Most Helpful Customer Reviews
49 of 50 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Another Good VSI Title, November 16, 2003
This review is from: Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction (Paperback)
Yet another excellent entrant in the VSI series. Okasha, Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of York, gives a well-organized quick tour of the main topics in the Philosophy of Science. Starting with an introductory chapter on "What is Science", he takes the reader on a tour of "Scientific Reasoning", "Explanation in Science", "Realism and anti-Realism", "Scientific Change and Revolutions". He then adds a chapter on three specific historical philosophical disputes in the Philosophy of Science: (1) the dispute between Newton and Leibniz about the nature of space (absolute or relative), (2) the dispute among three different schools of taxonomic classification in biology and (3) the dispute among psychologists about the 'modularity' of the human mind. He then ends with a wrap up chapter on some of the disputes about science ('Scientism', or an over-reliance on 'science' as a model for all of (or the only legitimate kind of) 'knowledge'; Science and Religion; and the debate around whether Science is 'value-free'). In each case, he gives a very clear, even-handed overview of the arguments that have raged (since the 16th Century) about these topics. He is quite good at giving analogies or examples that make otherwise abstract propositions understandable. He deftly lays out (which is difficult to do) the reasons why philosophical questions about science are not resolvable by science itself, and thus why disputes over these topics continue even today (e.g., all 'empirical' scientific theories ultimately rest on concepts that are more or less 'metaphysical' - which doesn't mean that choosing among fundamental principals is simply a matter of taste, belief or faith (e.g., Creation Science is clearly not just as good a 'scientific' theory as Evolution), but it does help clarify the nature of the assumptions that serve as the foundations of our scientific beliefs). In Okasha's descriptions of the debates over these topics, I often couldn't tell from his writing anything about his own - one of the marks of a good introductory work. Given the importance of science to modern life, understanding the debates around the core concepts on which modern science rests (and the enormously broad reach (as well as the limits) of science as a way of generating knowledge), is something every educated modern person should do at some level. This little book is an excellent way to get started.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
52 of 55 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A great little primer to the Philosophy of Science, September 12, 2005
This review is from: Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction (Paperback)
What this book claims to do, it does well. It is in the Oxford "Very Short Introductions" series, and so does not pretend to be anything but a cursory introduction to the field of Philosophy of Science. Given that caveat, the book is well-written, great fun to read, and is still likely to give us mere "laymen" in the field something to think about. Okasha assumes some scientific and philosophical knowledge on the part of the reader. There is not the space to dedicate explanations of specific scientists or scientific theories. The book appears to be for scientists rather than philosophers - he clearly goes into more detail describing the philosophical aspects than the scientific ones. At the same time, he tries not to take sides in the debates of the field, such as the importance of direct observation, the ideas of Kuhn (on scientific revolutions), Popper (on the definition of science), etc. He also covers the basic scientific issues such as causality, inductive vs. deductive reasoning, and how conflict can arise between science and religion. I'm not sure if a non-scientist will follow all Okasha's examples. However, it's probably unlikely that a non-scientist will pick up this book. This book has helped me immensely in preparing lectures for a module in "The Nature of Scientific Enquiry" for a general science course we have started this year. The clarity and conciseness with which the author presents the material makes this a nice little book, well worth the low cost.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
15 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Great Introduction, February 1, 2007
This review is from: Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction (Paperback)
I am a layman learning about Evolutionary Biology. Naturally I've been drawn into the ID/Evolution debate (in some cases on this site) and as part of that debate you end up talking a lot about what science really is, and particularly, what is a Theory. Lots of opponents of evolution cry out that it is ONLY A THEORY. True, but it is a theory (as I learned from this book) in the same sense as all other "theories"; such as the theory of gravity, theory of electricity, etc.! And so on... so anyway, I felt I needed to understand more about the "science of science". I picked this up to get that brief education and I was richly rewarded. It provides a thorough but concise introduction to the Philosophy of Science. It covers the main topics and gives summaries of the major points of view. It gives references to further reading and even provides some charts and graphics. I now feel equipped to at least discuss the basic problems of the philosophy of science and now know where to go get more information. My only criticism is the chapter that describes a specific problem in the philosophy of science from 3 of the main branches of science (Physics, Biology, and Psychology). I thought the Biology and Psychology examples were pretty weak - they didn't seem like much of a controversy today or terribly relevant. The controversy in Biology between Cladistics and Phenetics has some historical interest, but doesn't seem to be a pressing current issue (but I'm not a professional biologist, either, in all fairness). That small issue aside, it was a great read. I recommend it and I'm going to go buy and read some more of the books in this series.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
