The Golem: What You Need to Know About Science
It is often difficult to find books that holistically evaluate an academic discipline, and it is due to this very reason that The Golem stands out in stark contrast from its literary peers. In The Golem, authors Harry Collins and Trevor Pinch use a series of famous scientific case studies to show that science may be just another social discipline. The book itself does not attempt to completely break away the heavily fortressed reputation of science. Rather, it sheds light on its messy and controversial nature. To this end, the authors use an extended metaphor involving the Golem, a mythical creature associated with strength and malleability. The key word here is “malleability.” Once malleable, the Golem, intended to represent science, serves as the pliable medium through which to express human fallibility. The book attempts to break the barrier between science and all other social constructs.
The social science (some would even say humanistic) interpretation of the hard sciences has an interesting history. While many scholars such as Stanley Fish have insisted that social construction does not stipulate its physical existence, others have blatantly stated that science is merely a language like many other languages. Thomas Kuhn, among others, has previously labeled scientific “truth” as nothing more than a widespread consensus between numerous scientists. In this supposed paradigm, it is no longer objective mechanisms like the scientific method that determine truth, but rather individual (and ultimately group) opinion. Interesting as this theory may be, Collins and Pinch do not use the book only to focus on the errors implicit in commonplace scientific theory. Instead, the authors attempt to bridge the humanities and the sciences, offering a multi-faceted explanation of science.
Among the many themes discussed in the book, the most important centers on the experimenter’s regress. This “experimenter’s regress” refers to the practice of inappropriately confusing method with theory. In an ideal situation, the only way to complete an experiment successfully is to achieve the desired end independent of any biased framework. In order to judge whether evidence is faulty, one must rely on theory-based expectations, and to judge the value of competing theories, one relies on evidence. Clearly, this is a cyclical process. An experimenter’s strong belief in a new theory produces confirmation bias, and any biased evidence he obtains then strengthens his belief in that particular theory. This circular phenomenon leads to a system of replication and method change that is not so much indicative of progress as it is of a change in paradigm. Every time a correct result is achieved, the experimenter cannot know if it was simply because the method was right, or because the data produced was right. In the end, controversial science is controversial insofar as there is no established “criterion of competence.”
The first case study discussed in the book involves the chemical transfer of memory in experiments performed by James McConnell and Georges Ungar. The two scientists faced tremendous challenges in popularizing their experiments performed on planarian worms to prove the phenomenon known as memory transfer. McConnell’s methods were unconventional, and lab scientists from Stanford to MIT had trouble replicating his experiments. At first, McConnell trained the worms to scrunch up their bodies in response to light. Then, after achieving this goal (which in itself was difficult considering that planarian worms often scrunched up without any interference), McConnell cut the worms in half and tried to test the regenerated worms for memory retention. After finding out that these worms could be cannibalistic, McConnell also proceeded to feed minced worms to select planarians. In the end, the experiment faced challenges not founded specifically in scientific terms. In fact, many would argue that McConnell’s experiments failed to gain prestige precisely because his experiments aimed for a popular demonstration of memory transfer rather than a scholarly one.
On top of these criticisms, McConnell published his results in a journal called the Worm Runner’s Digest, hardly reflective of a mature, intellectual professional. In the end, the method of presentation was crucial, and McConnell’s (as well as Ungar’s) approach to fringe science deviated from the golden standard. This standard called for uniformity and popular consensus. This example, albeit trivial in its scope, shows a concrete example of so-called “populist” science.
Populist science has the tremendous capacity to alter social cognition and the way society processes different dilemmas. Both science and Golems are incredibly strong, but extremely prone to external influence. Insofar as a Golem is controlled and “utilized” in the right way, it will operate as it is meant to — that is, smoothly and obediently. Without a prominent dissenting opinion, science as a whole usually progresses in an uninterrupted manner. However, as shown by case studies involving the theory of relativity, cold fusion, and the sex life of lizards, the book exposes a different side of science.
In another case study, the authors turn to the debate surrounding the origins of life. Louis Pasteur (who is probably more famous for inventing the process of pasteurization) proved that spontaneous generation of life is false not strictly by using scientific fact, but rather by “crushing the opposition by political maneuvering, by ridicule, and by … drawing farmers, brewers, and doctors to his cause.” Collins argues that many scientific controversies tip in favor of one side not through facts or reason, but through death and weight of numbers that defeated the minority view. In this famous debate, Pasteur claimed that mold would not grow in an enclosed sample if the newly admitted air was itself devoid of living organisms. In other words, spontaneous generation was not responsible for the appearance of the mold. Collins and Pinch then go on to explain that Pasteur’s genius was more rooted in his foresight than his own capacity for scientific thinking. In a famous rivalry between Felix Pouchet and Louis Pasteur, the former argued that spontaneous generation could occur as evidenced in his own experiments. Pouchet chose to dip all of his experimental materials in mercury to “sterilize” them, and he later found that these same materials (like hay) grew microorganisms and mold. On the other hand, Pasteur argued differently and was adamant about his own disbelief in spontaneous generation. Experiments performed by both scientists proved that Pouchet was indeed right. However, Pasteur did not use the scientific method (claiming that there were microorganisms already in the mercury) to resolve the controversy; he merely relied on his own wits. Therein lies the abnormality in Pasteur’s discovery — the result was at most accidental, and as a whole the experiment was a far cry from the usually austere, scientific method-backed endeavors. Thus, as shown by Pasteur, the Golem can maintain a multitude of forms, and may sometimes differ from the usual sense of scientific infallibility.
The Golem’s overall message may not be subtle, but the delivery certainly is. Both Collins and Pinch try to make a distinction between scientific fundamentalism and diversified, “humanistic” science. At its core, the book tries to show a type of science that is less absolute and formulaicly strict. Instead, the science the authors present is malleable, and represents a greater compromise between science die-hards and social science adherents.
The book in itself is a key introduction for any student attempting to delve into philosophy, history, or science. The format is simple, and both the introduction and conclusion stress the possible shortcomings of the text. This book is a fascinating introduction to the social science dimension of traditional science. Engaging to both amateur high school scientists and seasoned degree-holding researchers, it is very broad in its appeal. The information and positions are meant to be taken piecemeal, and given that understanding, The Golem is sure to be a great read.