Enter your mobile number below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Getting the download link through email is temporarily not available. Please check back later.

  • Apple
  • Android
  • Windows Phone
  • Android

To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.

Buy Used
$10.59
FREE Shipping on orders over $25.
Condition: Used: Very Good
Comment: Clean, tight and unmarked. Pages are smooth and bright with no folds or creases. Minor page curl. Minor cover-wear. *** Fast Amazon shipping, delivery tracking number, no hassle return policy - your satisfaction is guaranteed!
Have one to sell? Sell on Amazon
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See this image

Science and Unreason Paperback – March 1, 1982

4.0 out of 5 stars 4 customer reviews

See all formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Price
New from Used from
Paperback
"Please retry"
$39.20 $0.01

The Amazon Book Review
The Amazon Book Review
Author interviews, book reviews, editors picks, and more. Read it now
click to open popover
NO_CONTENT_IN_FEATURE

New York Times best sellers
Browse the New York Times best sellers in popular categories like Fiction, Nonfiction, Picture Books and more. See more

Product Details

  • Paperback: 110 pages
  • Publisher: Wadsworth Pub Co (March 1, 1982)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0534011535
  • ISBN-13: 978-0534011536
  • Product Dimensions: 0.5 x 6.8 x 9.5 inches
  • Shipping Weight: 7.2 ounces
  • Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,773,013 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

5 star
0%
4 star
100%
3 star
0%
2 star
0%
1 star
0%
See all 4 customer reviews
Share your thoughts with other customers

Top Customer Reviews

Format: Paperback
Forced to read this book in university, I found that it opened a new world of critical thought: rebutting pseudo-science, its claims and methods. A must-have for managing dinner-table conversations about alien abduction, telepathy, and so on.
Comment 7 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
Format: Paperback
There is a fine line between science and pseudoscience. What sets them apart is the general understanding of what science and pseudoscience have to offer, but through careful observations. Michael and Daisie Radner distinguish the two terms in numerous ways in their book Science and Unreason. The book builds the reader to understand terms by using them in relatable examples followed by the main point of the subject. The different aspects of how to reason with science are what helps the reader to avoid the belief in "science" when it's really pseudoscience behind it all.
The book begins with the opening chapter where it discusses the fringe of science. The chapter is divided into 7 subjects: Flat Earth, Ancient Astronauts, Biorhythm, Creationism, Immanuel Velikovsky, The Bicameral Mind, and Parapsychology. Most of the subjects contain references from other scientific books and the views of writers. In one of the subjects, Radner briefly explains the beliefs and history of a flat-earther and even previews an instruction on how to get a subscription of Flat Earth News and a membership card containing the inscription of proof that the world is flat. In the section of Creationism, it explains the theory of evolution and creation and discusses both sides to avoid a biased view. The chapter itself defines uncommon words in order for the reader to proceed with comprehension of the subject, and uses quotes from other books to get a point across. The section of The Bicameral Mind was relatively easy to understand and interesting. It starts off by explaining how a specific procedure of severing the corpus callosum, the connection between the two hemispheres of the brain, work independently.
Read more ›
1 Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
By A Customer on June 12, 2000
Format: Paperback Verified Purchase
And I'm one who forces students to read this book -- it is interesting and very readable.
1 Comment 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
Format: Paperback
For the most part, this book delivers good value for its price and size. The exception is Chapter V, “The Perils of Fact Gathering,” which is unclear and unconvincing. It attempts to point out the errors of Charles Hoy Fort, who spent most of his life collecting accounts of inexplicable phenomena, like frogs falling from the sky, and parapsychologists, like J. B. Rhine. The tool that the Radners use to do this is the concept of the paradigm, which Thomas Kuhn introduced in "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions." A paradigm for a particular discipline tells what facts are relevant and how to interpret them. Before a discipline has a paradigm, fact gathering is haphazard. The Radners give early paleontology as an example of a pre-paradigm stage. In the 18th Century, Johann Scheuchzer identified a fossil as a victim of Noah’s flood. A century later, Georges Cuvier reclassified it as a giant salamander.

What are we to do, once we have a paradigm? The Radners are emphatic: “The only useful collection of mushrooms is a sorted collection. Likewise, you will never build up a scientifically useful collection of data unless you are willing to do some sorting and leave some of your ‘facts’ behind.” This is the unconvincing part. Just because systematic fact gathering is better than unsystematic fact gathering doesn’t mean that the facts obtained unsystematically are invalid. The unclear part is deciding what facts to get rid of. Should we discard facts that contradict the paradigm? If we do, we’ll never abandon an established paradigm. (The Radners never mention paradigm shifts. You aren’t getting full value from a study of scientific revolutions if you leave out scientific revolutions.) Should we discard them because the paradigm tells us that they’re irrelevant?
Read more ›
Comment One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
Pages with Related Products. See and discover other items: science books