Status
Available
Call number
Collection
Description
"Knowledge is a big subject, says Stuart Firestein, but ignorance is a bigger one. And it is ignorance--not knowledge--that is the true engine of science. Most of us have a false impression of science as a surefire, deliberate, step-by-step method for finding things out and getting things done. In fact, says Firestein, more often than not, science is like looking for a black cat in a dark room, and there may not be a cat in the room. The process is more hit-or-miss than you might imagine, with much stumbling and groping after phantoms. But it is exactly this "not knowing," this puzzling over thorny questions or inexplicable data, that gets researchers into the lab early and keeps them there late, the thing that propels them, the very driving force of science. Firestein shows how scientists use ignorance to program their work, to identify what should be done, what the next steps are, and where they should concentrate their energies. And he includes a catalog of how scientists use ignorance, consciously or unconsciously--a remarkable range of approaches that includes looking for connections to other research, revisiting apparently settled questions, using small questions to get at big ones, and tackling a problem simply out of curiosity. The book concludes with four case histories--in cognitive psychology, theoretical physics, astronomy, and neuroscience--that provide a feel for the nuts and bolts of ignorance, the day-to-day battle that goes on in scientific laboratories and in scientific minds with questions that range from the quotidian to the profound. Turning the conventional idea about science on its head, Ignorance opens a new window on the true nature of research. It is a must-read for anyone curious about science"-- "Contrary to the popular view of science as a mountainous accumulation of facts and data, Firestein takes the novel perspective that Ignorance is the main product and driving force of science, and that this is the best way to understand the process of scientific discovery"--… (more)
User reviews
LibraryThing member bragan
There's a popular conception of science and scientists that drives me absolutely crazy. It's one that looks on science as a supposed collection of hard, irrefutable Established Facts, and scientists as rigid, closed-minded sorts who care only about being able to say "Yes, yes, we have explained
Stuart Firestein doesn't talk about the Pioneer Anomaly in this short book, but he's making very much the point that I think those giddy physicists were demonstrating. The excitement of science, he says, and the key to its advancement, lies not in tidily accumulated lists of Facts That Are Known, but in identifying the areas of our ignorance and groping our way into them to try to figure out what might or, just as importantly, might not be concealed there. And this is a process that involves not so much finding the right answers, but asking the right questions, and, in some cases, in questioning even the things we think we already know.
The book itself is pretty slight, and for anyone who already understands this point, I don't think there's going to be a whole lot here that's new. And the half of the book that he spends on "case histories" -- that is, on looking at a few particular scientists and their perspectives on the unanswered questions in their fields, as well as on his own history of research and exploration -- was not nearly as interesting to me as I had expected it to be, although that may have to do with the fact that a fair amount of it wasn't new to me, either. But the basic point he's making is deeply important, and he formulates it clearly and well, in a way that's aimed at an audience of non-scientists, and there are a lot of people out there I can only wish would read it.
Show More
that," and who will deny the existence of anything they haven't already explained even when it's staring them plainly in the face. And it drives me crazy because it's absolutely, 100% the opposite of the truth. It's clear that anyone who buys into it, even the slightest bit, never heard an actual scientist talking about, say, the Pioneer Anomaly, in which the far-flung Pioneer space probes departed from their expected trajectories in a way that no one initially knew how to explain. Some of these scientists got positively giddy at the fantastically unlikely but nevertheless real possibility that this wasn't due to some overlooked but utterly mundane issue with the spacecraft themselves, but that it might, just possibly, represent some area where our current understanding of physics breaks down. (Sadly, in this case, the answer did ultimately turn out to be less exciting than that.)Stuart Firestein doesn't talk about the Pioneer Anomaly in this short book, but he's making very much the point that I think those giddy physicists were demonstrating. The excitement of science, he says, and the key to its advancement, lies not in tidily accumulated lists of Facts That Are Known, but in identifying the areas of our ignorance and groping our way into them to try to figure out what might or, just as importantly, might not be concealed there. And this is a process that involves not so much finding the right answers, but asking the right questions, and, in some cases, in questioning even the things we think we already know.
The book itself is pretty slight, and for anyone who already understands this point, I don't think there's going to be a whole lot here that's new. And the half of the book that he spends on "case histories" -- that is, on looking at a few particular scientists and their perspectives on the unanswered questions in their fields, as well as on his own history of research and exploration -- was not nearly as interesting to me as I had expected it to be, although that may have to do with the fact that a fair amount of it wasn't new to me, either. But the basic point he's making is deeply important, and he formulates it clearly and well, in a way that's aimed at an audience of non-scientists, and there are a lot of people out there I can only wish would read it.
Show Less
LibraryThing member tangledthread
An interesting treatise that focuses on the fact that it's what we don't know (ignorance) that drives the engine of science. The secondary premise is that we often don't know what we don't know, hence the need for basic scientific research. Too often the research that is focused on discovering
The book is tightly written, concise, and chock full of ideas which could be expanded on much further. One of the most fascinating topics that was entirely new to me is the field of computational biology. Fortunately, the author provides a list of suggested reading at the end of the book.
Show More
something specific can be skewed by the bias of the researcher.The book is tightly written, concise, and chock full of ideas which could be expanded on much further. One of the most fascinating topics that was entirely new to me is the field of computational biology. Fortunately, the author provides a list of suggested reading at the end of the book.
Show Less
LibraryThing member fpagan
A short and congenial read about the nature of the scientific enterprise and its relationship to ignorance -- not the bad kind of ignorance exemplified by some people of today not knowing why there are seasons or not grasping the factuality of biological evolution, but the good kind of ignorance
Show More
associated with the "tractable mystery" of things that are not yet understood by anyone. Firestein says research should be curiosity-driven as opposed to hypothesis-driven -- "looking in dark rooms for black cats that may not exist". He perhaps doesn't stress strongly enough the point that humanity's habit of making up supernatural "explanations" for not-yet-understood phenomena is a grievous mistake. Show Less
LibraryThing member pw0327
This book came onto my radar when I was reading Warren Burger’s book A More Beautiful Question. Burger referenced this book. As I was curious and Burger’s book sparked an interest in this topic, I proceeded to procure this book.
It took a while for me to get back to this book as I became
Stuart Firestein is a neuroscientist, and how he got to this particular field is fascinating by itself. I will leave him to tell that story and not ruin the narrative. It is in the chapter titled Case Histories.
This is a short book, packed with excellent insights and interesting stories. The author approaches the task of convincing the reader of the importance of ignorance as the centerpiece of intellectual and scientific inquiry from a broad perspective. Even though he is countering the intellectual history of the MO of our societal approach to science and scientific inquiry, he makes his mutiny palatable and very rational.
The idea is that the mass media and the lay community looks upon science and the goals of science with the wrong attitude, even some scientists live in a world where the tail is wagging the dog. The purpose of scientific inquiry is not to create knowledge, the purpose is to create ignorance, but not just ignorance but quality ignorance; ignorance that will push our thoughts towards better understanding and towards action that will expand our ideas and ask better questions. These questions must necessarily expand and dig deeper into our knowledge. In other words, to give us more areas of known ignorance so that we can research and investigate these open areas.
The author uses the familiar technique of digging into scientific history to give us anecdotal history of specific stories. He has combed through the scientific histories for some extremely interesting stories, he’s included many different areas of science, including his own expertise of neurosciences, as well as physics, astronomy, mathematics, etc. Fortunately for us, he is a very good story teller.
I will say that I have become jaded to this process of illustrating specific points by the author spinning a yarn which supports exactly his thesis, but when the tactic is well executed, such as this book is, I will overlook my pet peeve.
The book is in eight chapters. The initial chapters are used to present the author’s main argument about ignorance. In those chapters he goes into great depths to convince us of his main argument: that the cultivation of ignorance is the primary function of scientific inquiry. I was already a convert so I would say that he was successful in that regard. Chapters four, five, and six are the author’s way of presenting the structure of the ignorance business, the foibles of making predictions regarding scientific progress prematurely and under dubious assumptions.
My favorite chapter is the Quality of Ignorance, because the author delineates the difference between cultivating just ignorance and ignorance with a purpose. The main differentiator is that the quality ignorance must create more and better questions and unknowns which will drive the scientific inquiries deeper.
The longest chapter is chapter seven: Case histories. This is where he uses the case history tool to illustrate his points on how ignorance helps drive the inquiry and the nonlinear way it creates pathways to more knowledge. I must say that this chapter was kind of a long slog, but worthy of the slogging. It definitely did its job.
Finally, the author drives home the point regarding the importance of using ignorance and the gravitas of having this kind of mindset as it advances not just science, but society forward.
This book was published in 2012, and by then, the anti-intellectualism and wanton lack of scientific knowledge of the general public is already well known. The last chapter is actually a pleas for sanity. As I read this chapter five years since its publication, I marvel at how far we have fallen. I would like to say that the author was prescient in his prognostication, but sadly, he wasn’t prescient enough, for we are at a much worse point in time than he had predicted.
I thoroughly enjoyed this read. I did have to put it down often to contemplate and reflect on what he is saying. I believe that was his purpose and he did very well in meeting his purpose.
It took a while for me to get back to this book as I became
Show More
interested in other things. I’d started it but I continued to pick it up and putting it down over the months. It wasn’t because of the writing or of the subject matter. It was because the book brought out a certain amount of my own ignorance and caused me to ask some unanswerable questions. Stuart Firestein is a neuroscientist, and how he got to this particular field is fascinating by itself. I will leave him to tell that story and not ruin the narrative. It is in the chapter titled Case Histories.
This is a short book, packed with excellent insights and interesting stories. The author approaches the task of convincing the reader of the importance of ignorance as the centerpiece of intellectual and scientific inquiry from a broad perspective. Even though he is countering the intellectual history of the MO of our societal approach to science and scientific inquiry, he makes his mutiny palatable and very rational.
The idea is that the mass media and the lay community looks upon science and the goals of science with the wrong attitude, even some scientists live in a world where the tail is wagging the dog. The purpose of scientific inquiry is not to create knowledge, the purpose is to create ignorance, but not just ignorance but quality ignorance; ignorance that will push our thoughts towards better understanding and towards action that will expand our ideas and ask better questions. These questions must necessarily expand and dig deeper into our knowledge. In other words, to give us more areas of known ignorance so that we can research and investigate these open areas.
The author uses the familiar technique of digging into scientific history to give us anecdotal history of specific stories. He has combed through the scientific histories for some extremely interesting stories, he’s included many different areas of science, including his own expertise of neurosciences, as well as physics, astronomy, mathematics, etc. Fortunately for us, he is a very good story teller.
I will say that I have become jaded to this process of illustrating specific points by the author spinning a yarn which supports exactly his thesis, but when the tactic is well executed, such as this book is, I will overlook my pet peeve.
The book is in eight chapters. The initial chapters are used to present the author’s main argument about ignorance. In those chapters he goes into great depths to convince us of his main argument: that the cultivation of ignorance is the primary function of scientific inquiry. I was already a convert so I would say that he was successful in that regard. Chapters four, five, and six are the author’s way of presenting the structure of the ignorance business, the foibles of making predictions regarding scientific progress prematurely and under dubious assumptions.
My favorite chapter is the Quality of Ignorance, because the author delineates the difference between cultivating just ignorance and ignorance with a purpose. The main differentiator is that the quality ignorance must create more and better questions and unknowns which will drive the scientific inquiries deeper.
The longest chapter is chapter seven: Case histories. This is where he uses the case history tool to illustrate his points on how ignorance helps drive the inquiry and the nonlinear way it creates pathways to more knowledge. I must say that this chapter was kind of a long slog, but worthy of the slogging. It definitely did its job.
Finally, the author drives home the point regarding the importance of using ignorance and the gravitas of having this kind of mindset as it advances not just science, but society forward.
This book was published in 2012, and by then, the anti-intellectualism and wanton lack of scientific knowledge of the general public is already well known. The last chapter is actually a pleas for sanity. As I read this chapter five years since its publication, I marvel at how far we have fallen. I would like to say that the author was prescient in his prognostication, but sadly, he wasn’t prescient enough, for we are at a much worse point in time than he had predicted.
I thoroughly enjoyed this read. I did have to put it down often to contemplate and reflect on what he is saying. I believe that was his purpose and he did very well in meeting his purpose.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Daumari
Short but quick read on the nature of science- as the author calls it, 'searching for black cats that may or may not be there in a dark room'.
LibraryThing member KamGeb
An interesting short book about how science is more about figuring out important questions than about solving questions and learning rote facts. It was very readable and interesting.
LibraryThing member dmturner
An easy read and thought-provoking. Science is not always the search for answers, but often the search for what we don't know and for the good questions.
LibraryThing member steve02476
Really loved it - a wonderful book about science and the process of discovery. Well written, funny, and short. My kind of book!
LibraryThing member lschiff
Interesting, but repetitious. It really should have been just a long essay.
Publication
Oxford University Press (2012), Edition: 1, 195 pages
Original publication date
2012
Language
ISBN
0199828075 / 9780199828074