Buy new:
$28.44$28.44
FREE delivery:
Monday, April 3
Ships from: Amazon.com Sold by: Amazon.com
Buy used: $11.00
Other Sellers on Amazon
& FREE Shipping
95% positive over last 12 months
& FREE Shipping
96% positive over lifetime
& FREE Shipping
88% positive over last 12 months
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Uncontrolled: The Surprising Payoff of Trial-and-Error for Business, Politics, and Society Hardcover – May 1, 2012
| Price | New from | Used from |
- Kindle
$19.99 Read with Our Free App - Hardcover
$28.4424 Used from $2.01 13 New from $26.19 1 Collectible from $17.99
Enhance your purchase
In a powerful and masterfully-argued book, Manzi shows us how the methods of science can be applied to social and economic policy in order to ensure progress and prosperity.
- Print length320 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherBasic Books
- Publication dateMay 1, 2012
- Grade level11 and up
- Reading age13 years and up
- Dimensions6.14 x 0.94 x 9.21 inches
- ISBN-10046502324X
- ISBN-13978-0465023240
Frequently bought together

- +
- +
Customers who bought this item also bought
Editorial Reviews
Review
One of Hayek's old truths” is that individual freedom is an indispensible means to both human flourishing and material progress and that it is threatened by misguided government bureaucracy. We are fortunate to have it restated extraordinarily well in today's language in.... Jim Manzi's Uncontrolled...His observations offer genuinely original insights into longstanding political and social problems.”
Tyler Cowen, Marginal Revolution
This is a truly stimulating book, about how methods of controlled experimentation will bring a new wave of business and social innovation.”
The American
This book is one of the most powerful challenges to progressive political impulses I've read in a while.”
Library Journal
If social scientists entrusted with informing policymakers utilize more experiments, Manzi argues, the policies they create will be more effective over the long term. Simply put, adopting a trial-and-error methodology can help businesses, policymakers, and society as a whole. Backed by numerous pertinent examples, Manzi's arguments are convincing. Recommended for anyone interested in policymaking or in how businesses make decisions.”
Booklist
This challenging book highlights the astounding advances in science and technology that have started to be used in social-program evaluations.”
Conor Friedersdorf, The Atlantic
If Uncontrolled were merely a restatement of the need for epistemic humility among wonks and legislators, interest in it might be confined to the right. The book is of broader interest, and may turn out to be important, because its author makes a compelling argument for an ideologically neutral method for improving policy, one that left and right might both plausibly embrace, even as it challenges both sides to rethink some of their reflexes.... [Uncontrolled is] the rare political book that goes out of its way to raise the most powerful objections to its arguments and to point out the limits of the reform program that it recommends.”
The New Republic
In the first two thirds of his book, Manzi describes the historical development of the RFT [randomized field trial] and its philosophical basis, and includes a digression on the philosophy of science. The argument will be familiar to empiricists and philosophers, but it may interest a popular audience, and is well done and readable.... A more ambitious argument emerges in the last part of the book. Manzi argues that the RFT — or more precisely, the overall approach to empirical investigation that the RFT exemplifies — provides a way of thinking about public policy. This is the most imaginative and interesting part of Manzi's book.”
Andrew Sullivan, The Daily Beast / The Dish
It's a fresh, dense and fascinating exploration of what the policy implications of a true conservatism of doubt' would mean. I hope it can jumpstart a conservative intellectual renaissance.”
Kirkus Reviews
A thoroughly argued, powerful study based on principles independent of the author's own conservative-libertarian views.”
Kenneth Silber, The Daily Beast
Jim Manzi's Uncontrolled is an intriguing investigation of the power, limits, and varieties of empirical knowledge.... [A] substantial part of Uncontrolled's value is in its sharp thinking about how various disciplines seek reliable knowledge.... Uncontrolled offers useful advice for navigating a hard-to-know world.”
Arnold Kling, National Review
The ideas in this book are important.... This is a provocative book for people who are interested in how social science relates to public policy.”
The American Conservative
[A]s Jim Manzi persuasively argues in his insightful and well-written new book, Uncontrolled, humanity is terrible at foresight, and trial-and-error is the chief way humans develop reliable knowledge.... In Uncontrolled, Manzi provides an incisive and highly readable account of how trial-and-error experimentation in science and free markets lessens human ignorance, uproots bias, and produces progress.”
David Brooks, New York Times
[Manzi's] tour through the history of government learning is sobering, suggesting there may be a growing policy gap. The world is changing fast, producing enormous benefits and problems. Our ability to understand these problems is slow. Social policies designed to address them usually fail and almost always produce limited results. Most problems have too many interlocking causes to be explicable through modeling. Still, things don't have to be this bad. The first step to wisdom is admitting how little we know and constructing a trial-and-error process on the basis of our own ignorance. Inject controlled experiments throughout government. Feel your way forward. Fail less badly every day.”
Wall Street Journal
[O]ffers much to digest.... Uncontrolled is at its most provocative when Mr. Manzi considers the largely unmet potential of controlled experimentation to improve outcomes in social science and government policy.... A vigorous book, pulsing with ideas.”
Arnold Kling, National Review
The ideas in this book are important.... This is a provocative book for people who are interested in how social science relates to public policy.”
About the Author
Product details
- Publisher : Basic Books; 1st edition (May 1, 2012)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 320 pages
- ISBN-10 : 046502324X
- ISBN-13 : 978-0465023240
- Reading age : 13 years and up
- Grade level : 11 and up
- Item Weight : 1.18 pounds
- Dimensions : 6.14 x 0.94 x 9.21 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #1,428,286 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #463 in Political Advocacy Books
- #730 in Social Sciences Methodology
- #1,366 in General Elections & Political Process
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Manzi starts with the philosophical roots of induction in the writings of Francis Bacon and David Hume - and how they fared when Popper and Kuhn entered the picture. He describes the significant leap brought by three ideas. First, as the complexity of nature combines with humanity's pattern-seeking dispositions, experience and observation, the light in empiricism, become unreliable because we cast a shadow over them. Here is Manzi, quoting Bacon, on this: “the human understanding is of its own nature prone to suppose the existence of more order and regularity in the world than it finds.” (p. 6). Second, a departure from seeking ultimate causes towards searching practical, useful, knowledge fundamentally changed how progress in science is attained. Manzi summarizes this key point as a change in perspective: "The ultimate goal of Baconian science is not philosophical truth; it is improved engineering." (p. 8). And third, the mother of all induction problems: generalizability. As Hume noted, the reliability of inductions must necessarily be contingent, makeshift, as there will always be a chance that an undiscovered causal rule lurks behind whatever we gauged with our experience. These three ideas posit a challenge: "[…] without rules that generalize from experience, we have nothing more than a catalog of data, but inductive evidence can never tell us with certainty that our generalizations are correct." (p. 15). Enter experimental science.
Experimentation cuts through the three features that make our observations of nature so difficult: high causal density, that is, multiple causal relationships interacting in non-linear ways; holistic integration, how complex phenomena only arises, emerges, along the web of the interaction of a systems' components - but not in isolation; and motivated reasoning, as Bacon already foresaw. Statistician George Box put it sardonically: "To find out what happens when you change something, it is necessary to change it", and experimentation does precisely that. Since James Lind's 1747 allocation of treatments for scurvy in the British ship Salisbury, Pierce's 1884 randomized experiment on the perception of weights, and Neyman & Fisher's field randomization of fertilizer, experimentation has fundamentally changed how we accumulate knowledge. By accounting for white-coat biases that can inadvertently assign treatments to non-comparable groups, and holding approximately equal the unobserved differences in the members of control and treatment groups, randomization opens a window to causality - despite the complexity of the environment and the motivated reasoning of experimenters. Randomization, therefore, "[…] is another statement of epistemic humility." (p. 76).
The promise of experimentation, however, is not without its caveats. Immediately after tracing the history and importance of randomization, Manzi jumps to the criticisms and limitations underlying experiments - drawing on Heckman's 1991 paper "Randomization and social policy evaluation" and other sources. The problems abound. Most notably, the generalizability from experimentation just doesn’t do away with Hume's problem of induction: a single, well-run randomized experiment cannot convincingly show all hidden conditionals. Worse: the problem remains even after an experiment's replications. As Manzi asserts: "There is never an absolutely reliable probability distribution for external validity developed through replication." (p. 86). Even worse still: some phenomena, like macroeconomic shocks or epidemiological contagions, are not susceptible to experimentation and remain the arena of stories built around observational data. Experimentation can only tackle fundamentally local phenomena; econometrician Charles Manski (2011) puts it starkly: "A randomized experiment has no predictive power when interactions are global". So in areas like economics, as Manzi himself notes, "the maze of causation is now far beyond anything that physicists or biologists typically have had to address." (p. 102).
Yet there is room for experimentation somewhere else, somewhere where it can actually yield practical, tangible, benefits: business. Manzi is the founder of Applied Predictive Technologies (APT), a firm that streamlines experimentation using software in the retail sector. He describes how a culture of experimentation rose in banking, and later moved to other sectors, changing the landscape of business strategy: "Though individual companies will surely come and go, the experimental revolution is likely to become a permanent feature of the business landscape. " (p. 148), and it has, as companies like Google or Netflix run thousands of experiments to improve their services using basically the same methods Neyman and Fisher devised decades ago. Manzi's practitioner's experience hits home here, showing what has come out of years of the experimental work in business: "First, innovative ideas rarely work. Second, those that do work typically create improvements that are small compared to the size of the strategic issues they are intended to address, or as compared to the size of the dreams of those who invent them." (p. 166). If experimentation becomes more widespread, this lesson will become even more valuable in the areas where randomization strategies are incipient, and even more where they have been already oversold.
The fertile ground for experimentation in business is less so in the areas of public policy. Manzi notably summarizes the available randomized control trial (RCT) evidence in areas like crime, education, welfare, political science and economics in the U.S. as of 2011. From here he sets out a course of reform that puts his evolutionary epistemology to practice along existing U.S. institutions, suggesting how to experiment more by facilitating state waivers on federal policies; to introduce an agency similar to the FDA that would promote and standardize experimentation at different levels of government; using immigration as recruitment of human capital; unbundling welfare to distinguish the effects of education, healthcare, and other policies; among other prescriptions.
"We need freedom because we are ignorant" proclaims Manzi in the introduction of the book. And right he is.
Now, there is one aspect of the book that was disappointing. Uncontrolled misses by an inch the 5th star for one simple reason: the unbalanced coverage in discussing experiments in business vis-a-vis experiments in science and policy. The sections of the book on business experimentation cannot help but sound like a sales pitch, as the rigorous tone disappears when talking about business experimentation. This seems like a missed opportunity to show the results of business experimentation, and it’s a shame that the reader walks out from reading the book without a balanced grasp of experimentation in science and business alike.
Besides this, after 3 readings of the book I still find Uncontrolled inspired, erudite, and relevant. An impressive accomplishment.
Coda:
Uncontrolled deserves a follow-up or a second edition. In recent years, two important things happened that deserve to be seen through the lens of this book. First, the conversation on experimental social science has changed a lot since the book was written, as RCTs have become more and more frequent and influential, especially in development economics. Subjects like microfinance microfinance (see American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, Vol. 7, No. 1 January 2015) or how the poor allocate cash transfers (see Banerjee et. al. (2017) "Debunking the Stereotype of the Lazy Welfare Recipient: Evidence from Cash Transfer Programs Worldwide") have been redefined by RCTs. Quasi experimental evidence has also become more widespread, and natural experiments could also help bridge the observational/experimental divide - something the book doesn’t touch upon. Second, the replication crisis in some subfields of experimental psychology, mostly (and fortunately) irrelevant outside of academia and the pop-psychology book market, has exposed big methodological and sociological problems in experimentation, and I for one would like to see these problems filtered through Manzi's clarifying lens.
The central contention of the author is that randomized, double-blind, controlled experiments are the "gold standard" to establish validity. He goes as far as to claim that controlled experiments are necessary for scientific progress, which is patently absurd. But my criticism is not that I disagree, it's that the book fails to mention the reason people do these kinds of experiments.
For example, suppose we want to know if a drug helps lower back pain. We might select 100 healthy patients with severe, persistent lower back pain that has no discernible physical cause. We give half of them 100 mg of the drug daily for a week, the other half get an identical-looking pill with no active ingredients. Neither doctor nor patient knows who is getting the drug. We then ask the patients whether their back improved or not.
Real experiments will be more complicated. We may stratify the sample, test different dosages and regimes, record other data (certainly we will at least record reported side effects) and so forth. But the idea is still to throw away almost all the data, only adding back the stuff we think is important, and then to torture the remaining data to force it to give a definitive answer to a question that may not have one, or that the data may not know.
In contrast, you might treat the 100 patients one at a time, giving the treatment you thought was best, and recording everything about them before, during and after the trial. Blinding, control and randomization are still important. You will enter a treatment, but the computer will sometimes randomly change it, sometimes telling you, sometimes not, sometimes telling the patient, sometimes not. This is the only way to disentangle the effect of your diagnosis from the actual drug administered, and the effect of the drug from what you think and what the patient thinks. But we use the three techniques for the opposite reason as the standard protocol: to increase the dimensionality of our data rather than to reduce it.
The results may be analyzed using exploratory data analysis, letting the data talk to you rather than forcing them into pre-selected simple statistical tests. Or you could use a search algorithm, like the genetic algorithms the author likes. You start will thousands of hypotheses and recombine them randomly, selecting for the ones that explain the data best and are simplest. At the end you will have a weighted population of explanations, whose aggregated predictions give you a reasonable range of answers to what you really want to know, should I take this drug for my back pain? This is continuous learning, not a strict separation between experiment and application. There are no clear, simple answers, just increasingly precise and accurate subjective probability ranges.
A randomized, double-blind, controlled experiment is used when the goal is to get a group of people to agree on a simple action rather than to learn the truth. It is an organizational tool, not a scientific one. The author quotes Francis Bacon for indirect support of the idea, but Bacon was writing at a time when science was under attack by scholasticism and religious dogmatism. The book skips about 350 years to get to Ronald Fisher and randomized field trials. For most of this period, science had no need to prove itself to outsiders, there was rapid progress without significant public opposition. Only when scientists started demanding control over public policy and requesting huge government subsidies was there a need for the kind of experiments the author praises.
The people who came up with these experimental designs had lots of other bad ideas, such as non-expert witnesses, like judges or generals, for experiments. Their movement was popular with fascists. The fact that Nazis liked the ideas doesn't mean they were bad ideas, but it should give some pause. The author mentions Ronald Fisher's dismissal of the claims that smoking is bad for health (but not the money he was paid to argue for the case); he omits Fisher's support for institutionalized racism and eugenics. He also omits John Tukey's famous attack on the Kinsey Report that did so much to bring rationality to public discussion of sexuality, the claim that a random sample of 3 was better than Kinsey's detailed interviews with 300 non-randomly selected people (I recommended a book Tukey wrote much later in life above, when I knew him in the 1970s his opinions had nearly reversed from the 1950s).
The reason this book is five-stars despite the essential omissions, is the core of the argument is based on the author's extensive personal experience. He is really arguing for experiments, skepticism, trial-and-error, limited expectations, controls, blinding, randomization, quantification, careful record-keeping and common sense; he just somehow got it tangled up with a bad theory. This is valuable material you won't find other places, certainly not in as clear and lively form. His recommendations form the same mess of incisive sense mixed with tangled reversals of sense.
If you think for yourself, you will learn a lot from this book. If you don't, you should stay away.



