Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    Unavailable
    Nonsense on Stilts
    Unavailable
    Nonsense on Stilts
    Unavailable
    Nonsense on Stilts
    Ebook508 pages9 hours

    Nonsense on Stilts

    By Massimo Pigliucci

    4/5

    ()

    Currently unavailable

    Currently unavailable

    About this ebook

    Recent polls suggest that fewer than 40 percent of Americans believe in Darwin’s theory of evolution, despite it being one of science’s best-established findings. Parents still refuse to vaccinate their children for fear it causes autism, though this link has been consistently disproved. And about 40 percent of Americans believe that the threat of global warming is exaggerated, including many political leaders.

    In this era of fake news and alternative facts, there is more bunk than ever. But why do people believe in it? And what causes them to embrace such pseudoscientific beliefs and practices? In this fully revised second edition, noted skeptic Massimo Pigliucci sets out to separate the fact from the fantasy in an entertaining exploration of the nature of science, the borderlands of fringe science, and—borrowing a famous phrase from philosopher Jeremy Bentham—the nonsense on stilts. Presenting case studies on a number of controversial topics, Pigliucci cuts through the ambiguity surrounding science to look more closely at how science is conducted, how it is disseminated, how it is interpreted, and what it means to our society. The result is in many ways a “taxonomy of bunk” that explores the intersection of science and culture at large.

    No one—neither the public intellectuals in the culture wars between defenders and detractors of science nor the believers of pseudoscience themselves—is spared Pigliucci’s incisive analysis in this timely reminder of the need to maintain a line between expertise and assumption. Broad in scope and implication, Nonsense on Stilts is a captivating guide for the intelligent citizen who wishes to make up her own mind while navigating the perilous debates that will shape the future of our planet.
    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherUniversity of Chicago Press
    Release dateOct 5, 2018
    ISBN9780226496047
    Unavailable
    Nonsense on Stilts
    Author

    Massimo Pigliucci

    Massimo Pigliucci is K. D. Irani Professor of Philosophy at the City College of New York and the author of, among other books, How to Be a Stoic: Using Ancient Philosophy to Live a Modern Life (2017).

    Read more from Massimo Pigliucci

    Related to Nonsense on Stilts

    Related ebooks

    Science & Mathematics For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      Effective Altruism

      Oct 9, 2019

      Effective Altruism
      9 min read

    • Article

      Why Are Humans So Kind, Yet So Cruel?

      Mar 6, 2019

      Under different circumstances, humans can be the kindest, gentlest species or the most murderous. Evolution may hold clues to that Jekyll and Hyde nature.

      5 min read

    • Article

      How to Make Sense of Contradictory Science Papers

      Jun 2, 2021

      The science you can come across today can often appear to be full of contradictory claims. One study tells you red wine is good for your heart; another tells you it is not. Over the past year, COVID-19 research has offered conflicting reports about t

      6 min read

    • Article

      What Is Pseudoscience?

      May 8, 2017

      What Is Pseudoscience?
      3 min read

    • Article

      Why Science Needs Metaphysics: Science can’t tell us whether science explains everything.

      Oct 1, 2015

      Technology cannot keep pace with theoretical predictions about subatomic reality coming from physics. The same applies to our ability to observe the far reaches of the universe. Theory outstrips data and can become more extravagant with the claims it

      6 min read

    • Article

      Certainly Not!: Good science requires cultivating doubt and finding pleasure in mystery.

      Jun 27, 2013

      Physicist Isidor Isaac Rabi grew up in an immigrant family in New York City in the early 20th century. When he came home from school his mother would not ask him what he learned that day, as his friends’ mothers did. She would ask him, “Did you ask a

      8 min read

    • Article

      Can Science Hold All The Answers?

      Oct 27, 2022

      MEASURABILITY, REPRODUCIBILITY, independent verification, accurate predictions — these are the criteria that have elevated scientific experimentation to the arbiter of truth in modern society. Besides the long and impressive history of accomplishment

      6 min read

    • Article

      Commentary: We Rely On Science. Why Is It Letting Us Down When We Need It Most?

      Aug 19, 2020

      Science is suffering from a replication crisis. Too many landmark studies can't be repeated in independent labs, a process crucial to separating flukes and errors from solid results. The consequences are hard to overstate: Public policy, medical trea

      3 min read

    • Article

      Devil In The Detail

      Jun 20, 2021

      Devil In The Detail
      3 min read

    • Article

      Why Science Should Stay Clear of Metaphysics: Meet the philosopher who revived anti-realism.

      Sep 8, 2016

      Philosophers of science are not known for agreeing with each other—contrariness is part of the job description. But for thousands of years, from Aristotle to Thomas Kuhn, those who study what science is have roughly categorized themselves into two ba

      11 min read

    • Article

      The Problem With Reason

      Aug 26, 2020

      The Problem With Reason
      8 min read

    Reviews for Nonsense on Stilts

    4/5

    26 ratings4 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

    • 3/5
      With respect to the subtitle of how to tell science from bunk, Pigliucci sadly fails to make his case. Sure, there are extensive side trips into differentiation between examples of science and pseudoscience (i.e., evolution vs creationism/ID), but only to illustrate a very specific point rather than a general approach, and he really doesn't address the "how" - for the most part he merely contrasts and states one is science and the other is not. Too easy for proponents of bunk to pick apart (and too easy for proponents of intelligent reason and science to pick apart.)

      There is one rambling chapter on logic, philosophy, and the history of science that does nothing to achieve the subtitle. Description of inductive vs deductive schools of thought (a waste of a chapter focusing on philosophical BS) without application is rather silly. This is not to say that Pigluicci is not right, rather, the knowledge conveyed is useless.

      A common theme, he offers no real tools to apply to generic instances. This is a collection of sometimes interesting, if verbose, observations about specific contrasts. And a standard pattern of this book is a disjointed soft segue into something purportedly connected to the preceding chapter, followed by an Emeril-ish BAM! of a not quite sequitur sidebar.

      One of the better questions posed was whether one needed to be an expert in both science and pseudoscience to be able to tell the difference, but as per the previous chapters, Pigliucci quickly diverged to explaining what constituted an "expert" rather than answer the question. While claiming to provide a way to tell science from bunk in the last chapter, he actually is giving a way to tell bunk "experts" from possible scientific experts. That has value. But not how he thinks.

      Mostly unsatisfying, and sadly so. But he gets an extra star for skewering and roasting Deepak Chopra. That was fun. If short.
    • 4/5
      As the title indicates, the main focus of this is supposedly on the "demarcation problem," that is, how to draw the line between valid science and pseudoscience. I'm not entirely sure how well it achieves that goal, as a lot of what Pigliucci discusses doesn't seem to me to work towards answering that question in any clear and immediate way, although he does tie it all together reasonably well, if very briefly, in his concluding chapter. I also wouldn't say that this is the book I'd recommend for an in-depth discussion of pseudoscience and its characteristics. Most of his specific coverage of that topic consists of some very cursory case studies of individual psuedoscientific beliefs, although his chapter on the famous Dover case (in which a school board attempted to mandate the teaching of creationism in the guise of "intelligent design") is good. (He also has a decent, if perhaps slightly dated, discussion of global warming, although I'm not entirely sure about his choice to, effectively, present his arguments about the subject in the form of a pair of book reviews.)Where this book is really worthwhile, though, is in the chapters on the philosophy of science -- unsurprisingly, perhaps, considering that this is Pigliucci's main field of interest. These chapters include a thought-provoking examination of the difference between "hard" and "soft" sciences, a history of scientific thinking from the time of the ancient Greeks, and a critique of the extreme postmodernist view of science as having nothing to do with objective reality. I found these chapters fascinating, and very much appreciated Pigliucci's nuanced and thoughtful approach in discussing the powers and the limitations of science as a human endeavor.Rating: Despite some unevenness, I'm giving this one a 4/5. If this is a topic you're interested in, the worthwhile parts are very worthwhile.
    • 4/5
      This book is relevant to everything going on in society today, especially as concerns the public perception and interpretation of scientific news and advances. Today you don't have to look hard to find someone peddling some new miracle cure, or claiming that they've discovered some new secret to the universe. And much of this is presented right along with the latest in scientific discoveries on your favorite news channel. But how do you tell the difference between what's really true, and what's utter bunk? That's what this book is all about; it lays out the different criteria one can use to determine what is science, and what is pseudo-science, or even out right nonsense (with or without stilts).The book is broken up into several sections starting with an examination of the differences between science, fringe science, and pseudo-science. It then examines the discussion of science within the media and how the outreach of some scientists to the media has fared. It further explores the history of science and the relationship it has with philosophy, as well as the future need for the philosophy of science. It ends the book with a look at what criteria we the public can use when trying to determine someone's expertise in a particular area of science in order to determine who we should trust when evaluating claims.In general the book's writing style was engaging and keeps you moving along, as opposed to other similar books that tend to be a bit dry and sometimes difficult to get through.; there is even a bit of wit and humor thrown in from time to time to keeps things light. The topics are handled without the need for a heavy knowledge of science and I found it to be highly accessible for the general public. If you find yourself struggling to determine which claims are correct, and which are not, among the many news venues available, this book is a good remedy for that.
    • 5/5
      With such a great title, I sort of expected this book to disappoint. It didn't. The author delivers a solid critique of pseudoscience and irrational thinking, explaining in the process how science is done and giving a good argument for philosophy and history, as well. There are a couple of week spots, particularly in the chapter on scientism where he makes some pronouncements without any real evidence, but for the most part, it is well thought out, well researched, and well written. It should be a vital part of the library of evrey thinking person (and is needed even more in the libraries of those persons who tend not to think too much).