Monday, January 18, 2016

Bynum, William (2013): A Little History of Science

What is it about?

The book is basically an intellectual history of the mankind; it proceeds more or less chronologically from some millennia BCE until the modern day. However, the bulk of the book is devoted to the past two or three centuries, which is entirely appropriate for a modern-day reader.

Was it good?

Extremely good. The proceeding is not strictly linear over time, because the book is nicely organized into thematic chapters (e.g. "airs and gases", "coughs, sneezes and diseases") each of which present a "mini-history" of that theme, spanning a few decades or a century or so. This is a very appealing choice, as in this manner the reader can absorb the contents in thematic modules of sort. In addition, the narrative is very fluent and even entertaining, in many cases following a central character within a focal "mini-history". 

The main take-away for me?

Well, perhaps the main take-away from a book like this has to be the 'great arch' of developments - how the human kind has proceeded in acquiring knowledge and understanding its surroundings. However, while reading books like this, I tend to wonder more strongly as usual about in what respects we, today, are more or less in the dark concerning this or that - like people some centuries ago concerning how diseases spread, for example.

Who should read the book?

This - or equivalent contents - should be be read (or known in outline) by every well-read person, for sure. Moreover, as the book is very fluently written, it should be quite accessible to anyone.

The book on Amazon.com: A Little History of Science

Saturday, January 16, 2016

Diamond, Jared (2012): The World Until Yesterday: What Can We Learn from Traditional Societies?

What is it about?

The book discusses the diversity of human culture (and consequently social practices) around the world - particularly in 'traditional' societies (i.e. societies which have not 'westernized' or have done so only recently).

The basic setup of the book is that there are some aspects of those cultures that we in 'western' 'modern' societies would benefit from (e.g. with regard dietary habits or conflict resolution) and some which in turn would be downright harmful (e.g. widow strangling or infanticide).

Was it good?

Absolutely. The book is such and written in such a manner that it undoubtedly takes a very seasoned and experienced (and practically oriented) scholar to write it. In other words, modern narrowly focused scholarship is not generally geared towards producing such "this is the variety of human experience down to enjoying early morning bird songs and this is how you could lead a happier life" treatises. Moreover, the ample personal anecdotes backing up and illustrating the arguments make the book extremely enjoyable to read.

The main take-away for me?

There probably are two. The first and more immediate one is constituted by the actual 'life-enhancing' observations, like those related to dietary, social and exercise habits. And the other is the reinforced understanding that the human condition is very, very variable around the world and that there really is something to cultural relativism even though it is, of course, still somewhat troublesome as an universal norm (something that the author does not problematize, though).

Who should read the book?

Basically everyone. The book is very accessible and vividly written - no scholarly excesses here. Moreover, both the above-mentioned take-aways should resonate quite universally given a sufficiently open mind.

The book on Amazon.com: The World Until Yesterday

Anderson, Benedict (2006): Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, Revised Edition

What is it about?

The book discusses the nature and emergence of nationalism, and then proceeds to discuss several empirical cases around the world. The basic argument of the book - put forth quite early on, is that nations are socially constructed entities where vernacular language and mass communication have a significant role. The argument is well developed and compelling.

Was it good?

Yes and no. The first - more conceptual - part of the book where the basic argument is developed is very interesting, reads quite fluently and exhibits clarity of thinking. However, there onwards the author proceeds to discuss empirical cases of nationalism and nation-building, which appears to jump from case to case in no particular order. Therefore at least for me the empirical discussion was quite laborious to follow; there seemed to be no clear read thread to organize the empirical discussion. Thus, if I were to read the book again, I would only read the conceptual part.

The main take-away for me?

Clearly, the notion of a nation as being socially constructed - 'imagined' - was the main take-away, and lead me to constantly apply this notion to my national context, Finland, where it undoubtedly makes sense. However, perhaps the more important take-away for me was that it lead me to more explicitly consider also other social phenomena as 'imagined', or socially considered. They are, once you look at them in this manner, everywhere.

Who should read the book?

If one considers the whole book, perhaps it would be of most interest to 'hard core' social scientists. However, the first conceptual part would be interesting to, I believe, nearly everyone if the scholarly writing style does not bother too much.

The book on Amazon.com: Imagined Communities