Introducing Philosophy of Science: A Graphic Guide

I hesitated for three months to buy this book based on the reviews from previous readers, and what a waste of time it was. Despite of the format of the presentation in this particular book and the series as a whole, it introduces this subject to the most novice of readers as well as to the most expert in a very informative way. I am preparing for a PhD level class that will involve Philosophy of Science themes and wanted to prepare myself for that class by reading a book or a group of books that will introduce me to the subject very quickly and comprehensively. I was not interested in the lengthy debates and elaborations but rather a tool that will give me the main themes of the subject. I read Theory and Reality by Geodfrey-Smith and listened to The Great lectures course by Prof. Kaeser. Though these two resources were in-depth and very academic they were limited in scope! This book introduces you to other themes and topics in the Philosophy of Science such as the post colonial critique, feminist themes and post-normal science; All of which are very relevant to the subject and they are not discussed in the other material I looked at. The book also includes a very useful list of reference books and resources around the themes it covers. In short, if you are interested in the subject this is a book you must buy and read first. It is simple but deep. If you want a quick introduction to the subject this book is indispensable.

It's an OK book. It has a lot of criticism of science, which I welcome. As an ex-scientist who is still interested in how science works, though, this book fell a little short.If you're looking for an introduction to induction in science, scientific explanation, pseudo-science vs. real science, etc., you're better off with Samir Okasha's "Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction" from Oxford University Press, or "Philosophy of Science: Beginners Guide" from Oneworld Publications.

I labored in the vineyards of science all of my adult life and I don’t recognize the scientists the author is describing. Anyone who says that scientists believe a certain way or all act a certain way has never met a scientist! (Confession, I couldn’t finish the essay. Maybe it got better?)I have a pretty simple definition of science. It is a creative activity much like writing or composing or dancing or painting... it just has really tough rules. I think that makes some folks bitter.

A must read for any reader specially those who read Scientific American, like myself: it opened my eyes, about big science, big data , big pharma: you must see: Dopesick in Disney’s Channel where they talk about PurduePharma and Oxycodine.

As other reviewers have noted, this book is not primarily concerned with philosophical aspects of science. It mostly covers sociopolitical issues in the implementation of scientific research specifically the dangers of bias introduced by private funding. The format of this series is inadequate to cover the topics presented in any meaningful detail. It just reads as a series of disjointed factoids. The illustrations are not helpful and are just distractions. The other entries in this series have a similar problem but it is particularly noticeable when the speech bubbles are important to the flow of the argument. There are important issues considered here but it is way too brief. This could have been 4 or 5 good books if the historical, sociopolitical, methodological, and philosophical topics were explored in their own volumes. As published, it reads as a disjointed screed against a somewhat cartoonish version of "the scientific establishment." The suggestions for an alternative model for the advancement of science are underdeveloped and some kernels of good ideas such as greater citizen involvement science are obscured by what appears to be an advocacy of "alternative facts" that could easily lead to harmful movements like anti-vaccination or climate change denial. Again, the book is far too brief for a detailed analysis. It's essential to follow it up by examining the referenced sources to better understand the ideas presented in their original contexts.This is the fourth or fifth book that I have read in this series and unsurprisingly the overall quality of the books is uneven. They could use another round of editing and fact checking but that is probably cost prohibitive. I would recommend reading this book and others in the series with the strong caveat that you will have to read other sources to get an accurate picture.

In "Introducing Philosophy of Science: A Graphic Guide", Ziauddin Sardar and Borin Van Loon explore different societal understandings of science from the Enlightenment forward, with special attention to how scientists considered their own work. The authors successfully condense the various concepts and conflicts to simple, short paragraphs and illustrations, linking everything in a way that the reader can easily grasp. Perhaps most valuable is their "Further Reading" section at the end, which serves as a guide for those researching the history or sociology of science. In their conclusion, Sardar and Van Loon argue for greater public awareness and involvement in science in order to counter the role of special interests and ensure greater responsibility in the discipline.

provides few details or connections. there is no real theme or deeper understanding about science or its process. much more about sociology than philosophy. i was consistently left wondering about meaning and application for how science is done. it seems to have been written by someone who despises science in its totality.

I generally like the book of "graphic guide" serie, but this book is arguably one of the least successful volume.It has very little to do with philosophy of science. In case, is about sociology of science. But even in that case the selection of the subjects is really weird. In addition, the pictures are not well-integrated with the text.

A useful review of the forces shaping science as it changed throughout history and radically shifted its assumptions. We need such books in a world where science, for many, is a monolithic and perfect mindset to learn the truth about the physical reality. The book is not a substitute for a solid knowledge of science history, but it meets the objective of serving as an objective, sober reflection on humanity's drive to control the world,a compact point of reference.

Great book, simple read, but covers very relevant points. Came on time and in excellent condition.

I miss the 0-star option! This content under this title is a fraud. It is not at all an Introduction to the Philosophy of Science, but rather a survey of the most radical science studies questions. Moreover, each question is treated from a single point of view, the most radical possible. If it is what you are really looking for, fine. If it is not, if you are really looking for an Introduction to the Philosophy of Science, then find something else: say "Science - a Discovery in Comics" by Margreet de Heer, for a starter. Both are introductory, both articulate text and graphics, but only one is faithful to its title. This is only too bad for the "graphic guide" collection which also contains real pearls.

Vor einiger Zeit hatte ich das meiner Meinung nach sehr gute "Introducing Logic" gelesen und deshalb habe ich spontan in einer Sammelbestellung einige "Introducing..." Bücher gekauft, die sich vom Titel her interessant anhörten ohne mich weiter über die Bücher schlau zu machen.Bei "Philosophy of Science" hätte ich Wissenschaftstheorie erwartet. Hinten auf dem Buch findet man auch Popper, Kuhn, Feyerabend etc. und der Werbetext liest sich in diese Richtung. Man bekommt allerdings ein normatives Buch, welches darauf hinarbeitet die Postmoderne als den "heiligen Gral" für die moderne Wissenschaft zu etablieren. Auf jeden Fall hat das Buch insgesamt einen wenig objektiven Eindruck hinterlassen.Man findet sehr wenig Popper, Feyerabend, Kuhn und sehr viel Feminism, Post-Colonial, Islamic Science usw.[Die Zeichnungen finde ich nebenbei bemerkt auch seltsam und eher verwirrend als hilfreich]