Skip to main content

The Ashtray - Errol Morris *****

Wow. When someone suggested I read a book called The Ashtray, written by a documentary film-maker, it didn't strike me that it would be a book that gave deep insights into the history and philosophy of science - while also being a remarkable reading experience. In fact, I almost didn't bother with it, but I'm glad that I did.

The titular ashtray was thrown at the author when he was a grad student - thrown by one of the two best known names in the philosophy of science, Thomas Kuhn, he of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions and the concept of paradigm shifts. Kuhn didn't like the young Errol Morris daring to challenge his ideas and reacted with what some would regard as a less than philosophical reply by hurling a heavy glass ashtray at him.

Part of the reason that reading The Ashtray is a remarkable experience is because it's a book that feels in some ways like watching a documentary. I have to confess I've never seen any of Morris's work, but he uses visual imagery both to make his point and to be playful. I don't usually like semi-coffee table format books, but this was a delight to read. Even the copious marginal notes (more stylish than footnotes) have a little edge as the inline reference numbers are elegantly shaded red. (Also one of the margin notes quotes me, so what's not to like?)

My position on Kuhn's work is primarily ignorance. As a science writer, my interest in history of science is to give context and narrative structure to explaining aspects of science - and I tend not to think of philosophy of science much at all, except to make the point that science isn't about finding 'the truth', but is about our best theories given the current data. I've never read Kuhn's book, and all I had assumed it covered was the idea of having sudden shifts of scientific viewpoint - effectively the philosophy of science equivalent of catastrophism (as opposed to gradualism) in geology. What I hadn't realised was that Kuhn's ideas are thoroughly embedded in post-modernist woo.

I ought to emphasise that my only exposure to Kuhn is via The Ashtray, and Morris clearly detests Kuhn's ideas - but assuming Morris is telling it straight, it's hard to understand why Kuhn is even mentioned anymore, unless, like me, most people who do so aren't aware that he wasn't just talking about sudden shifts in scientific viewpoints, but that a) he thought this meant the world itself was changed, because there is no reality, only the words we use to describe it, b) progress in science is a meaningless concept and c) we can't really say anything about, say Newton, because when he used words, he didn't mean the same thing as we do by those words. His 'gravity' is not our 'gravity'. (I may be a little adrift in the subtle detail in that whirlwind summary, but that seems to be the message.)

I'd honestly thought that history and philosophy of science had pretty much abandoned  post-modernism after the Sokal hoax and the realisation that it seemed far more about its advocates pretensions than having anything useful to say about science, so it was a revelation to me that Kuhn was a full-blown advocate of this approach.

Bearing in mind Morris is dealing with an approach to philosophy where it's almost impossible to discern meaning and unless words like 'hermeneutics' and 'exegesis' are part of your everyday vocabulary it's easy to get lost, his explanations are almost all easy to follow. There were a couple of pages near the middle where my eyes did start to glaze over, but Morris was soon back to form.

In the end, this is still a very odd book. It's an anti-love letter to Kuhn, a powerful introduction to one aspect of history and philosophy of science and a dramatic dismantling of a horror that has loomed over science and scientists like a Frankenstein's monster since the 60s. I loved it.


Review by Brian Clegg


Popular posts from this blog

Ancestral Night (SF) - Elizabeth Bear *****

Only a couple of weeks ago, reviewing a 1960s SF book, I bemoaned the fact that science fiction novels of ideas are less common now. Although it is correctly labelled a space opera, Ancestral Night delivers ideas with aplomb.

Let's deal with the space opera aspect first. Elizabeth Bear provides some excellent adventure scenes in space, and we've the usual mix of huge spaceships and interesting aliens. Main character Haimey Dz is an engineer on a ship that salvages wrecks - but, as we gradually discover - she also has a forgotten past. A major feature of the storyline (one that seems to link to the medieval idea of the lost wisdom of the past) is ancient technology from a long-dead race with capabilities, notably manipulating spacetime mentally (Bear has yet to point out that the travel technologies used here could manipulate time as well as space), which fit well with Arthur C. Clarke's magic definition.

I particularly liked the (surely intentional) nods to the much-misse…

The Creativity Code - Marcus du Sautoy *****

At first glance this might just be another 'What AI is good at and not so good at' title. And in a way, it is. But, wow, what a brilliant book! Marcus du Sautoy takes us on a tour of what artificial intelligence has achieved (and possibly can in the future achieve) in a range of fields from his own of mathematics, through game playing, music, art and more.

After a little discussion of what creativity is, we start off with the now very familiar story of DeepMind's AlphaGo and its astonishing ability to take on the hugely challenging game of Go. Even though I've read about this many times before, du Sautoy, as a Go player and mathematician, gives a real feel for why this was such a triumph - and so shocking. Not surprisingly he is also wonderful on what mathematicians actually do, how computers have helped them to date and how they have the potential to do far more in the future. After all, mathematics is by far the closest science to game playing, as it has strict rule…

The Demon in the Machine - Paul Davies *****

Physicists have a habit of dabbling in biology and, perhaps surprisingly, biologists tend to be quite tolerant of it. (I find it hard to believe the reverse would be true if biologists tried to do physics.) Perhaps one reason for that tolerance is Schrödinger’s lecture series and book What is Life?, which had a huge impact on molecular biology and with a reference to which, not surprisingly, Paul Davies begins his fascinating book. 

At the heart of the The Demon in the Machine (we'll come back to that demon in a moment) is the relationship between life and information. In essence, Davies points out that if we try to reduce life to its simple physical components it is like trying to work with a computer that has no software. The equivalent of software here is information, not just in the best publicised aspect of the information stored in the DNA, but on a far broader scale, operating in networks across the organism.
This information and its processing gives life its emergent compl…