Science and Anti-Science By Gerald Holton (review)

complex reasons for their reaching this decision. Until data are available on a large series of such individuals, the answers to these questions and the logical solutions based on these answers will elude us. Thus although the back cover says that the book is a "powerful document for reform," my rejoinder is reform what, and how? In the absence of the necessary information, the reformers can attack discrimination and the specific stereotypes that are engendered in children at an early age about what activities are and are not appropriate for females . But are these the most critical culprits? Janet Rowley Department of Medicine University of Chicago Science and Anti-Science. By Gerald Holton. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1993. Pp. 203. $24.95. From the viewpoint of the working scientist what is lacking among all of the "answers" Holton chooses is a clear statement of a standard for "good science." The nineteenth century "empiricist view of what good science should be" is instead expressed by deep statements like "matter and substance are indistinguishable ." (See William James, Pragmatism.) I use here Bohr's meaning of "clear" and "deep": "A clear statement is a statement to which the contrary is either true or false. A deep statement is a statement to which the contrary is another deep statement." A clear statement of the meaning of "good" natural science would have eliminated the blind spot and provided an important perspective on that aspect of the "end of science" most important to physics, the notion of "Ultimate reducibility." The launching by Einstein of this modern version of the ultimate reducibility of theoretical physics to a "Master Equation" is described by the quotation in a letter to C. Lanczos and quoted (pp. 65—66) as follows: "Coming from skeptical empiricism of somewhat the kind of Mach's, I was made, by the problem of gravitation, into a believing rationalist, that is, one who seeks the only trustworthy source of truth in mathematical simplicity." The specific notion of ultimate reducibility is introduced in Holton's Chapter 5, which carries the title "The Controversy over the End of Science." This chapter contrasts the concept of science as a self-enhancing process leading ultimately to "one coherent body of understanding" with the Spenglerian view that science is a terminal illness. The former concept is illustrated by excerpts from a talk by Einstein on "Motivations of Research" (See p. 143 n6.) in which he speaks of the long range agenda for science (p. 136). Einstein finally committed himself to ultimate reducibility in the form of a "unified field theory," unifying gravitation and electromagnetism, that would account for all physical phenomena. He devoted much of his life to trying to formulate such a field theory. The discussion of the nature, meaning and future of natural science in Chapter 5, including Spengler's dire predictions have little direct impact on natural science. However, these opinions are very important to the extent that they Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 37, 4 ¦ Summer 1994 615 influence or represent public opinion. That, I believe is the point that Holton makes successfully in using Chapter 5 as a staging area for his final chapter "The Anti-Science Phenomenon." Although Holton says (p. 128) about thematically opposed positions, such as those in Chapter 5, that "one cannot expect to decide for one and against the other by some simple test" there is indeed one simple test for deciding what is and what is not a theory in natural science and it should appear in any clear definition of "good science." It can be expressed in one word (Popper's word): fahifiable. In order for a proposed theory to be a legitimate theory of natural science the theory must allow for unobserved phenomena whose later observation would lead to the unambiguous conclusion that the theory is false. While the emphasis in the early chapters of the book is on natural science, especially physics, the issues addressed in this last chapter do not address science itself but, instead, consider the impact of the world view resulting from the successes of natural science. Holton presents a provocative summary and analysis of the way in which the conflict of this world...