The History of Science

A Sweeping Visage of Science and its History

De: Professor Michael Shermer

Narrado por: Dr. Michael Shermer

This is a sweeping look at science, its history and philosophy from the Middle Ages to the present, with special emphasis on defining science within the cultural context of the age, who was doing science at the time, and what their goals were in conducting science. This course reflects Dr. Shermer's doctoral training at Claremont Graduate School.©2009 Michael Shermer (P)2009 Michael Shermer

Cut in the wrong places

Is there anything you would change about this book?

The lectures should not be cut so often. There is a lot of side talk that isn't really interesting.

The recording quality is maddening

I struggled to finish it but I finally got through it. I don't want to write a less than stellar review unless I've listened to the entire thing. There were some interesting points scattered throughout that kept me from shutting it off. I would like to hear a far better curated version of this from Dr. Shermer.

Old and bad sound recording

The line of thought is often interesting - but the low quality of the sound with whisperings and chairs ruminating in the background as well as inaudible questions makes it difficult to recommend. Also we listeners do not have at hand or on-line the many handout that are used ad referenced throughout. All-in-all its a lecture recording "on the cheap" that needs to be updated and applied for tape/digital to make real sense.

It's lectures recorded on magnetic tape.

What did you love best about The History of Science?

It's interesting to look back to 1991 both in the tech that recorded this, the overhead projector he's obviously using, and the understanding of world politics (this is ten years before 9/11).

What did you like about the performance? What did you dislike?

The recording is sometimes difficult to hear, particularly the audience.

Was this a book you wanted to listen to all in one sitting?

25+ hours? Heck no!

Any additional comments?

I think some of the other reviewers didn't understand what this is (lectures) and don't recall or never experienced older tech recording.

leave

if it is optional why do I get to fill this thing out to get off this damn

Deceptive Title

I was hoping for a somewhat concise history of science when I purchased this but was suprised to find that the author supports very little with dates and facts, rather this seems little more than a backyard philosophical conversation about science, full of opinions from the author and running conversations with his audience.

I agree with the other reviews that the title is deceptive and I did not get what I thought I was getting and feel that I wasted my credit as well.

Cliodynamics

What disappointed you about The History of Science?

It is not a History of Science. It is a loose survey of philosophy and history in the hopes of justifying Shermer's personal Cliodynamics.

What was most disappointing about Michael Shermer’s story?

It is false advertising at best. I enjoy Michael Shermer's discussions and books on science, but this is not that.

Any additional comments?

If you want to hear a convoluted philosophical diatribe with a pseudo intellectual bend then download and listen......or you could spend the $60 that this "course" costs and head to your local bar. You may not find what you're looking for there either, but at least you might have a good time.....plus, you may have something more interesting to talk about

ideologue

Wow, I am sorry that I wasted a credit on this. I thought I was buying a survey of the History of Science. Instead, half the lectures are ruminations on economic theory - cursory at best and academically dishonest at worst. Marx is dismissed as a literary hack and inept buffoon, while apparently the sun shines out of Ayn Rand's butt. Discussion of Hegel sounds like an undergraduate book report copied sloppily from the Wikipedia. Much time is devoted to the sound-poem made by Shermer's shifting papers to find the long dry and unconnected-to-lecture quote he would like to read you. Thoroughly avoids discussion of, say, empiricist experiments during the Enlightenment. Even discussion of Locke is more about Economics and social theory than science. Perhaps this product has been packaged incorrectly as History of Science? Judging from class participation (barely audible) he was performing these lectures at an old age home. Constant deference too, to his (graduate advisor's (?) opinion. Nice moment when he says hello to his mom and dad. I KNOW you can find better FREE downloadable lectures on the HoS from the Berkeley or MIT sites because I have downloaded them myself.

Professor???

This is not worth the time or money. Poorly organized, broken by many extraneous interruptions, read from out-of-date notes, and given by a "professor" who is no more an academic than a high school student. I was completely disappointed and unhappy with this book and amazed that the Audible description was so inaccurate. If I could get my money back, I would.

A truly awful book.

This book wasn’t for you, but who do you think might enjoy it more?

Someone who truly hates people of faith and enjoys hearing people of faith ridiculed. If that's you, by all means get this one.

What do you think your next listen will be?

I know it will not be anything by this fellow.

How could the performance have been better?

It would be better if he spent more time on the history of science and less time riduculing faith. It would be even better if he got the science right! (At one point he refers to a light-year as a unit of time! Anyone as self-important as this dude ought to at least know that a light-year is a unit of distance.) Also, he laughs at his own jokes, and has endless verbal ticks, um, err, uhh. He is extremely impressed with himself and how witty he percieves himself to be.

If you could play editor, what scene or scenes would you have cut from The History of Science?

The whole deal is a bad scene.

Any additional comments?

This is truly one of the very worst things I have ever gotten from Audible. I am definitely returning it. It is just unbelievably bad.