Prime Day business savings Shop now
$27.29 with 35 percent savings
List Price: $41.99
$4.99 delivery June 30 - July 2. Details
In Stock
$$27.29 () Includes selected options. Includes initial monthly payment and selected options. Details
Price
Subtotal
$$27.29
Subtotal
Initial payment breakdown
Shipping cost, delivery date, and order total (including tax) shown at checkout.
Ships from
Blackstone_Publishing
Blackstone_Publishing
Ships from
Blackstone_Publishing
Returns
30-day refund/replacement
30-day refund/replacement
This item can be returned in its original condition for a full refund or replacement within 30 days of receipt. You may receive a partial or no refund on used, damaged or materially different returns.
Read full return policy
Payment
Secure transaction
Your transaction is secure
We work hard to protect your security and privacy. Our payment security system encrypts your information during transmission. We don’t share your credit card details with third-party sellers, and we don’t sell your information to others. Learn more
Kindle app logo image

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

QR code to download the Kindle App

Follow the author

Michael Strevens
Follow
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.

The Knowledge Machine: How Irrationality Created Modern Science Audio CD – CD, November 3, 2020

by Michael Strevens (Author)
4.4 out of 5 stars 390 ratings
{"desktop_buybox_group_1":[{"displayPrice":"$27.29","priceAmount":27.29,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"27","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"29","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"sbHbFyUd0wKNjaYk8CR85SnRV0wElMUl%2Fvc%2FvH7qJZfmbJEHXzWIaWIMLMiRiJaDswvKEv1s6YbzrRfIvviqNSsirXWMl%2BDYCArxS0Ku0qlfqVXyiEYDLLmno%2F1A0gFfdYASU8QyB%2FyGb8dlJJ4hzH3O3L0IL8B38YMGx6Kz0vcn241HbuNX%2Bw%3D%3D","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"NEW","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":0}]}

Purchase options and add-ons

A paradigm-shifting work that revolutionizes our understanding of the origins and structure of science.

Captivatingly written, interwoven with historical vignettes ranging from Newton's alchemy to quantum mechanics to the storm surge of Hurricane Sandy, Michael Strevens's wholly original investigation of science asks two fundamental questions: Why is science so powerful? And why did it take so long, two thousand years after the invention of philosophy and mathematics, for the human race to start using science to learn the secrets of nature? The Knowledge Machine's radical answer is that science calls on its practitioners to do something irrational: by willfully ignoring religion, theoretical beauty, and, especially, philosophy--essentially stripping away all previous knowledge--scientists embrace an unnaturally narrow method of inquiry, channeling unprecedented energy into observation and experimentation.

Like Yuval Harari's Sapiens or Thomas Kuhn's 1962 classic, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, The Knowledge Machine overturns much of what we thought we knew about the origins of the modern world.
Read more
Previous slide of product details
  1. Print length
    1 pages
  2. Language
    English
  3. Publisher
    Highbridge Audio and Blackstone Publishing
  4. Publication date
    November 3, 2020
  5. ISBN-13
    979-8200923014
Next slide of product details
The%20Amazon%20Book%20Review
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now

Editorial Reviews

About the Author

Michael Strevens, who received a Guggenheim Fellowship in 2017, is a professor of philosophy at New York University. He was born in New Zealand and has been writing about the philosophy of science for twenty-five years. He lives in New York.

Product details

  • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09NRZRGK8
  • Publisher ‏ : ‎ Highbridge Audio and Blackstone Publishing
  • Publication date ‏ : ‎ November 3, 2020
  • Edition ‏ : ‎ Unabridged
  • Language ‏ : ‎ English
  • Print length ‏ : ‎ 1 pages
  • ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 979-8200923014
  • Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 8.3 ounces
  • Customer Reviews:
    4.4 out of 5 stars 390 ratings

About the author

Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Michael Strevens

Michael Strevens

Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.
Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read book recommendations and more.

Customer reviews

4.4 out of 5 stars
390 global ratings

Review this product

Share your thoughts with other customers
Write a customer review

Customers say

Customers find this book to be one of the best works of scientific philosophy, praising its readability and excellent writing style. They appreciate its pacing, with one customer noting its clear ideas and colorful vignettes.

Select to learn more

Philosophy of scienceReadabilityWriting stylePacing
30 customers mention "Philosophy of science"21 positive9 negative

Customers appreciate the philosophy of science in the book, describing it as one of the best works in the field, with one customer noting how science makes considerable progress over time.

"...Then history and examples in the book are interesting and well done...." Read more

"...All-in-all, this is an exceptionally well-written, highly informative, provocative book, but beware the take on scientific practice and scientists...." Read more

"...a key to discriminate science from non-science and points the direction of scientific activity...." Read more

"The Knowledge Machine is an insightful, well-written book that attempts to both provide a meta-philosophy of science and remain at the popular level...." Read more

15 customers mention "Readability"15 positive0 negative

Customers find the book well-written and engaging, with one mentioning it's a wonderful read that they excitedly pass along to others.

"Amazing book. All who want to understand science need to read it...." Read more

"...In addition, this book was enjoyable to read—a rarity in books on this subject. This is well worth the price to buy and read." Read more

"...Newton, Kelvin, D'Arcy Thompson, Whewell and many others, in well-told episodes and colorful vignettes...." Read more

"...I found this an extremely satisfying book as it, in my judgement, resolved a number of outstanding issues in philosophy of science...." Read more

11 customers mention "Writing style"8 positive3 negative

Customers praise the writing style of the book, finding it highly readable and excellent, with one customer describing it as witty.

"...Strevens' writing is easygoing, his scholarship is very impressive, and his ambivalence about his own Iron Rule is intriguing." Read more

"...All-in-all, this is an exceptionally well-written, highly informative, provocative book, but beware the take on scientific practice and scientists...." Read more

"Overall i thought this book was mundane and uninformative...." Read more

"...His writing is entertaining and has a lot of interesting historical context...." Read more

4 customers mention "Pacing"4 positive0 negative

Customers appreciate the pacing of the book, with one noting it is very nicely laid out and another mentioning its clear ideas and colorful vignettes.

"...Thompson, Whewell and many others, in well-told episodes and colorful vignettes...." Read more

"EXCELLENT writing, very nicely laid out and actually kind of makes sense to a non-science liberal arts major! Highly recommended" Read more

"Very clear ideas, but I think that his main argument is very close to Lakatos research program." Read more

"Bold, but I think mistaken..." Read more

Top reviews from the United States

  • Vincent M. Smiles
    5.0 out of 5 stars Fabulous book, but …
    Reviewed in the United States on March 23, 2025
    Format: KindleVerified Purchase
    Amazing book. All who want to understand science need to read it. But it leaves behind important questions, as suggested, for instance, by Roger Perry in SCIENCE AND MORAL PRIOITY, and especially by Michael Polanyi in SCIENCE, FAITH AND SOCIETY. For all its power, science cannot BY ITSELF provide moral guidance. It can give the numbers, but not the VALUES - ethical values. And they are not obvious. At some point, science has to be in conversation with philosophy and theology and might have to be restrained by them from some of its practices (WMD, AI, etc).
    One person found this helpful
    Helpful
     Report
  • Ryan Boissonneault
    4.0 out of 5 stars An Important Contribution to the Philosophy of Science
    Reviewed in the United States on November 1, 2020
    Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
    Unlike the humanities, including philosophy—where the idea of progress is a controversial topic—it is an essentially indisputable fact that science makes considerable progress over time. Why this is the case—and how science actually works—is what Michael Strevens seeks to explain in The Knowledge Machine.

    The basic argument is that scientific knowledge grows through the application of the “iron rule of explanation,” as Strevens calls it, that demands that all scientific argument be settled by empirical testing alone, and that the results of empirical testing are to be recorded in formal scientific journals for future reference and use.

    The iron rule is peculiar in the sense that it demands adherence to empirical testing and does not consider the relevance or significance of any non-empirical knowledge, whether philosophical, religious, spiritual, or aesthetic. While individual scientists are free to theorize in whatever manner they like—and are swayed by the same philosophical, moral, and political influences and biases as everyone else—the iron rule of explanation guarantees that formal arguments are presented without reference to any of these ancillary considerations.

    The net effect of this “procedural consensus,” over time, is what Strevens refers to as “Baconian convergence,” or the idea that repeated empirical testing over time converges on the one theory that best explains all the accumulated data. This is why physicists, over time, have eventually come to accept the legitimacy of the general theory of relativity, for example, whereas a religion like Christianty schisms permanently into a thousand different parts.

    The reason for this is that philosophical and theological reasoning, while attempting to be more ambitious and all-encompassing, has no ultimate method of verification or falsification through testing. If I think, as Isaac Newton did, that Jesus was created by God and subordinate to God, whereas you think that Jesus and God are one and the same, how are we supposed to resolve this philosophical difference? I can provide my logical and coherent reasons and you can provide yours—along with our respective interpretations of the relevant scripture—but without a procedural consensus whereby we can ascertain the truth beyond mere logic, there is no way to settle the argument.

    On the other hand, if I believe the Newtonian theory of gravity is correct and you believe the Einsteinian theory is correct, we can (if we were capable) settle the dispute by measuring the angle that light is bent by the sun’s gravity during a total solar eclipse, as Arthur Eddington and others did. Newton’s theory predicts one measure; Einstein’s predicts the other. We can both agree to what the measurements will tell us beforehand; then, after the experiment is conducted and the measurements are verified, we can settle the dispute.

    Of course, as Strevens points out, it’s not exactly this simple. An individual scientist must still engage in “plausibility rankings” and determine how to weigh conflicting evidence. There is a strong element of subjectivity in the interpretation of evidence and the process is far from completely objective. But the main reason why science is effective is not due to the unwavering rationality of any individual scientist; rather, it is attributable to the process of several scientists over time abiding to the iron rule of explanation—and publishing detailed empirical findings—that allows the process of convergence to occur over time and the correct theory to materialize. This is why science advances, and why we are now able to launch satellites into space and communicate with each other around the globe electronically at the speed of light.

    So far, so good, but why did the iron rule of explanation—which has proven to be so effective—take humanity so long to develop? Why did it develop in 17th-century Europe and not, for example, in ancient Greece or China? The reason is, according to Strevens, that the iron rule is, at bottom, irrational. It asks the practicing scientist to effectively ignore all other forms of human inquiry that is not strictly empirical. This would have seemed absurd, especially in ancient Greece, the birthplace of philosophy, or in Medieval Europe, obsessed with theology as it was. To give up all philosophical and theological reasoning in the attempt to explain how the world works was too radical an idea for most times and places.

    This is why science had to wait for the peculiar historical and cultural circumstances of early modern Europe. Only then, and only over time, did it begin to make paradoxical sense that knowledge of the world can only grow by significantly limiting its scope to empirical testing and data alone. Since then, the iron rule of explanation and its procedural consensus has resulted in Baconian convergence and a growing and sophisticated understanding of the workings of the world.

    Strevens, I think, has hit on something profound in this book, and his explanation for how science works is ultimately convincing. However, I take some issue with the title of the book and on his calling the process of scientific discovery irrational.

    The iron rule is not, in itself, irrational; its tremendous success over the last few hundred years should attest to that. By limiting scientific argument to empirical data alone, our knowledge of the world has increased astronomically in a short period of time.

    The irrationality, then, does not lie in the iron rule itself; rather, it lies in the belief that the iron rule applies to problems outside the realm of science. If you believe that philosophical, ethical, and political problems can be solved with empirical argument alone, then yes, your overextension of the iron rule is indeed irrational.

    But if you limit the scope of the iron rule to scientific, empirical problems, then there is nothing irrational about the rule because there is nothing in the rule that says you cannot compartmentalize scientific problems. Isaac Newton should have demonstrated this; he abided by the iron rule in his scientific work while simultaneously pursuing other philosophical and mystical pursuits. There is nothing irrational about this. The irrationality, rather, comes from someone like Stephen Hawking, who said that “philosophy is dead” because he couldn’t apply the iron rule to philosophical problems—problems it is not meant to address.

    There is no “theory of everything”; reality is complex, like a six-sided cube you cannot view all from the same perspective. Different problem types require different approaches, and science has developed, according to the iron rule, its own successful approach. Philosophical, historical, ethical, legal, and political problems all have their approaches as well, and, while they all influence each other, no single domain has authority over all the others.

    Science has simply limited its scope to empirical testing to solve certain kinds of problems. While the scientist that thinks this particular approach can solve all types of problems is certainly irrational, scientific problem solving, led by the iron rule, is not.
    114 people found this helpful
    Helpful
     Report
  • Green
    5.0 out of 5 stars An impressive argument for how science functions
    Reviewed in the United States on February 25, 2025
    Format: KindleVerified Purchase
    This book provides an argument for the inescapable irrationality of the scientific process, and serves to illustrate and rebut the thinking of Popper and Kuhn. But it also escapes the trap of relativism. In addition, this book was enjoyable to read—a rarity in books on this subject. This is well worth the price to buy and read.
    One person found this helpful
    Helpful
     Report
  • Brigham Klyce
    5.0 out of 5 stars Science does better in a straight-jacket!?
    Reviewed in the United States on January 7, 2021
    Format: KindleVerified Purchase
    Modern Science is uniquely powerful because, in Newton's day, it began to follow the "Iron Rule of Explanation". That's the thesis of The Knowledge Machine by Michael Strevens. The rule, profusely elaborated, dictates what counts as a legitimate move in the game of science. Most of what formerly qualified no longer does. I found Strevens' restrictions as confining as a straight-jacket. Eventually we see that he has misgivings, too! The Knowledge Machine

    One manifestation of the Iron Rule is the "Tychonic Principle": the importance of observations with accuracy out to many decimal places. Kepler's use of Tycho's voluminous data exemplifies this principle. So would the careful measurement of the bending of starlight in the solar eclipse of 1919 — in theory at least. But the eclipse data were not very precise. In their interpretation, Eddington's prejudice had a much bigger role than precision. In general, Strevens' contentions — that early science was so primitive, the Scientific Revolution was so abrupt, and science is at last fully objective — seem debatable to me.

    While reading the book, I often wanted to raise a hand and ask a question. Sometimes Strevens came around to the issue, but not always. For example, Strevens says that the Iron Rule guarantees consensus, which allows continuity, which he deems important. But sometimes consensus is completely lacking, as in the theory of evolution. How life evolves is one of the most contentious issues in the history of science. I see no consensus there, only crisis. Strevens has studied Thomas Kuhn but seems little persuaded by him.

    Strevens says the Iron Rule guarantees, "Always there is something that even the most bitter enemies can agree to do next: another test." This is starkly wrong. The schism between Darwinism and Intelligent Design illustrates this. From my third-party perspective, the gridlock is especially obvious.

    Still, I quite enjoyed reading The Knowledge Machine. I love knowing more about Aristotle, Francis Bacon, Descartes, Galileo, Newton, Kelvin, D'Arcy Thompson, Whewell and many others, in well-told episodes and colorful vignettes. Strevens' writing is easygoing, his scholarship is very impressive, and his ambivalence about his own Iron Rule is intriguing.
    10 people found this helpful
    Helpful
     Report

Top reviews from other countries

Translate all reviews to English
  • ADELMAR DE M TORRES
    5.0 out of 5 stars Ótima leitura
    Reviewed in Brazil on April 22, 2022
    Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
    Texto bem escrito, fornecendo ótimos insights acerca do método e dos procedimento (iron law) científicos
    Report
  • Gabriel Alberto Carrillo Garibay
    5.0 out of 5 stars ¡Interesante lectura!
    Reviewed in Mexico on April 19, 2021
    Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
    Un buen libro de filosofía de la ciencia. Si te interesa este tema, lo leerás con mucho gusto. He aprendido muchas cosas nuevas y que le dan sentido a mi visión anterior y actual de la ciencia
    Report
  • Darragh
    5.0 out of 5 stars Great history review
    Reviewed in the United Kingdom on January 15, 2023
    Verified Purchase
    Really humbling to see how far we've come, and how it all just seemed to happen by chance.
    Report
  • GM
    3.0 out of 5 stars Overly ambitious
    Reviewed in Italy on November 24, 2021
    Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
    This is an overly ambitious book. On the one hand, Strevens attempts to introduce a new philosophical theory of scientific knowledge. On the other hand, he tries to write a book for the general public. It’s not easy to do both. And, in the end, I do not think that the author succeeds. The book encompasses a large collections of scientific disputes in no particular order, and it’s filled with anecdotes. This might allure the lay reader, but it has a negative impact on Strevens’ overall philosophical project.
    Report
  • Isabelle Drolet
    5.0 out of 5 stars 10/10!
    Reviewed in Canada on March 22, 2021
    Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
    Loved how clear and straightforward it was. Wish it was longer!
    Report