Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime and start saving today with fast, free delivery

Hardcover
$1.99

Paperback
$35.00

FREE Returns

FREE delivery Monday, March 11

Select delivery location

Only 4 left in stock (more on the way).

$$35.00 () Includes selected options. Includes initial monthly payment and selected options. Details

Ships from

Amazon.com

Ships from

Amazon.com

Sold by

Amazon.com

Sold by

Amazon.com

Returns

Eligible for Return, Refund or Replacement within 30 days of receipt

Returns

Eligible for Return, Refund or Replacement within 30 days of receipt

This item can be returned in its original condition for a full refund or replacement within 30 days of receipt.

Read full return policy

Payment

Secure transaction

Payment

Secure transaction

We work hard to protect your security and privacy. Our payment security system encrypts your information during transmission. We don’t share your credit card details with third-party sellers, and we don’t sell your information to others. Learn more

Details

Add a gift receipt for easy returns

Get Fast, Free Shipping with Amazon Prime

FREE delivery Monday, March 11 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35

Select delivery location

Used: Very Good | Details

Sold by Jenson Books Inc

Fulfilled by Amazon

Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items.

Follow the author

L. Wolpert

Follow

The Unnatural Nature of Science: Why Science Does Not Make (Common) Sense Paperback – April 25, 2000

by Lewis Wolpert (Author)

3.9 24 ratings

See all formats and editions

{"desktop_buybox_group_1":[{"displayPrice":"$35.00","priceAmount":35.00,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"35","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"00","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"0gem5%2Fa%2BaJNU4BB0%2FO6%2Fj9flzu%2FkQuEZHoJW4R4xu%2BHucLRiWVrW33W6vPCe6C%2F9NvwH%2Bra3n9j7khX4PJi7xoRPdHE4ddvDcvQvUnT0%2FUqSj%2FHr6RWJDQe7jGKN6uDdMkRS6UGXkoY%3D","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"NEW","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":0}, {"displayPrice":"$9.57","priceAmount":9.57,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"9","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"57","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"0gem5%2Fa%2BaJNU4BB0%2FO6%2Fj9flzu%2FkQuEZnFGLKe408b5eAFrD2umu278symTz6JW3LTywhLVYXhPeYqfXgCP%2Bej9JB5%2F21wMpuSzT01%2BJIa%2FzLRyBEqrM%2FLoDRhaV0QMGwiBF0F77o%2BHPxi4i5vqk%2BXJkUBw3QHU9B8jIwdyNz71aYZ1wB8ZZsjX0VDlDfNTv","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"USED","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":1}]}

Purchase options and add-ons

How is it that nobody―except maybe scientists―sees science for what it is? In this entertaining and provocative book, Lewis Wolpert draws on the entire history of science, from Thales of Miletus to Watson and Crick, from the study of eugenics to the discovery of the double helix. The result is a scientist’s view of the culture of science, authoritative and informed and at the same time mercifully accessible to those who find cohabiting with this culture a puzzling experience.

Science is arguably the defining feature of our age. For anyone who hopes to understand its nature, this lively and thoughtful book provides the perfect starting point.

Print length

191 pages
Language

English
Publisher

Harvard University Press
Publication date

April 25, 2000
Dimensions

5.25 x 0.75 x 8.5 inches
ISBN-10

0674929810
ISBN-13

978-0674929814
See all details

Frequently bought together

The Unnatural Nature of Science: Why Science Does Not Make (Common) Sense

$35.00

Get it as soon as Monday, Mar 11

Only 4 left in stock (more on the way).

Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.

+

$22.00

Get it as soon as Monday, Mar 11

In Stock

Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.

+

The Double Helix: A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of DNA

$11.69

Get it as soon as Monday, Mar 11

In Stock

Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.

Total price:

To see our price, add these items to your cart.

Try again!

Details

Added to Cart

Some of these items ship sooner than the others.

Show details Hide details

Choose items to buy together.

Most purchased | Highest rated | Lowest Pricein this set of products
James D. Watson Ph.D.
1,496
Paperback
$11.69
Carl Djerassi
64
Paperback
$22.00

Editorial Reviews

Review

“The unnaturalness of science is held to lie both in the superior clarity of its thought over everyday notions…and in the counterintuitive character of regimes far from common experience. The unnaturalness is to be commended, and Lewis Wolpert’s book is a kind of hymn of praise from one of science’s practitioners… [An] entertaining book.”―John Polkinghorne, Nature

“The implications of Wolpert’s thesis are important and widespread, especially to anyone concerned with education and the public understanding of science… Wolpert is a passionate defender of science. All he asks is that we understand what we are defending.”―Tony Jones, New Scientist

“Wolpert’s book is…a lively presentation of points we need constantly remember as we reflect on the role of science in our world.”―Philip Kitcher, New York Times Book Review

“[A] wonderful book… Wolpert’s prose is measured and thoughtful… In an age when fundamental ideas about the nature of truth are assailed, when scientists are derided as madmen who threatened the world with nuclear weapons and genetic engineering, it is a pleasure to read a clear, level-headed, and persuasive defense of the scientific enterprise.”―Lee Dembart, Los Angeles Times

From the Back Cover

This is a scientist's view of the culture of science; authoritative and informed and at the same time mercifully accessible to those who find cohabiting with this culture a puzzling experience.

Product details

Publisher ‏ : ‎ Harvard University Press (April 25, 2000)
Language ‏ : ‎ English
Paperback ‏ : ‎ 191 pages
ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 0674929810
ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-0674929814
Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 9.6 ounces
Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 5.25 x 0.75 x 8.5 inches

Best Sellers Rank: #2,473,492 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #8,511 in History & Philosophy of Science (Books)
- #66,029 in Philosophy (Books)
- #265,083 in History (Books)

Customer Reviews:
3.9 24 ratings

Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.

Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

Videos

Help others learn more about this product by uploading a video!

Upload your video

Important information

To report an issue with this product or seller, click here.

About the author

Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.

L. Wolpert

Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.

Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more

Customer reviews

3.9 out of 5

24 global ratings

How customer reviews and ratings work

Sort reviews by

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Mindstogether

What is science, how it developed, and how it differs from technology

Reviewed in the United States on October 19, 2009

Verified Purchase

This is a down-to-earth, clear introduction to the scientific way of thinking.

I agree with evolutionist R. Dawkins's advice that the book should be read regardless of your personal views about science and scientists.

I believe Wolpert's book is an excellent introduction to science because it clarifies how technology and science are different and yet feed on each other;and enable the advance of our knowledge of the real world.

What impressed me the most is the author's separation of "common-sense beliefs" from scientific thinking. And how serendipity arises from hard work, educated guesses and "inspiration";the willingness to take a leap into the darkness and advance predictions that can be tested in the laboratory or by other observations and measurements (e.g., in cosmology).

One person found this helpful

Helpful

Yehezkel Dror

GOOD ON SCIENCE, PROBLEMATIC BEYOND IT

Reviewed in the United States on May 21, 2019

Verified Purchase

This book clarifies many issues of science, such as its nature and relations with technology. Short case studies supplement explanations. The unique origin of science in Western civilization is rightly emphasized (though the image of Athens is idealized). And relativistic approaches to knowledge are justly condemned.
But when the book moves into society and politics it becomes problematic. The statement that ‘the better the understanding we have of the world, the better the chance we have to make a just society’ (Kindle location 2726-2727) lacks any basis. The trust in ‘openness and public debate’ (Kindle location 2819) contradicts reality. Scientists cannot know the consequences of many findings, which are shrouded in deep uncertainty. And the statement ‘To those who doubt whether the public or the politicians are capable of taking the correct decisions, I would commend the words of Thomas Jefferson’ (Kindle location 2832-33) is false in the world as I know it, as one deeply immerged in the theory and practice of politics over time.
Still, nearly all of the book is highly recommended.
Professor Yehezkel Dror
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

2 people found this helpful

Helpful

F. G. Nobrega

Important concepts about science

Reviewed in the United States on July 19, 2010

Verified Purchase

To me this is a very valuable book because what he discusses is at the roots of the trouble people have in understanding science. The review by Luc Reynaert highlighted important aspects of the book. The flaws pointed by other reviewers are, to me, secondary to the contribution of setting science apart from common sense. The other book about the subject that I like immensely is Uncommon sense by Alan Cromer. He further explores the subject and links it to the effectiveness of teaching science.

2 people found this helpful

Helpful

doctom

A must read for every scientist or science lover

Reviewed in the United States on August 14, 2013

Verified Purchase

Ever wonder why the non-science world is hostile toward the sciences and has a love/hate relationship with scientists?
Dr. Wolpert has written a wonderfully insightful volume that explains the matter better than any I've seen.
It's accessible, fun and may even be necessary.
If only, he'd tell us what to do about it.

3 people found this helpful

Helpful

Freddie Ingle

Five Stars

Reviewed in the United States on May 28, 2017

great

Wolpert's "Unnatural" Argument

Reviewed in the United States on December 8, 2009

I agree that Lewis Wolpert's language is "measured and thoughtful" in "The Unnatural Nature of Science", as advertised. He asks thought-provoking questions (What catalysts produced the scientific revolution? What are the origins of creativity?). The book, though, does not fully answer the questions and suffers from three fundamental problems:

1) "Unnatural" is not clearly-defined
2) He relies on unsubstantiated assertions and generalizations
3) He disparages psychology and philosophy as unscientific, yet psychology and philosophy (or, his own version of them) comprise his argument.

The first problem is the biggest. If Wolpert had provided a coherent definition of "natural" and "unnatural", we could verify or falsify his argument. As it is, we are left to infer his precise meaning from examples and assertions about "common sense" versus science, which he apparently contends are mutually-exclusive. Because he does not clearly define his terms, the book prods in search of an objective.

Wolpert generalizes heavily from anecdotal evidence, asserting various assumptions (i.e., 'phlogiston leaves burning materials', 'the earth is the center of the universe', 'science is dangerous and produces monsters like Frankenstein') to be common-sense and natural, while the scientific explanation presumably defies a common-sense, natural approach. This seems to be a straw-man, as the scientific explanations are often more natural, more common-sense (by my own understanding), when all the facts are reviewed.

Besides: granting his assertion for argument's sake, how did "unnatural" science arise from natural origins? Wolpert is no Design proponent, so attributing its cause and stewardship to Greek and Christian thought as he does simply multiplies the questions he means to answer.

Finally, Wolpert denigrates the philosophy of science (which forms the basis of science) while embracing his own version of philosophy (namely, that science is "unnatural"). He largely scorns psychology while promoting it in every chapter. While touting scientists as "self-aware", Wolpert apparently fails by his own definition. This simply doesn't work.

"Science does not fit with our natural expectations," Wolpert says, but he has not defined "natural expectations", has generalized from anecdotal observation, and has failed to realize that his own psychology (the study of which he scorns) apparently provides all but a rough outline for his thoughts. Though it wanders through some promising territory, his "unnatural" argument never gets off the ground. Disappointing.

24 people found this helpful

Helpful

Lester M. Stacey

a crucial concept

Reviewed in the United States on May 22, 2012

Verified Purchase

I arrived at this book by way of a reference to it in Chasing Reality: Strife over Realism (Toronto Studies in Philosophy) . There I learned about the limits of common sense and intuition in exploring the real world.

Wolpert's book makes clear the fact that scientists investigate the reality our ordinary senses are incapable of apprehending. Scientists amplify ordinary senses by using instruments designed for that purpose. They enhance our understanding.

The concept I most appreciate which Wolpert explicates is that of "unnaturalness." It is a very useful tool in oppososing the concept of "supernaturalness." Naturalism fails to take the limits of common sense into account. So, we need a concept to effectively step beyond common sense. Using the concept "unnatural" does exactly this.

Another term for unnaturalness is "artificiality."

Mario Bunge's system of philosophy takes full advantage of this concept.

2 people found this helpful

Helpful

Top reviews from other countries

F Henwood

Excellent Exposition of What Science Is and Is Not

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on June 15, 2011

Verified Purchase

Why is it that science, incomparably successful in explaining the natural world, is still alien to many people's thoughts?

Lewis Wolpert provides a lucid, succinct and clear exposition of why this is the case. The basic premise is that science has no relation to common sense. Much of it is based on mathematics, rationalist and abstract in its expression, unrelated to everyday language. Common sense thinking is not necessarily naïve but the way the universe works is not the way our common sense reasoning works. The most natural state for an object is for it to be in motion, at a constant speed, and not stationary, as common sense would suppose (p.3) You throw a ball and it falls back to Earth - it is in fact pushed back down to Earth by the force of gravity. Without it, the ball would carry on forever, until it encountered an obstacle or a force. Much of science is counter-intuitive, contrary to common sense.

Aristotle supposed that if two objects were dropped from the same height the heaviest of the pair would hit the ground first. It took 1,800 years before Galileo showed that this was not true. Both objects would hit the ground simultaneously (provided they are of the same material). So much for common sense (p 44 -45)! If something fits with common sense, then it is not science (p.11).

Second, technology and science are conflated when they are in fact very separate human endeavours. We have no idea for example who invented the telescope: it was probably a lens-maker who looked through an aligned pair of lenses, one convex and one concave, and discovered the effect. Science is not inventiveness. Until the 19th Century, most technological and engineering innovations borrowed nothing from science: `all the beautiful cathedrals with their great domes and high naves were built by engineers who based their buildings on practical experience, not on science. (p29). This may seem a surprising contention to make but as Wolpert explains, the final product of science is an idea; the final product of technology is an artefact (31). Japan, that great powerhouse of manufacturing, owed nothing of its success to a strong scientific base.

Is it not the case that all cultures do science? No, says Wolpert. He attributes the first scientist as the Greek Thales (c. 600 B.C), who tried to explain the world not in terms of myth but in terms that might be subject to verification (p.35). Thales thought that the world was made of water which was fantastical and wrong but akin to science because of the `unnatural nature' of the thought. It doesn't matter if it was mistaken - what matters is the positing of a theory, and specifying what facts would be needed to confirm the theory.

Did other cultures possess this essentially scientific curiosity? No: `for thousands of years the mythology and cosmology of almost all cultures entertained neither a critical tradition nor curiosity about nature. The idea that man is innately curious is a partial myth: man's curiosity only extends to what affects his conduct.' Most societies are not curious in nature for its own sake.

This contention also confutes philosopher John Gray's contention that the well-spring of science and religion is the same: a desire to control nature. This is not valid. The Voyager probe is one giant exercise in curiosity-satisfaction for its own sake, providing further confirmation of the unnatural nature of science. The probe doesn't seek to control the solar system but to understand it. The religious, mystical impulse is perhaps universal but the scientific one is not.

Neither is science to be confused with the creative process in the arts. Creativity in arts is intensely personal while science is a social affair, at once collaborative and competitive, constrained by the rules of the scientific community, and is about discovering or understanding the parameters of nature, not producing original cultural artifacts. Bold, imaginative thinking can play a role in the scientific advance, and scientists' work is often imbued with a sense of the awe of nature. But the pathway for progress in science means that if Alexander Fleming had never lived, others would have discovered penicillin. But if Shakespeare had never lived, we would not have had Hamlet. True Eureka moments are rare. When Fleming observed that famous petri dish, he was able to interpret the observations based on the bedrock of understanding already laid down by the patient accumulation of tested facts and observations.

Wolpert gives short shrift to relativism, especially those that claim science is a mere social construct. Power struggles and jealousies may well influence whether or not a theory is accepted. For decades, the theory of continental drift was delayed by social factors but the evidence accumulating in favour of it overcame these objections. Theory may be couched in florid, forceful rhetoric but scientific progress is not based on theory but data. A theory is just that without the data to back it up.

What about rival claims to knowledge and understanding, such as the paranormal. Wolpert does not rule out that telepathy may be a real phenomenon (and the Queen may well be a Russian spy) but the evidence against the proposition doesn't support not least (in the first case at any rate) because it would entail some fundamental revisions about the way the world is known to work. Science does not deal in absolute truth but evidence, and this is a distinction that many do not grasp. Certain mysteries have defeated all attempts to explain them - when did the first cell exist? How did the universe begin? How did something come from nothing? Profound mysteries no doubt. But positing a supernatural entity as their solution advances our understanding of the natural world not one jot.

Wolpert concludes with a brief survey of the social and ethical implications of science. He points out the physics that allowed the concept of an atomic bomb to be devised was separate from the political decision taken by Franklin D Roosevelt to build the bomb. It may be that the bomb would never have been built but for the exigencies of the war (but I doubt this: a democratic society at peace might not have taken the decision but the same cannot be said for a totalitarian one like the Soviet Union).

Scientists should not be barred from undertaking and publishing research on sensitive areas. Nothing should be off-limits - race and intelligence being one controversial example mentioned. But scientists should be aware of the political and ethical implications of their research. Science cannot tell us how to live. It can inform, but not necessarily resolve, knotty political and social problems.

All in all, an excellent exposition of the unnatural nature of science: the best explanation there is for why nature is the way it is.

7 people found this helpful

B Jay

Interesting read

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on September 22, 2016

Verified Purchase

Very conceptual, broad-pictured book about the whole of science. Worth a read if you want to understand the mechanics behind scientific thinking & methods.

Guy Chapman

Very enjoyable read

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on December 28, 2014

Verified Purchase

Very enjoyable, a tad dry at times, but that's because it's well researched, methodical and accurate.

Amazon Customer

this book is not in very good as stated

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 4, 2017

Verified Purchase

While I do appreciate the quick delivery, this book is not in very good as stated. And it's not the publication year stated on the product information. I'm very disappointed and I have order several other books that are still to arrive and I'm now very apprehensive about their quality.

Amazon Customer

Good Book!

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on March 9, 2019

Verified Purchase

A good book as extra reading.

See more reviews

Return this item for free

Image Unavailable

Follow the author