24 of 25 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Best Of Burke, February 12, 2002
Having read Burke's previous efforts, I was prepared to be entertained and amazed at how seemingly unrelated thoughts and developments came together to move history and innovation forward - but this book exceeded my expectations! Another reveiwer commented (accurately) that Burke gives religion a pretty rough time, it must also be said that he gives an incredible perspective on how much impact religious thought impacted people's freedom to think, and how those places tolerant of fresh thinking attracted (and benefitted from) thinking people.
The same is shown to be true of political freedom, economic freedom, and, well, you get the picture...freedoms made great differences.
Burke does a fabulous job of providing meaningful context to innovation and innovators. He also demonstrates that a lot of innovation was not pursued, but rather occurred almost by accident - two things sitting next to each other for the first time, and someone decides to combine them!
If you don't read any of his other books, be sure to read this one! I have only one bit of advice when reading it - pace yourself - it is much too good to rush, so savor it...
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
30 of 34 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Very Informative, Well-Conceived and Wonderfully Illustrated, June 25, 2001
Psychologists tell us that people often tend to see patterns and connections in situations where none really exist. At first, I had reservations about Burke's book for this very reason. But I found the book informative, intelligent, and a real pleasure to read. The author is very pesuasive in his thesis that unexpected connections and new knowledge really alter the human condition and our understanding of the universe. I learned a lot from this book and would recommend it to anyone who is interested in intellectual history, the history of technology, science, and medicine, or the relationship between political economy and the human condition.
Because the scope of Burke's book is so wide, brevity is a must. For this reason, some important connections had to be stated only in general terms, without deep explanations that may be necessary for a reader who is not already familiar with many major figures and events of the past. But no one should be intimidated. You can still enjoy the book, even if you do not already have the knowledge of technological and scientific history. Another challenge that is posed by the wide scope of this project and the subsequent terseness that it requires, is that 1) some statemets are subject to dispute because of their breif nature and generality; 2) a number of relevant causes and connections remain unexplored. I do not think there is a way around this. For example, Burke unequivocally states that John Locke supported slavery. This is debatable. True, Locke had invested in a slave-trading company, but his political philosophy rejected slavery in principle, allowing it only in the very special circumstance of prisoners of war. (Locke believed, for whatever reason, that prisoners of war could rightly be killed, and therefore if they chose to live, their captor could enslave them.) Also, Burke makes much of Locke's defense of private property, ignoring, as many authors have done before him, the fact that by "property" Locke meant to include all of these: life, liberty, and estate. And by "estate" Locke meant what we mean by private property today. But explanations of this sort, while providing a more balanced picture, would take up too much of the book, whose time span includes millenia of technological history!
I think that a greater challenge is posed by the complex nature of technological progress itself. Burke explores some connections and remains silent about others. This makes the methodology a little weak. For example, he practically argues that the weather was responsible for the industrial revolution, which began in Great Britain in the eighteenth century. I do realize that it is the unexpected and unusual connections that are the focus here. Still, I was left wondering, what about other factors?
I also have a difference of opinion on the philosophy of science. I do not think the universe really changed that much, perhaps not at all, based on the discoveries we as the human race made through the centuries. Only our understanding of the universe has undergone changes. Furthermore, not every understanding is equally valid. Some are much more scientific and accurate than others. The universe did not really change because Galileo discovered the moons of Jupiter and Newton the 'laws' of all mechanical motion. What changed is the level of our scientific sophistication in regards to the question, How does the universe work? Also, I do not think that Burke's optimism about making science a true item of public domain is altogether justified. On the last two pages of the book he seems to suggest that the general public should dictate which direction science shall take, and what in the end counts for science. This is an interesting populist move. But one should not deceive himself. Science is not that democractic. One does not establish validity of scientific theories based on a vote. As to the direction that science will take, well, that is likely to be decided by scientists, corporations, and all those unexpected connections and unintended consequence that are so important in history, as Burke himself demonstrated.
I enjoyed the book a great deal. Everybody should read the chapter on medicine as soon as they get a chance. It makes you feel grateful for what you have in an economically advanced country. Finally, "The American Internet Advantage" owes much to the spirit that is also the spirit of this book--the spirit of exploration, perseverance, and strange connections.
Michael Hart
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
