Auf ein Miniaturbild klicken, um zu Google Books zu gelangen.
Lädt ... Denialism: How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet, and Threatens Our Lives (2009)von Michael Specter
Lädt ...
Melde dich bei LibraryThing an um herauszufinden, ob du dieses Buch mögen würdest. Keine aktuelle Diskussion zu diesem Buch. Michael Specter is presenting a very solid argument about different groups of people who share something in common, they deny the facts in favor of unproven information. He is also admitting that yes, the price we have to pay for advancement is sometimes sever but truly we have no other options but to keep advancing. As people tend to forget how much science and technology has helped the human race to survive. Good survey of a few faddish denials, if temporal....written in 2009, Specter hits a couple of topics of the day and a few more bigger issues. Big pharma (not in favor), anti-vaccines (Jenny McCarthy, et al), organics and anti-oxidants - he skewers one of my favorite (and I admit a very unscientific bias in my term) quacks Dr. Andrew Weil - and genetics...climate science wasn't on the radar three years ago. Doesn't explain why...just that there are things pele deny and why they shouldn't. Still a good read though.
"We can all believe irrational things," the author of Denialism tells NPR's Scott Simon. "The problem is that I think an increasing number of Americans are acting on those beliefs instead of acting on facts that are readily present." In this hotly argued yet data-filled diatribe, Mr. Specter skips past some of the easiest realms of science baiting (i.e., evolution) to address more current issues, from the ethical questions raised by genome research to the furiously fought debate over the safety of childhood vaccinations. Auszeichnungen
Literaturhinweise zu diesem Werk aus externen Quellen. Wikipedia auf Englisch (13)In this provocative and headline-making book, Michael Specter confronts the widespread fear of science and its terrible toll on individuals and the planet. In Denialism, New Yorker staff writer Michael Specter reveals that Americans have come to mistrust institutions and especially the institution of science more today than ever before. For centuries, the general view had been that science is neither good nor bad--that it merely supplies information and that new information is always beneficial. Now, science is viewed as a political constituency that isn't always in our best interest. We live in a world where the leaders of African nations prefer to let their citizens starve to death rather than import genetically modified grains. Childhood vaccines have proven to be the most effective public health measure in history, yet people march on Washington to protest their use. In the United States a growing series of studies show that dietary supplements and "natural" cures have almost no value, and often cause harm. We still spend billions of dollars on them. In hundreds of the best universities in the world, laboratories are anonymous, unmarked, and surrounded by platoons of security guards--such is the opposition to any research that includes experiments with animals. And pharmaceutical companies that just forty years ago were perhaps the most visible symbol of our remarkable advance against disease have increasingly been seen as callous corporations propelled solely by avarice and greed. As Michael Specter sees it, this amounts to a war against progress. The issues may be complex but the choices are not: Are we going to continue to embrace new technologies, along with acknowledging their limitations and threats, or are we ready to slink back into an era of magical thinking? In Denialism, Specter makes an argument for a new Enlightenment, the revival of an approach to the physical world that was stunningly effective for hundreds of years: What can be understood and reliably repeated by experiment is what nature regarded as true. Now, at the time of mankind's greatest scientific advances--and our greatest need for them--that deal must be renewed. Keine Bibliotheksbeschreibungen gefunden. |
Aktuelle DiskussionenKeineBeliebte Umschlagbilder
Google Books — Lädt ... GenresMelvil Decimal System (DDC)306.45Social sciences Social Sciences; Sociology and anthropology Culture and Institutions Specific aspects of culture ScienceKlassifikation der Library of Congress [LCC] (USA)BewertungDurchschnitt:
Bist das du?Werde ein LibraryThing-Autor. |
Here's hoping...
I knocked one star off because I wish the book had kept focused on things that are right now, that we know about; the last few 10's of pages range off into future biotech. That is all important, true, but it distracts from the discussion about current issues. I think, for some people, it will interfere with considering the facts we know now. E.g. we *know* that vaccines are safe, for any real-world meaning of that word, and we know that have immense benefits *right now*. Following that (and other) arguments with a few chapters about future developments in genetic engineering or synthetic biology weakens all that; people who don't already support the positions in the book will be left with their uncertainties about future directions and outcomes of research, rather than with strong arguments about the certainties around current issues.
I could possibly knock off one more star because the book does cover things *so* rapidly, at a high level of detail. It could also have been written a bit more dispassionately. But, in this case anyway, those are just my own my tastes; this is an argumentative/persuasive pop-sci book, not a book written for scientists, policy wonks, etc. Hopefully this can get a few people thinking. ( )