Skip to main content

Iwan Rhys Morus - Five Way Interview

Iwan Rhys Morus is a professor of history at Aberystwyth University, specializing in the history of science. He’s written a number of books, including Frankenstein’s Children (1998), Michael Faraday and the Electrical Century (2004), When Physics Became King (2005), Shocking Bodies (2011), Nikola Tesla and the Electrical Future (2019), and most recently How The Victorians Took Us To The Moon (2022). He studied Natural Science at Emmanuel College, Cambridge before moving on to do a PhD there in the history and philosophy of science. He is a fellow of the Royal Historical Society and the Learned Society of Wales.

• Why science and technology?

As a historian of science, I spend a lot of time trying to understand the relationship between science, technology, and culture, particularly for the nineteenth century. It’s important, I think, because our contemporary world is entirely dependent on scientific and technological systems that are often invisible to most people. We just don’t think about what makes our smartphones work, or even how the water comes out of our taps. I’m interested in getting at how this came about – how it really came about rather than repeating fairy tales about the inevitability of scientific progress. This matters, I think, because understanding the origins of techno-scientific expertise is essential if we’re to properly defend it in a world in which it’s increasingly under threat.

• Why this book?

I’ve become increasingly interested recently in the history of the future – how people in the past have imagined their future – and that’s really what this book is about: the way in which the Victorians invented the future in the way that we think about it now. The book looks at the ingredients out of which the Victorian future was made, hence the conceit that the Victorians took us to the Moon. They didn’t really, of course, but they did, in the sense that they created the mindset, which we still have, that such things are technologically feasible. As with understanding the cultural origins of modern science and technology, I think that understanding the cultural origins of that way of thinking about the future matters, particularly as we face a future of existential crises.

• You are critical in the book of the tie between Victorian technology and empire - do you think we would have our current level of science and technology if there had been no British Empire?

I think that’s an impossible question to answer. Without getting into questions of right and wrong, I do think that it’s important to acknowledge that our current scientific institutions and much of our ways of thinking about science and technology, have imperial roots. Understanding that is the first step towards taking a hard look at the way we do things now and deciding whether we might want to do things differently.

• What’s next?

Aliens. The history of aliens and extra-terrestrial life is what’s next.

• What’s exciting you at the moment?

Christmas, obviously, since I’m a sucker for Christmas! Seriously, there’s been a flurry of recent advances and breakthroughs in cancer research which I’m hopeful signal a revolution in cancer therapy.

Interview by Brian Clegg - See all of Brian's online articles or subscribe to a digest free here

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Antigravity Enigma - Andrew May ****

Antigravity - the ability to overcome the pull of gravity - has been a fantasy for thousands of years and subject to more scientific (if impractical) fictional representation since H. G. Wells came up with cavorite in The First Men in the Moon . But is it plausible scientifically?  Andrew May does a good job of pulling together three ways of looking at our love affair with antigravity (and the related concept of cancelling inertia) - in science fiction, in physics and in pseudoscience and crankery. As May points out, science fiction is an important starting point as the concept was deployed there well before we had a good enough understanding of gravity to make any sensible scientific stabs at the idea (even though, for instance, Michael Faraday did unsuccessfully experiment with a possible interaction between gravity and electromagnetism). We then get onto the science itself, noting the potential impact on any ideas of antigravity that come from the move from a Newtonian view of a...
Post a Comment
Read more

The World as We Know It - Peter Dear ***

History professor Peter Dear gives us a detailed and reasoned coverage of the development of science as a concept from its origins as natural philosophy, covering the years from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. inclusive If that sounds a little dry, frankly, it is. But if you don't mind a very academic approach, it is certainly interesting. Obviously a major theme running through is the move from largely gentleman natural philosophers (with both implications of that word 'gentleman') to professional academic scientists. What started with clubs for relatively well off men with an interest, when universities did not stray far beyond what was included in mathematics (astronomy, for instance), would become a very different beast. The main scientific subjects that Dear covers are physics and biology - we get, for instance, a lot on the gradual move away from a purely mechanical views of physics - the reason Newton's 'action at a distance' gravity caused such ...
Post a Comment
Read more

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more