such thing as truth and the fundamentalists who believe that words written in sacred books a thousand and more years ago prevail over the discoveries of science are all enemies of reason- some of them very dangerous enemies indeed". An important and intelligent read that may not appeal to all.
However, Dick Taverne addresses this whole issue so much more eloquently with a heavily cited/referenced book that shines a light on both eco-fundamentalism as well as religious fundamentalism and their threat to reason, logic, and science. What is interesting is he wrote this book in 2003. Casting ones mind back that was to the days of anti-globalisation and environmental linkages and the period when there was an interesting shift with the environmental alliances in the far right across to the far left. His book runs the argument of strong linkages between science, enlightenment and democracy and the threat from fundamentalists of all persuasions with an emphasis on eco-fundamanetalists with a relatively cursory (though informative) mention of religious fundamentalists across the main regions of the world. It would be fascinating to see this book written now where I see an increased shift to populism and non-evidence-based belief being treated as fact with an increased influence of faith (not fact) based religions on world governance. This book is very much a treatise on the importance of adherence to reason and is jam-packed with illustrations and instances of drift from fact-based understanding arising from the great enlightenment to faith-based beliefs as the rather dodgy foundation for a modern effective and fair society. Though written in 2003, there are lots of entries that ring true today. He very clearly defines the enemies of reason A quote from the epilogue- "Sociologists who talk of the need to take into account 'unknown unknowns' in assessing risk should be laughed out of court. The nihilists who say there is no such thing as truth and the fundamentalists who believe that words written in sacred books a thousand and more years ago prevail over the discoveries of science are all enemies of reason- some of them very dangerous enemies indeed". An important and intelligent read that may not appeal to all.
September 17, 2018
In Labour/independent/Lib Dem MP Dick Taverne’s 2006 book he presents a powerful argument in support of the scientific method, reason, and their offshoot democracy. Taverne is a long-time supporter of the importance and public remit of science, and writes with passion, insight and clarity on his subject. His ire is in particular aimed at those he (rightly) calls eco-fundamentalists, whom he exposes as brilliant media operators with a deeply irrational attitude.
I’ve long found this irrational aspect of Green attitudes troubling – and not just the absurd, crystal-wielding part of it. I’ve enjoyed being part of the alternative/underground world for a long time, but, even amongst friends, I’ve always realised that I walked on the outer fringes of the group, with my regular attacks on conspiracy theories, unreasonable arguments (eg those against GM foods), absurd “alternate history”, unethical exploitation of media, entrenched attitudes etc. The inability of many people to use evidence and follow peer-reviewed methods is a huge concern. But in these days of social media and fake news – little more than ten years after the publication of this book – we are sleepwalking into an even worse situation, where not just truth but reality itself is the casualty. Reading this book a few years after it appeared, as traditional media fawns to public opinion and science continues to be downtrodden, is not a pleasant experience, for all the work’s excellence.
We have failed once again to learn the lesson of history. But that of course is part of our current problem. Technology is changing at a pace faster than human beings can psychologically cope with.
In my view, the great majority of what Taverne presents in this book is not only correct but vitally important. I think he does give capitalism and multi-national corporations too easy a time (he still believes in enlightened self-interest), but his main message, that democracy and its benefits come from the evidence based scientific method – itself a child of the Enlightenment – needs to be heard across the world. Unfortunately, at the moment, that seems the least likely message to achieve visibility in our age of digital media, let alone enhanced credence. A highly recommended book.
I’ve long found this irrational aspect of Green attitudes troubling – and not just the absurd, crystal-wielding part of it. I’ve enjoyed being part of the alternative/underground world for a long time, but, even amongst friends, I’ve always realised that I walked on the outer fringes of the group, with my regular attacks on conspiracy theories, unreasonable arguments (eg those against GM foods), absurd “alternate history”, unethical exploitation of media, entrenched attitudes etc. The inability of many people to use evidence and follow peer-reviewed methods is a huge concern. But in these days of social media and fake news – little more than ten years after the publication of this book – we are sleepwalking into an even worse situation, where not just truth but reality itself is the casualty. Reading this book a few years after it appeared, as traditional media fawns to public opinion and science continues to be downtrodden, is not a pleasant experience, for all the work’s excellence.
We have failed once again to learn the lesson of history. But that of course is part of our current problem. Technology is changing at a pace faster than human beings can psychologically cope with.
In my view, the great majority of what Taverne presents in this book is not only correct but vitally important. I think he does give capitalism and multi-national corporations too easy a time (he still believes in enlightened self-interest), but his main message, that democracy and its benefits come from the evidence based scientific method – itself a child of the Enlightenment – needs to be heard across the world. Unfortunately, at the moment, that seems the least likely message to achieve visibility in our age of digital media, let alone enhanced credence. A highly recommended book.
August 24, 2018
Grumpy attack on the strange alliance of anti-vaxers, environmentalists, and anti-globalisers that attack science (when and only when it contradicts their ideologies). I suppose we could call this an early entry in the culture war.
Greenpeace's internal culture turns out to be surprisingly Stalinist, and they have repeatedly made convenient errors / told lies when it suits them. Nuclear power safety for instance. It is fair to associate their successful campaign against Golden rice with some fraction of the millions of blindnesses and deaths associated with vitamin A deficiency.
Rorty is cited in this - as a man of unreason - and Taverne's whole chapter on postmodernism is a bog-standard strawman. Still mostly good. He is optimistic in the manner of successful scientists.
I preferred 'The Rational Optimist' and 'Enlightenment Now'; they're more constructive.
Greenpeace's internal culture turns out to be surprisingly Stalinist, and they have repeatedly made convenient errors / told lies when it suits them. Nuclear power safety for instance. It is fair to associate their successful campaign against Golden rice with some fraction of the millions of blindnesses and deaths associated with vitamin A deficiency.
Rorty is cited in this - as a man of unreason - and Taverne's whole chapter on postmodernism is a bog-standard strawman. Still mostly good. He is optimistic in the manner of successful scientists.
I preferred 'The Rational Optimist' and 'Enlightenment Now'; they're more constructive.
July 3, 2023
A book of mixed quality. The early chapters were strong and his arguments about alternative medicine struck me as substantively correct. The chapters on the case for and against GMOs were the highlight of the book. It is clear that anti-science environmentalists were the primary impetus for the book being written.
When the book strays from these topics his evidence and arguments can become noticeably weaker. For example, he does not really engage with the many substantive criticisms of Bjorn Lomborg's book rather he discusses in greater depth the discourse around the book. The section on post-modernism is also very general and sometimes his claims throughout were not sourced or would benefit from greater discussion of the evidence base.
When the book strays from these topics his evidence and arguments can become noticeably weaker. For example, he does not really engage with the many substantive criticisms of Bjorn Lomborg's book rather he discusses in greater depth the discourse around the book. The section on post-modernism is also very general and sometimes his claims throughout were not sourced or would benefit from greater discussion of the evidence base.
April 3, 2024
an artifact of the early 2000s.
September 10, 2012
Unfortunately, rather than being “an excellent defence of science” as Lewis Wolpert is quoted as saying on the back cover, The March of Unreason is actually an example of Unreason in itself. The emotional ‘arguments’ against what many people believe to be effective treatments in their own health care, do nothing to explain either why they feel the need to use ‘alternative medicine’ nor why “Epidemiological studies seem particularly difficult for the public and the media to comprehend.” (as Taverne writes on pages 52-53)
Overall I found the prologue promising of an interesting discussion, and the book itself a great disappointment. But then Taverne does admit he is not a scientist but a politician. I find him unconvincing on both counts.
Although he says he came to the subject of GM food ‘with an open mind’, he proves this to be false by his prejudicial statements against those who oppose it. He fails to state their real arguments, and only negates their position from his own judgment. If he were really open-minded he would present the arguments themselves and weigh them as he did in his own mind. This would be worthy of a scientific approach, and it would be the kind of discussion a politician should want presented to his electorate to help them make a rational choice for themselves. Instead, he muddies the issue with that modern political waste of attacking the opponent and distracting from the content of the argument.
He even goes so far (on p101-102) as saying:
While there is general agreement among leading scientists – indeed it is a view supported by every authoritative body that has examined the evidence – that there is no reason to expect GM crops to be a danger to health, many plant biologists do not dismiss the possibility of damage to biodiversity and to the environment, although of course they will add that it depends on the particular crop, how and where it is grown, and the particular circumstances: scientists, unlike Green lobbyists, avoid generalisations
Of course, this in itself is a generalisations. And so he distances himself from being a scientist, by proving himself incapable of what he seems to think the “green lobbyists” should be more capable of, in following an example he does not even demonstrate himself.
After this point in the book I was so frustrated with the style of presentation I stopped reading a merely skimmed the rest of the book for any revealing indications of where else to look for a better coverage of issues I would like to know more about to form my own opinions.
I would recommend that others merely browse the “Sources” section at the back and read more directly for themselves.
With the range of references I would have expected a more open and revealing discussion. A great let down.
[footnote: To make something worthwhile out of the time spent reading this book, I now consider writing something myself. Perhaps “The Limits of Reason: why reason alone won’t save us from ourselves” or “Beyond Reason: the integration of our varied faculties”. There is much work to be done, and it is pointless wasting time ‘against’ anything if we cannot find a way of directing it toward what we would like to teach ourselves, even if those who have presented their ‘opposing‘ don’t come with us. We can only ultimately be responsible for ourselves. Beyond that we can offer our example trusting that those who see it may find a better way within and for themselves as well. And that should not take force, nor ridicule, but the love of learning and exploring and seeing for ourselves.]
Overall I found the prologue promising of an interesting discussion, and the book itself a great disappointment. But then Taverne does admit he is not a scientist but a politician. I find him unconvincing on both counts.
Although he says he came to the subject of GM food ‘with an open mind’, he proves this to be false by his prejudicial statements against those who oppose it. He fails to state their real arguments, and only negates their position from his own judgment. If he were really open-minded he would present the arguments themselves and weigh them as he did in his own mind. This would be worthy of a scientific approach, and it would be the kind of discussion a politician should want presented to his electorate to help them make a rational choice for themselves. Instead, he muddies the issue with that modern political waste of attacking the opponent and distracting from the content of the argument.
He even goes so far (on p101-102) as saying:
While there is general agreement among leading scientists – indeed it is a view supported by every authoritative body that has examined the evidence – that there is no reason to expect GM crops to be a danger to health, many plant biologists do not dismiss the possibility of damage to biodiversity and to the environment, although of course they will add that it depends on the particular crop, how and where it is grown, and the particular circumstances: scientists, unlike Green lobbyists, avoid generalisations
Of course, this in itself is a generalisations. And so he distances himself from being a scientist, by proving himself incapable of what he seems to think the “green lobbyists” should be more capable of, in following an example he does not even demonstrate himself.
After this point in the book I was so frustrated with the style of presentation I stopped reading a merely skimmed the rest of the book for any revealing indications of where else to look for a better coverage of issues I would like to know more about to form my own opinions.
I would recommend that others merely browse the “Sources” section at the back and read more directly for themselves.
With the range of references I would have expected a more open and revealing discussion. A great let down.
[footnote: To make something worthwhile out of the time spent reading this book, I now consider writing something myself. Perhaps “The Limits of Reason: why reason alone won’t save us from ourselves” or “Beyond Reason: the integration of our varied faculties”. There is much work to be done, and it is pointless wasting time ‘against’ anything if we cannot find a way of directing it toward what we would like to teach ourselves, even if those who have presented their ‘opposing‘ don’t come with us. We can only ultimately be responsible for ourselves. Beyond that we can offer our example trusting that those who see it may find a better way within and for themselves as well. And that should not take force, nor ridicule, but the love of learning and exploring and seeing for ourselves.]
August 15, 2012
Taverne argues that such movements as the anti-GM groups, advocates of organic farming, and antiglobalization forces display a worrying attitude toward science. For Taverne, science is a great good, one that encourages democracy and leads to an optimistic view of human potential. Meanwhile, those arguing against (for instance) the genetic modification of foods are seen as holding science in contempt, rejecting reason, and hewing to what Taverne calls “new fundamentalism”—not religious fundamentalism (though he does deal with that), but a dogmatic reliance on gut feeling in the teeth of evidence.
Taverne is actually pretty convincing; the book itself is broad-stroke stuff, giving a chapter to GM technology, a chapter to organic farming, etc etc etc. As a result, he tends more toward the magisterial pronouncement (though, it should be said, the footnoted magisterial pronouncement); this is compounded by the fact that Taverne himself is not a scientist, but a politician. Furthermore, he seems to take the view that democracy, science, and capitalism all go together—though, as Žižek points out in numerous places, the example of China (which is not democratic, but which is becoming thoroughly capitalist) seems to complicate matters. Taverne barely mentions China, except to comment on the astounding economic growth of Asian countries.
That said, "The March of Unreason" has one great virtue: it doubles down on the idea that science, as a whole, is a good thing and leads to human betterment. One would hardly think the idea worth reinforcing, but given the fact that both science and the idea of progress are under the gun from religious fundamentalists and back-to-nature advocates, it is a timely reminder and one worth revisiting.
Taverne is actually pretty convincing; the book itself is broad-stroke stuff, giving a chapter to GM technology, a chapter to organic farming, etc etc etc. As a result, he tends more toward the magisterial pronouncement (though, it should be said, the footnoted magisterial pronouncement); this is compounded by the fact that Taverne himself is not a scientist, but a politician. Furthermore, he seems to take the view that democracy, science, and capitalism all go together—though, as Žižek points out in numerous places, the example of China (which is not democratic, but which is becoming thoroughly capitalist) seems to complicate matters. Taverne barely mentions China, except to comment on the astounding economic growth of Asian countries.
That said, "The March of Unreason" has one great virtue: it doubles down on the idea that science, as a whole, is a good thing and leads to human betterment. One would hardly think the idea worth reinforcing, but given the fact that both science and the idea of progress are under the gun from religious fundamentalists and back-to-nature advocates, it is a timely reminder and one worth revisiting.
July 26, 2013
Thought provoking read that gives a reader a lot to chew on, through I thought the author over-stated his case at times (though, he is writing more about current situations in Great Britain and Europe, so that might explain some his distaste for what he refers to as eco-fundamentalism). The writing is solid, and he presents a wealth of information in an accessible way. I believe that, ultimately, that's what you look for in a book like this - accessibility and enough information to make you critically think about things, without overwhelming you. From that perspective, I think the book succeeds, and provides an important reminder to use evidence based thinking as often as we can and is appropriate when approaching issues that affect our world.
December 9, 2010
A great book with a good scope of issues. The GM crop issue religious/fundamentalist intrusion into science etc. If you're someone that is often dubious of newspaper headlines on scientific issues and doubtful of some of the claims of 'greens' but have never had a firm foundation as to the thought process of the people making these claims you're not sure about this book can shed light on that giving you an enlightening look on the ideology of pushing an agenda without wanting to present facts.
August 22, 2011
This book criticises the postmodern contempt for science with regards to alternative medicine, the environmental movement and GM-crops. The only criticism to be made that is apparent throughout the book is that Dick Taverne fails to address some justified worries (e.g. patenting in GM-crops).
Well worth reading for anybody buying organic food.
Well worth reading for anybody buying organic food.
February 19, 2013
Hovered between a 4 and 5 rating. Dick Taverne comes across as an extraordinarily intelligent and enlightened man; not a book you might expect from a politician. Very interesting on uncovering the true nature of organisations like Greenpeace and the anti-globalisation brigade.
Want to read
September 22, 2011Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews