What do you think?
Rate this book
Failure Why Science Is So Successful
The general public has a glorified view of the pursuit of scientific research. However, the idealized perception of science as a rule-based, methodical system for accumulating facts could not be further from the truth. Modern science involves the idiosyncratic, often bumbling search forunderstanding in uncharted territories, full of wrong turns, false findings, and the occasional remarkable success.In his sequel to Ignorance (Oxford University Press, 2012), Stuart Firestein shows us that the scientific enterprise is riddled with mistakes and errors - and that this is a good thing! Why Science Is So Successful delves into the origins of scientific research as a process that relies upontrial and error, one which inevitably results in a hefty dose of failure. In fact, scientists throughout history have relied on failure to guide their research, viewing mistakes as a necessary part of the process. Citing both historical and contemporary examples, Firestein strips away the distortedview of science as infallible to provide the public with a rare, inside glimpse of the messy realities of the scientific process.An insider's view of how science is actually carried out, this book will delight anyone with an interest in science, from aspiring scientists to curious general readers. Accessible and entertaining, Failure illuminates the greatest and most productive adventure of human history, with all themissteps along the way.
Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 2015
68 people are currently reading
1072 people want to read
About the author
Stuart Firestein
3 books58 followersStuart Firestein is an American neuroscientiest and biologist.
After earning his Ph.D. in neurobiology, Firestein was a researcher at Yale Medical School, then joined Columbia University in 1993. At the Columbia University Department of Biological Sciences, Firestein is now studying the sense of smell.
Dedicated to promoting the accessibility of science to a public audience, Dr. Firestein seeks to reach broader audiences through nonscientific writing, public appearances, and his support of science in the arts.
After earning his Ph.D. in neurobiology, Firestein was a researcher at Yale Medical School, then joined Columbia University in 1993. At the Columbia University Department of Biological Sciences, Firestein is now studying the sense of smell.
Dedicated to promoting the accessibility of science to a public audience, Dr. Firestein seeks to reach broader audiences through nonscientific writing, public appearances, and his support of science in the arts.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews
September 18, 2016
For me, this was a failure, which I suppose the author will take as a compliment.
The writing is clunky, e.g. "Because science does, after all, have a lot of facts. For all my ranting against the overly hallowed attitude toward facts, in this book and my earlier one, Ignorance, the truth is that science has facts, lots of them." While some points are interesting, too many are painfully obvious. The author states that the book is not for scientists because they will find nothing new here. But non-scientists who buy science books probably also know that science has lots of facts.
Most troubling is that the author's thinking is often non-scientific. For example, there's a chapter on reforming science education. This is a great opportunity to illustrate the main principle he's trying to explain: science is iterative and builds on objective evidence. So you might think he would start by providing an objective definition of successful science education and then reviewing the literature on what works or not. Nope. Instead we get a rambling essay about art and whatnot. But science has lots of facts, remember? And it builds on previous failures, right? Arrgh!!
A much better way to understand about "failure" in science is the following book, which describes the decades long process of "discovering" global warming.
The writing is clunky, e.g. "Because science does, after all, have a lot of facts. For all my ranting against the overly hallowed attitude toward facts, in this book and my earlier one, Ignorance, the truth is that science has facts, lots of them." While some points are interesting, too many are painfully obvious. The author states that the book is not for scientists because they will find nothing new here. But non-scientists who buy science books probably also know that science has lots of facts.
Most troubling is that the author's thinking is often non-scientific. For example, there's a chapter on reforming science education. This is a great opportunity to illustrate the main principle he's trying to explain: science is iterative and builds on objective evidence. So you might think he would start by providing an objective definition of successful science education and then reviewing the literature on what works or not. Nope. Instead we get a rambling essay about art and whatnot. But science has lots of facts, remember? And it builds on previous failures, right? Arrgh!!
A much better way to understand about "failure" in science is the following book, which describes the decades long process of "discovering" global warming.
December 1, 2015
I am a big fan of Stuart Firestein's previous book Ignorance. It does a superb job of demolishing the traditional picture (as seen from outside) of scientific endeavour. As the author makes clear, facts may sometimes be interesting, but the driver behind real science is far more likely to be exploring our delicious areas of ignorance.
This meant I had huge expectations for this follow-up title, and it's entirely possible that this anticipation resulted in an unnecessary feeling of being let down. But in all honesty I think it was also due to the writing.
What Firestein sets out to do is to build up failure as the second parallel pillar to ignorance as a driver of science. Now, there's lots of good stuff in here about the importance of failure to science, and how too much of it is overlooked as it is very valuable, and how Popper was right but also wrong and so on and so forth, but it all seems flung together with little idea of structure and comes across as a failure (see what I did) if you consider the prime role of a book is to communicate effectively.
As one example of many, we hear about the importance of failure in the scientific method, but that there isn't really a scientific method, what scientists do is just pootle about, except they don't really, and though they clearly gain from failure they can't be said to learn from failure because that's too like what those horrid business people say. It's all far too woffly and unstructured. That might be intentional, as a metaphor for the nature of science, but if it is, it really gets in the way of providing an effective book.
There is also a surreal moment (on page 170 in case you want to dip into a copy and enjoy it), when Firestein lumps genetically modified crops and nuclear energy in with astrology and alternative medicines as 'completely non-scientific practices.' I read this three times and still can't make sense of it.
So there is some really interesting material here, and it is probably a must-have for Firestein fans like me, but it is hard work to extract those gems.
This meant I had huge expectations for this follow-up title, and it's entirely possible that this anticipation resulted in an unnecessary feeling of being let down. But in all honesty I think it was also due to the writing.
What Firestein sets out to do is to build up failure as the second parallel pillar to ignorance as a driver of science. Now, there's lots of good stuff in here about the importance of failure to science, and how too much of it is overlooked as it is very valuable, and how Popper was right but also wrong and so on and so forth, but it all seems flung together with little idea of structure and comes across as a failure (see what I did) if you consider the prime role of a book is to communicate effectively.
As one example of many, we hear about the importance of failure in the scientific method, but that there isn't really a scientific method, what scientists do is just pootle about, except they don't really, and though they clearly gain from failure they can't be said to learn from failure because that's too like what those horrid business people say. It's all far too woffly and unstructured. That might be intentional, as a metaphor for the nature of science, but if it is, it really gets in the way of providing an effective book.
There is also a surreal moment (on page 170 in case you want to dip into a copy and enjoy it), when Firestein lumps genetically modified crops and nuclear energy in with astrology and alternative medicines as 'completely non-scientific practices.' I read this three times and still can't make sense of it.
So there is some really interesting material here, and it is probably a must-have for Firestein fans like me, but it is hard work to extract those gems.
February 2, 2020
I had read Stuart Firestein’s previous book: Ignorance. It was well written, well argued, and tempered with anger about where the sciences are at this moment in history. It struck a chord with me because the book spoke out fiercely against the prevailing psyche in academia, something that was derived by the need to publish or perish. The author made a very strong point about how this aversion is destroying the fundamentals of research and pursuit of new knowledge as well as compromise the integrity of everyone involved in science.
Indeed, Prof. Firestein is reiterating his point in this follow up. He expresses the thought that it is an absolute imperative for scientists and technologists to commit to rigorously accepting and examining our failures; he admonishes us to actively seek opportunities to create failures, and he proclaims that it is the failures that will fuel our innovation engines.
Prof. Firestein cogently argues in fifteen succinct chapters why we must seek out failures.
In those fifteen chapters, he makes the case for taking more chances, and experiencing failure. He is able to layout a very convincing case that not only is failure something from which we need to learn from; indeed, failure is something that we absolutely need to demand of our researchers and scientists in order to make advances in science.
He makes his case mostly in the pharmacological and biological world since that is his milieu in the sciences, but the knowledge and the lessons that he provides us are general in nature. The advices are something that could be applied to both applied and pure research and for things that are far broader than just the biological world.
In Chapter One, Prof. Firestein lays out the case that we are terrible at defining what failure is because of the negative nature of the word failure. He cites Gertrude Stein’s quote: “A real failure does not need an excuse. It is an end of itself.” The quote concisely defines the bad failures, the stupid silly kinds that we all do because we were negligent, and those failures that lead us somewhere interesting. The latter are the ones that we need to talk about, the ones that piques our interest, pushes and allows us to investigate further, ask better questions. Those are the ones that. that reveal surprising questions and/or gives us a chance to re-evaluate our assumptions, understanding, and biases.
In Chapter Two, he discusses the meaning of Samuel Beckett’s famous quote: “Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail Better.” Prof. Firestein goes into detail on what he thinks Fail Better means and he discusses what he thinks what we should do to Fail Better. This chapter was the one that really hooked me onto this book because I've always been fascinated by Beckett's quote. I hadn't really thought about what failing better meant until I read Prof. Firestein’s arguments. It clarified some of my thoughts on the subject, so kudos to him for allowing me to think about it and leading me to a clear definition of failing better.
In Chapters 3 and 8 Prof. Firestein goes after the scientific method. He takes out the scalpel and dissects the whole idea of how we do science, or the official written way we are supposed to do science. His willingness to take on the mythology of the scientific method, which turned him into an apostate to the temple of knowledge that is big science, is encouraging and very courageous. I think coming from somebody like Prof. Firestein, who is a respected researcher and a product of the system, adds weight to the argument and he doesn't disappoint. The two chapters are very forceful, and it shows a lot of very deeply thought out argument against the strawman that is the Scientific Method.
Chapters 4 and 5 are his argument on why failure is something that is beyond what we think it is. We usually believe that failure is something that should be ameliorated and something that should lead us to a positive result. His argument is that failure is something much beyond that, much like what Nicholas Taleb’s take about Anti-fragility. Being anti-fragile means something beyond grittiness and resilient, it means more than just being able to survive the bad fortune, it means being able to benefit and thrive when circumstances are against you. In Prof. Firestein’s argument, failure leads to attaining a higher level of understanding of what we're trying to study and it leads us to discovering heretofore unknown dynamics within our knowledge base. It is the negative result which will leads us to better and broader understanding of nature. In Chapter 5 Prof. Firestein goes into a very impassioned argument for the integrity of failure. The integrity of failure means that we are honest with our results, we are committed to intellectual honesty in our work, we are willing to broadcast our failures to our fellow researchers because we are dedicated to the advancement of science over shielding our own fragile egos and reputations.
Chapter 6 and 7 are interesting because they go into how we're teaching the future of research and scientific investigations and how we are putting a wrong public face on what scientific research truly entails. The crux of it is that teaching future scientists the scientific method as the means to do research we are handcuffing them to a mythology of what scientific investigation is, which in turn stifles broad questioning of concepts and ideas. In addition, by telling the non-scientific world that the scientific method is the dominant mode of doing research, we are building up a fictional impression in the general public of what scientists do on a daily basis, thereby mythologizing doing science.
Chapters 9, 12, 13, and 14 has Prof. Firestein going deep into his own milieu of biological and pharmacological research. The chapters were interesting because I have no background in the area, so I waded in with great interest but with scant background to really dig into what he was trying to get at, I enjoyed it but I’m not sure I got everything that I could have out of it. This failure was all on my part of not understanding.
In Chapters 10, 11, and 14, Prof. Firestein really gets going philosophically. It was great reading; it was very interesting reading. He talks about overcoming are negative connotation of what data that does not meet with our hypothesis should mean to us and how we can get over that mental obstacle. In Chapter 11 Prof. Firestein talks about Karl Poppers, a philosopher who worked exclusively in the area of understanding what science is, or how to differentiate between real science and bad science. It was a very educational chapter for me as I have always been interested in Popper's work, yet I have not read Poppers writing. Chapter 14 is where Prof. Firestein goes full force into the philosophical idea of a plurality. Most of us are devoted to a monistic belief, that there is only one single truth in this scientific world and that is just not true. In his dabbling in philosophy Prof. Firestein discovered this and he shares it with us and it was really a Tour de force chapter of writing where he takes you along with his experience in high level research and exploration; to think about what scientific reality is and about what our interpretation of reality is, what our mindset does to our scientific understanding of nature. A monistic scientific culture just doesn't ring true, given what we know now, demonstrating the principle that Prof. Firestein had argued all along: that our understand of the sciences are temporary, it lasts as long as the advent of the next discovery. The pluralistic one is so much more complete.
The book itself is a short one; although it is dense with ideas, ideas that we don't usually think about, ideas that we don't usually want to talk about, ideas that challenges our very existence as researchers and scientists. It is a fantastic read because it really does make you think about the meaning of scientific work, it challenges the closely held believe that you have regarding what you are doing. It is very healthy for people to read this; indeed, I believe it should be required reading for anyone who wants to get into the sciences, because it will change your viewpoint completely. I am reading this as an engineer, I am not a scientist so my work is somewhat different because of what my company wants me to work on and what I need to do to get the desired results, which is not strictly the pursuit of pure and unadulterated truth, but it does gives me food for thought and it admonishes me to be honest and truthful when I am confronted with failure, and I can look at failure without fear or shame.
Indeed, Prof. Firestein is reiterating his point in this follow up. He expresses the thought that it is an absolute imperative for scientists and technologists to commit to rigorously accepting and examining our failures; he admonishes us to actively seek opportunities to create failures, and he proclaims that it is the failures that will fuel our innovation engines.
Prof. Firestein cogently argues in fifteen succinct chapters why we must seek out failures.
In those fifteen chapters, he makes the case for taking more chances, and experiencing failure. He is able to layout a very convincing case that not only is failure something from which we need to learn from; indeed, failure is something that we absolutely need to demand of our researchers and scientists in order to make advances in science.
He makes his case mostly in the pharmacological and biological world since that is his milieu in the sciences, but the knowledge and the lessons that he provides us are general in nature. The advices are something that could be applied to both applied and pure research and for things that are far broader than just the biological world.
In Chapter One, Prof. Firestein lays out the case that we are terrible at defining what failure is because of the negative nature of the word failure. He cites Gertrude Stein’s quote: “A real failure does not need an excuse. It is an end of itself.” The quote concisely defines the bad failures, the stupid silly kinds that we all do because we were negligent, and those failures that lead us somewhere interesting. The latter are the ones that we need to talk about, the ones that piques our interest, pushes and allows us to investigate further, ask better questions. Those are the ones that. that reveal surprising questions and/or gives us a chance to re-evaluate our assumptions, understanding, and biases.
In Chapter Two, he discusses the meaning of Samuel Beckett’s famous quote: “Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail Better.” Prof. Firestein goes into detail on what he thinks Fail Better means and he discusses what he thinks what we should do to Fail Better. This chapter was the one that really hooked me onto this book because I've always been fascinated by Beckett's quote. I hadn't really thought about what failing better meant until I read Prof. Firestein’s arguments. It clarified some of my thoughts on the subject, so kudos to him for allowing me to think about it and leading me to a clear definition of failing better.
In Chapters 3 and 8 Prof. Firestein goes after the scientific method. He takes out the scalpel and dissects the whole idea of how we do science, or the official written way we are supposed to do science. His willingness to take on the mythology of the scientific method, which turned him into an apostate to the temple of knowledge that is big science, is encouraging and very courageous. I think coming from somebody like Prof. Firestein, who is a respected researcher and a product of the system, adds weight to the argument and he doesn't disappoint. The two chapters are very forceful, and it shows a lot of very deeply thought out argument against the strawman that is the Scientific Method.
Chapters 4 and 5 are his argument on why failure is something that is beyond what we think it is. We usually believe that failure is something that should be ameliorated and something that should lead us to a positive result. His argument is that failure is something much beyond that, much like what Nicholas Taleb’s take about Anti-fragility. Being anti-fragile means something beyond grittiness and resilient, it means more than just being able to survive the bad fortune, it means being able to benefit and thrive when circumstances are against you. In Prof. Firestein’s argument, failure leads to attaining a higher level of understanding of what we're trying to study and it leads us to discovering heretofore unknown dynamics within our knowledge base. It is the negative result which will leads us to better and broader understanding of nature. In Chapter 5 Prof. Firestein goes into a very impassioned argument for the integrity of failure. The integrity of failure means that we are honest with our results, we are committed to intellectual honesty in our work, we are willing to broadcast our failures to our fellow researchers because we are dedicated to the advancement of science over shielding our own fragile egos and reputations.
Chapter 6 and 7 are interesting because they go into how we're teaching the future of research and scientific investigations and how we are putting a wrong public face on what scientific research truly entails. The crux of it is that teaching future scientists the scientific method as the means to do research we are handcuffing them to a mythology of what scientific investigation is, which in turn stifles broad questioning of concepts and ideas. In addition, by telling the non-scientific world that the scientific method is the dominant mode of doing research, we are building up a fictional impression in the general public of what scientists do on a daily basis, thereby mythologizing doing science.
Chapters 9, 12, 13, and 14 has Prof. Firestein going deep into his own milieu of biological and pharmacological research. The chapters were interesting because I have no background in the area, so I waded in with great interest but with scant background to really dig into what he was trying to get at, I enjoyed it but I’m not sure I got everything that I could have out of it. This failure was all on my part of not understanding.
In Chapters 10, 11, and 14, Prof. Firestein really gets going philosophically. It was great reading; it was very interesting reading. He talks about overcoming are negative connotation of what data that does not meet with our hypothesis should mean to us and how we can get over that mental obstacle. In Chapter 11 Prof. Firestein talks about Karl Poppers, a philosopher who worked exclusively in the area of understanding what science is, or how to differentiate between real science and bad science. It was a very educational chapter for me as I have always been interested in Popper's work, yet I have not read Poppers writing. Chapter 14 is where Prof. Firestein goes full force into the philosophical idea of a plurality. Most of us are devoted to a monistic belief, that there is only one single truth in this scientific world and that is just not true. In his dabbling in philosophy Prof. Firestein discovered this and he shares it with us and it was really a Tour de force chapter of writing where he takes you along with his experience in high level research and exploration; to think about what scientific reality is and about what our interpretation of reality is, what our mindset does to our scientific understanding of nature. A monistic scientific culture just doesn't ring true, given what we know now, demonstrating the principle that Prof. Firestein had argued all along: that our understand of the sciences are temporary, it lasts as long as the advent of the next discovery. The pluralistic one is so much more complete.
The book itself is a short one; although it is dense with ideas, ideas that we don't usually think about, ideas that we don't usually want to talk about, ideas that challenges our very existence as researchers and scientists. It is a fantastic read because it really does make you think about the meaning of scientific work, it challenges the closely held believe that you have regarding what you are doing. It is very healthy for people to read this; indeed, I believe it should be required reading for anyone who wants to get into the sciences, because it will change your viewpoint completely. I am reading this as an engineer, I am not a scientist so my work is somewhat different because of what my company wants me to work on and what I need to do to get the desired results, which is not strictly the pursuit of pure and unadulterated truth, but it does gives me food for thought and it admonishes me to be honest and truthful when I am confronted with failure, and I can look at failure without fear or shame.
October 12, 2017
This book is fantastic! It's clearly well researched, but I also appreciate that it's much more than a scientist writing about something that fascinates him; Dr. Firestein is a wonderful author, and I think he could still make a great book even if focusing on a mediocre topic. However, what makes the book really good isn't just his writing, but the fact that the topic is anything but unimportant. It's a fascinating journey about how the contributions of failure (including accidents, ignorant theorizing, and plain "bad" luck") have helped advanced our understanding and knowledge of the laws of science. You also don't have to be a scientist to appreciate the stories and rabbit holes of history the book follows. I think it would be an interesting read for just about anyone. Definitely thought-provoking as well as entertaining.
Disclaimer: I received this book in a Goodreads giveway for promotional purposes, but this didn't consciously influence my review to any degree.
Disclaimer: I received this book in a Goodreads giveway for promotional purposes, but this didn't consciously influence my review to any degree.
April 19, 2021
While still as valuable as its prequel in addressing the need for failure in science, this volume could have used better editing. Rather rambling and disparate, with many irrelevant opinions that could have been left unsaid - mainly those against non-western science and faith, coupled with a patronizing awe that women are accomplishing things in science.
April 21, 2022
"Why is Fahrenheit a better scale than Celsius for living creatures? This is my own personal rant now, but I like it because it seems to drive almost everyone else in the world crazy. Fahrenheit is a biological temperature scale. It uses as its zero point the temperature at which blood freezes. And 100 degrees Fahrenheit is the approximate mean body temperature of mammals. So with Fahrenheit, there are 100 equal divisions in the temperature range where most of us live our lives. Celsius, on the other hand, has a zero point set at water's freezing point, and 100 degrees at its boiling point. This means that the Celsius scale has few gradations in the temperature range of living things, resulting in weather reports that are in half degrees and very often 'minus numbers'. And then, body temperature happens to be 37 degrees, an unwieldy and pesky prime number can't be evenly divided when calculating what temperature you want for some reaction. Celsius is a great scale for engineers and physicists, but for biology, give me good ol' Fahrenheit.
As I said, this is my own rant, but you can also see that it could start a useful discussion about what temperature means, and the fact that it is arbitrary but still describes a real physical condition. This is a fabulous model of how science works--from Newtonian physics, to Darwinian speciation, to Mendeleev's periodic table, to Einstein's relativity, and so on. Science can take something arbitrary and build a whole description of physical reality on it. It's a little bit like magic, which everybody knows is more fun or engaging than just the facts."
As I said, this is my own rant, but you can also see that it could start a useful discussion about what temperature means, and the fact that it is arbitrary but still describes a real physical condition. This is a fabulous model of how science works--from Newtonian physics, to Darwinian speciation, to Mendeleev's periodic table, to Einstein's relativity, and so on. Science can take something arbitrary and build a whole description of physical reality on it. It's a little bit like magic, which everybody knows is more fun or engaging than just the facts."
December 31, 2018
Not particularly profound, but a good book on science nonetheless. There aren’t many books that talk about the process of science.
Read
April 12, 2020very good, a bit abstract and intense.
August 13, 2015
Firestein makes the point that, while failure's essential role in science advancement is obvious to scientists, it is not known to the general public. So he's set out to remedy that. He makes a very good point. And then in the pursuit of a neat picture, he over-simplifies things here and there, but I can forgive him for that.
Firestein's previous book, on how ignorance drives science (title: Ignorance), was more directed at explaining science as a process to the general public. While that is his stated audience for this one as well, I felt that it would be much more useful for students of science, teachers, and practitioners of science. There's whole chapter on what's wrong with science funding these days, and while I found that great as a scientist, I can't imagine many members of the general public are going to get excited about it.
So here's my advice: read it. If the current chapter you're on doesn't thrill you, move on to the next. The chapters are independent of each other, sort of mini-essays, variations on the theme of failure in science. It is not an argument that builds cumulatively. I really like Firestein's approach to science and explaining it, and I'd recommend it to most people I know even remotely interested in science.
I got a free copy of this from Net Galley.
Firestein's previous book, on how ignorance drives science (title: Ignorance), was more directed at explaining science as a process to the general public. While that is his stated audience for this one as well, I felt that it would be much more useful for students of science, teachers, and practitioners of science. There's whole chapter on what's wrong with science funding these days, and while I found that great as a scientist, I can't imagine many members of the general public are going to get excited about it.
So here's my advice: read it. If the current chapter you're on doesn't thrill you, move on to the next. The chapters are independent of each other, sort of mini-essays, variations on the theme of failure in science. It is not an argument that builds cumulatively. I really like Firestein's approach to science and explaining it, and I'd recommend it to most people I know even remotely interested in science.
I got a free copy of this from Net Galley.
May 7, 2016
Stuart Firestein's follow-up to Ignorance, Failure, is a worthy sequel. They work together well in that one addresses, for the most part, the curiosity that comes from acknowledging one's ignorance and seeking to find answers while the other addresses the need to keep that curiosity alive through the many failures one will sustain while seeking more and better answers.
I saw a comment from another reviewer I think bears repeating, these chapters are essentially separate essays, so if the topic of one does not strike a chord with you, feel free to go to the next chapter.
While the general application in this volume has to do with science, there is a lot to learn here that will help in other areas of life and intellectual pursuit. That said, this book is still primarily to make scientific study and advancement more understandable to non-scientists. On that note Firestein rings clearly.
I would recommend this to those who enjoy learning about the process of science as well as the actual advances of science. This is both accessible and engaging so should appeal to a wide range of readers.
Reviewed from an ARC made available by the publisher via NetGalley.
I saw a comment from another reviewer I think bears repeating, these chapters are essentially separate essays, so if the topic of one does not strike a chord with you, feel free to go to the next chapter.
While the general application in this volume has to do with science, there is a lot to learn here that will help in other areas of life and intellectual pursuit. That said, this book is still primarily to make scientific study and advancement more understandable to non-scientists. On that note Firestein rings clearly.
I would recommend this to those who enjoy learning about the process of science as well as the actual advances of science. This is both accessible and engaging so should appeal to a wide range of readers.
Reviewed from an ARC made available by the publisher via NetGalley.
April 13, 2022
bilimin dogmatik olmaması ve bunun nasıl insanlığa fayda sağladığı üzerine bir eser. kitapta anlatılanlara bağlı kalmadan, aslında başarısızlığın bilimin başarısına nasıl katkı sağladığını birkaç perspektif üzerinden kendimiz de anlayabiliriz.
strateji oyunlarında haritaların karanlık bölgeleri bulunur. oyuncular olarak o bölgelere scout yollayarak, aradığımızı bulamasak bile; o bölgelere dair fikirler ediniriz. bilimin başarısızlığının faydasını bir yönüyle buna benzetebiliriz. bilmediğimiz veya sahip olmadığımız bir şey için gözlem üzerinden bir hipotez oluşturup onun peşinde bir deney yaparız, sonucunda istediğimizi buluruz ya da başarısız olsak bile artık daha az şey bilmiyor hale geliriz.
bir başka bakış açısı ise, başarısız deneyler sonucunda hedefimize ulaşamasak bile; hedeflemediğimiz farklı ve yararlı sonuçlar ortaya çıkabiliyor. bunu da tarihte kazara keşfedilmiş birçok teknolojinin varlığıyla doğrulamak mümkün. kısa bir google aramasıyla, kazara ortaya çıkmış inanılmaz sayıdaki keşfi ve icadı görmek mümkün. üstelik bu keşiflerin ne kadar farklı alanlarda olduğuna da şaşırabilirsiniz. bu gibi keşiflerin sürpriz şekilde ortaya çıkması da ilginç; çünkü üzerine düşünülen, araştırma yapılan, para ve zaman harcanan bir teknolojinin; tamamen alakasız bir araştırma sonucunda bulunması bir yönüyle de hayal kırıklığı. kitapta yazmayan bir örnek; saç dökülmesi tedavisiyle alakalı fda onaylı nadir ilaçlardan birisi olan finasteridin, aslında prostat tedavisi için bulunan bir formülün yan etkisi olması. bulunduğu tarihte saç dökülmesi tedavisi üzerine yapılan milyonlarca dolarlık ar-ge harcaması yapılmış olmasına rağmen, erkek tipi saç dökülmesi için araştırılan hiçbir formülün; farklı bir ilacın yan etkisi kadar etkili olamaması trajik. bu örneği özellikle vermemin sebebi, bu tedaviyi bulan ilaç firmasının milyarlarca dolar karlı bir işe imza atacağının herkes tarafından bilinmesi ve bu alanda harcanan olağanüstü emeğin farkında olunması.
kitapta da bahsedilen başka bir bakış açısı ise, henüz neyin keşfedildiğinin farkında olunmayan durumlar. lazer teknolojisinin de bu şekilde olduğunu kitaptan öğrenebilirsiniz. bu bakış açısının diğer yönü ise, ilerleyen zamanlarda başka araştırmalara esin kaynağı olduğu durumlar.
yazarın asıl bahsetmek istediğine ise henüz değinmedim. bilimin dogmatik olmaması, her teorinin herkes tarafından challenge edilebilmesinden kaynaklanıyor; çünkü doğruluğundan %100 emin olunulan bir teori bulunmuyor. zaman geçtikçe hatalı olduğu ya da en azından bir kısmının yanlış olduğu sayısız teori bulunuyor. örneğin newton’ın sunduğu teorilerin doğruluğunu uzun süre kabul etmiş olmamıza rağmen, bugün itibariyle “nispeten doğru” olduğunu söyleyebiliriz. ancak buradaki başarısız teorinin daha başarılı hale gelmesinde de bilimin incremental yapısı rol oynuyor.
kitapta yer alan farklı başlıklarla konuyu bağdaştıramadığım durumlar da oldu. örneğin okul müfredatları, kaynak yönetimi ya da hibe dağıtımı gibi konuların bilimin başarısızlığıyla doğrudan ilişkisini kuramadım; özellikle bu context içerisinde. bu kısımlar belki çıkarılabilirmiş. genel olarak okunmasının faydalı olacağı bir eser sunuluyor olsa da, bilim üzerine farklı kaynaklardan yararlanmış okurlar için biraz hafif bir metne sahip bana kalırsa.
strateji oyunlarında haritaların karanlık bölgeleri bulunur. oyuncular olarak o bölgelere scout yollayarak, aradığımızı bulamasak bile; o bölgelere dair fikirler ediniriz. bilimin başarısızlığının faydasını bir yönüyle buna benzetebiliriz. bilmediğimiz veya sahip olmadığımız bir şey için gözlem üzerinden bir hipotez oluşturup onun peşinde bir deney yaparız, sonucunda istediğimizi buluruz ya da başarısız olsak bile artık daha az şey bilmiyor hale geliriz.
bir başka bakış açısı ise, başarısız deneyler sonucunda hedefimize ulaşamasak bile; hedeflemediğimiz farklı ve yararlı sonuçlar ortaya çıkabiliyor. bunu da tarihte kazara keşfedilmiş birçok teknolojinin varlığıyla doğrulamak mümkün. kısa bir google aramasıyla, kazara ortaya çıkmış inanılmaz sayıdaki keşfi ve icadı görmek mümkün. üstelik bu keşiflerin ne kadar farklı alanlarda olduğuna da şaşırabilirsiniz. bu gibi keşiflerin sürpriz şekilde ortaya çıkması da ilginç; çünkü üzerine düşünülen, araştırma yapılan, para ve zaman harcanan bir teknolojinin; tamamen alakasız bir araştırma sonucunda bulunması bir yönüyle de hayal kırıklığı. kitapta yazmayan bir örnek; saç dökülmesi tedavisiyle alakalı fda onaylı nadir ilaçlardan birisi olan finasteridin, aslında prostat tedavisi için bulunan bir formülün yan etkisi olması. bulunduğu tarihte saç dökülmesi tedavisi üzerine yapılan milyonlarca dolarlık ar-ge harcaması yapılmış olmasına rağmen, erkek tipi saç dökülmesi için araştırılan hiçbir formülün; farklı bir ilacın yan etkisi kadar etkili olamaması trajik. bu örneği özellikle vermemin sebebi, bu tedaviyi bulan ilaç firmasının milyarlarca dolar karlı bir işe imza atacağının herkes tarafından bilinmesi ve bu alanda harcanan olağanüstü emeğin farkında olunması.
kitapta da bahsedilen başka bir bakış açısı ise, henüz neyin keşfedildiğinin farkında olunmayan durumlar. lazer teknolojisinin de bu şekilde olduğunu kitaptan öğrenebilirsiniz. bu bakış açısının diğer yönü ise, ilerleyen zamanlarda başka araştırmalara esin kaynağı olduğu durumlar.
yazarın asıl bahsetmek istediğine ise henüz değinmedim. bilimin dogmatik olmaması, her teorinin herkes tarafından challenge edilebilmesinden kaynaklanıyor; çünkü doğruluğundan %100 emin olunulan bir teori bulunmuyor. zaman geçtikçe hatalı olduğu ya da en azından bir kısmının yanlış olduğu sayısız teori bulunuyor. örneğin newton’ın sunduğu teorilerin doğruluğunu uzun süre kabul etmiş olmamıza rağmen, bugün itibariyle “nispeten doğru” olduğunu söyleyebiliriz. ancak buradaki başarısız teorinin daha başarılı hale gelmesinde de bilimin incremental yapısı rol oynuyor.
kitapta yer alan farklı başlıklarla konuyu bağdaştıramadığım durumlar da oldu. örneğin okul müfredatları, kaynak yönetimi ya da hibe dağıtımı gibi konuların bilimin başarısızlığıyla doğrudan ilişkisini kuramadım; özellikle bu context içerisinde. bu kısımlar belki çıkarılabilirmiş. genel olarak okunmasının faydalı olacağı bir eser sunuluyor olsa da, bilim üzerine farklı kaynaklardan yararlanmış okurlar için biraz hafif bir metne sahip bana kalırsa.
January 7, 2022
Stuart Firestein aims to make science and the scientific discussion accessible to the non-specialized public and deconstruct preconceived ideas that make us look at science and scientists as a beast of seven heads. Failure: Why Science Is So Successful, his sequel to Ignorance: How It Drives Science, is a set of short essays on the importance of failure for scientific progress.
The language is conversational, the reasoning should not be understood sequentially because you can read the chapters separately, and the unique way Firestein highlights his beliefs about science and what moves it, stands out, making his speech ultimately successful.
The Firestein thesis is built on how failure is a constant, not only on doing science but on financing, disseminating and teaching it. But it becomes even juicier when he explores his experiences and those of his colleagues. But mostly the failure (or failures) of some famous scientists, such as Newton, Edison, Einstein or Darwin, to prove science is rarely 100% right or wrong and how failure can lead to better results.
I have to stress the importance of discussing science education and the idea, mentioned for the first time in the chapter Fail Better: Advice from Samuel Beckett, that learning science should not be a memorization marathon.
In the chapter Teaching Failure, Stuart Firestein reinforces his criticism of what he calls the bulimic system of education. A teaching method that encourages students to decorate and dump the material in exams, keeping no useful knowledge for their future as citizens and professionals.
It's also important to highlight the chapter Negative Results: How To Love Your Data When It's Wrong. It addresses the mistaken belief that the publication of a scientific article represents the end of the research, with the results being perceived as absolutely correct when the truth is science is always under constant review.
Stuart Firestein argues that the publication of results is only a contribution not only to research but also to the scientific discussion. That's why the results are always presented, even if the initial theory is refuted.
It's also important to know why research replications can raise suspicions of fraud if the data are not correct or if it's not possible to replicate them. But mostly how sometimes the replication was unsuccessful just because a scientist didn't consider it necessary to report a particular step, let alone understand it as crucial to the success of his research.
A failure can be a product of different circumstances and can become a success in another era, with new technologies, techniques and perspectives, until then not available.
In short, Firestein encourages the scientific community to reflect on the effectiveness of the scientific method, the importance of failing, assuming mistakes and achieving success through corrections, that is through failing better.
The language is conversational, the reasoning should not be understood sequentially because you can read the chapters separately, and the unique way Firestein highlights his beliefs about science and what moves it, stands out, making his speech ultimately successful.
The Firestein thesis is built on how failure is a constant, not only on doing science but on financing, disseminating and teaching it. But it becomes even juicier when he explores his experiences and those of his colleagues. But mostly the failure (or failures) of some famous scientists, such as Newton, Edison, Einstein or Darwin, to prove science is rarely 100% right or wrong and how failure can lead to better results.
I have to stress the importance of discussing science education and the idea, mentioned for the first time in the chapter Fail Better: Advice from Samuel Beckett, that learning science should not be a memorization marathon.
In the chapter Teaching Failure, Stuart Firestein reinforces his criticism of what he calls the bulimic system of education. A teaching method that encourages students to decorate and dump the material in exams, keeping no useful knowledge for their future as citizens and professionals.
It's also important to highlight the chapter Negative Results: How To Love Your Data When It's Wrong. It addresses the mistaken belief that the publication of a scientific article represents the end of the research, with the results being perceived as absolutely correct when the truth is science is always under constant review.
Stuart Firestein argues that the publication of results is only a contribution not only to research but also to the scientific discussion. That's why the results are always presented, even if the initial theory is refuted.
It's also important to know why research replications can raise suspicions of fraud if the data are not correct or if it's not possible to replicate them. But mostly how sometimes the replication was unsuccessful just because a scientist didn't consider it necessary to report a particular step, let alone understand it as crucial to the success of his research.
A failure can be a product of different circumstances and can become a success in another era, with new technologies, techniques and perspectives, until then not available.
In short, Firestein encourages the scientific community to reflect on the effectiveness of the scientific method, the importance of failing, assuming mistakes and achieving success through corrections, that is through failing better.
April 11, 2025
Stuart Firestein’s Failure: Why Science Is So Successful is a brilliant, refreshing, and much-needed counterpoint to the overly romanticized image of science as a neat, linear pursuit of truth. Instead of painting researchers as infallible geniuses unlocking nature’s secrets with surgical precision, Firestein invites readers into the real laboratory world—messy, uncertain, riddled with dead ends, and yes, gloriously full of failure.
With warmth, wit, and a deep reverence for curiosity, Firestein turns the spotlight on the most misunderstood yet vital aspect of scientific progress: getting it wrong. He argues—convincingly—that it is precisely through failed hypotheses, flawed experiments, and unexpected results that science moves forward. What might seem like chaos to an outsider is, in fact, the very pulse of discovery.
As a sequel to his acclaimed Ignorance, this book continues Firestein’s mission to demystify science and celebrate its beautiful imperfections. His use of vivid historical anecdotes alongside modern scientific misfires makes the content both accessible and illuminating. Whether he’s referencing Galileo’s errors or modern-day research setbacks, Firestein’s message is clear: science thrives not in spite of failure, but because of it.
This book is a joy for anyone who’s ever been curious about how real science works—students, educators, researchers, or simply inquisitive minds. Failure doesn’t just redefine how we view scientific success; it inspires us to embrace failure in our own lives as a powerful tool for growth.
With warmth, wit, and a deep reverence for curiosity, Firestein turns the spotlight on the most misunderstood yet vital aspect of scientific progress: getting it wrong. He argues—convincingly—that it is precisely through failed hypotheses, flawed experiments, and unexpected results that science moves forward. What might seem like chaos to an outsider is, in fact, the very pulse of discovery.
As a sequel to his acclaimed Ignorance, this book continues Firestein’s mission to demystify science and celebrate its beautiful imperfections. His use of vivid historical anecdotes alongside modern scientific misfires makes the content both accessible and illuminating. Whether he’s referencing Galileo’s errors or modern-day research setbacks, Firestein’s message is clear: science thrives not in spite of failure, but because of it.
This book is a joy for anyone who’s ever been curious about how real science works—students, educators, researchers, or simply inquisitive minds. Failure doesn’t just redefine how we view scientific success; it inspires us to embrace failure in our own lives as a powerful tool for growth.
March 26, 2021
Her şeyi bildiğini iddia eden dogmatik bütün ideolojilerin aksine, Bilim insanının (veya her insanın kendi yaşamında diyebiliriz) Sabırlı, tutkusunu kaybetmeden, tekrar tekrar hatalardan, yenilgilerden, başarısızlıklardan dersler çıkararak ilerlemesi gerektiğini, bilimin tek yönteminin bu olduğunu vurguluyor. Bilim tarihinin büyük dehalarının (Newton, Einstein, Darwin...) sanki hiç yanılmadan, başarısızlık yaşamadan, yaşadıkları aydınlanma ile her şeyi bilen insanlar olarak dayatılmasına karşı bir manifesto bir nevi. Onlarında defalarca hatalı yollardan, bir çok başarısızlıktan sonra kuramlarını geliştirdiklerini; Bilimin yönteminin bu olduğunu bilim tarihinden örneklerle anlatıyor.
Güzel bir bilimsel düşünme yöntemi kitabı. Kısa, kolay ve rahat okunuyor. Tavsiye ederim.
Güzel bir bilimsel düşünme yöntemi kitabı. Kısa, kolay ve rahat okunuyor. Tavsiye ederim.
June 10, 2020
2.5 stars. It was an ok experience.
listened to the audiobook.
I wanted to listen to "ignorance" but chose this one as it is what was available from my audiobook service.
I liked watching a few of his Ted Talks and so I thought the book would be good.
It's a very casual conversation, and I'm not sure if I have any takeaways from the book.
I think the topic has great potential, and I look forward to learning where he's taken this conversation. So I'm glad he's exploring this topic, I'm just not sure this was his final take on failure.
listened to the audiobook.
I wanted to listen to "ignorance" but chose this one as it is what was available from my audiobook service.
I liked watching a few of his Ted Talks and so I thought the book would be good.
It's a very casual conversation, and I'm not sure if I have any takeaways from the book.
I think the topic has great potential, and I look forward to learning where he's taken this conversation. So I'm glad he's exploring this topic, I'm just not sure this was his final take on failure.
May 23, 2021
Although it deepens about the mechanisms of making Science - and the potential benefits of the so called "failure" - his book is incredibly easy to read. The author has a really engaging language and a positive and ambitious view on risks and Science. There is value in Pluralism and there is value in Ignorance. The so called Truth is what we should be wary about. The future depends of Failure and how it is treated.
September 3, 2025
This book is written for non-scientists, and might be best suited for young scientists or those just beginning their graduate studies. Failure in science can be unexpected and discouraging for a young scientist, and this book helps re-frame failure. As a 7th (!) year PhD student I am intimately familiar with failure and have come to anticipate it in my work. For that reason, a lot of this book felt obvious to me. But, it certainly serves its place for a different audience.
May 14, 2023
This book helped me see a valid perspective on failure in science. It had interesting views and topics that are worth exploring. My perception of science has definitely changed a bit since reading this. The book was a bit clunky and seemed to be ranting and hard to read at some parts. Some opinions in the book also would have been better left unsaid. Other than that, it gets the job done.
January 30, 2025
When I picked it up I thought the cover was catchy but never thought it would be so thought-provoking, very philosophical and on par with the theme I have been reading. A lesser author would have named it the "philosophy of science" or something like that, but I think the title works better like it is. If I could give a 4.5 or something I would.
July 27, 2019
I'm a first year PhD student studying crayfish parasites. This book was a great reminder for me that sometimes things get messed up. You fail. Data are insignificant. Organisms die for no apparent reason. But, in the end, you can still be a successful scientist.
October 9, 2021
Stellar read! This book will make you approach thinking in a more pluralistic way, and make you question many of our long-held approaches to research and science. Loved every word, and now can't wait to read Firestein's other books.
December 14, 2023
failure....that's exactly what this book was.....i mean ffs...it's self explainatory that no one wins all the time...this guy found 150 000 ways to say the same thing over and over and over...this is was an article tops...
June 6, 2017
More home runs in the first more than the last half but a worthwhile read
November 4, 2018
A little difficult to get through but worth reading. I came away with a better understanding of how science really works and how important failure is.
September 17, 2020
it was ok, some interesting thoughts about failure but not well presented adn not well organised.
January 2, 2023
The more we know the more we can know?
We often don’t yet know what we don’t know
We often don’t yet know what we don’t know
February 24, 2024
جبد وممتع
Read
June 9, 2024Enjoyable, but not as impactful as his book Ignorance.
April 27, 2018
Took me much to long to get through, but Failure gives a great history and argument for how failing is what makes Science and academia in general great. Chock full of great detail and examples.
November 7, 2015
What a fun and interesting book.
Firestein, a biologist by training and professor of biology with experience in the history and philosophy of science, investigates and argues persuasively that science, and progress in science, is a messier and less-certain endeavor that most people believe. Furthermore, he shows that progress is driven by slow and continual failure just as much as through instants of profound insight, or through serendipities accidents. As such, science is really advanced by repeated failure, and that this truth should be recognized, accepted, and embraced.
Firestein asserts that science education should not be merely “a memorization marathon,” and that science is not a body of infallible work, of immutable laws and facts. Rather, the work of science grows in “the mulch of puzzlement and of bewilderment, of skepticism and experiment.” A much needed clarity, I should think.
He lists these insights he learned about science while in graduate school:
• Questions are more important than facts
• Answer or facts are temporary, data, hypotheses(models) are provisional
• Failure happens...a lot
• Patience is a requirement; there is no substitute for time
• Occasionally you get lucky – hopefully you recognize it
• Things don’t happen in the linear or narrative way that you read about in papers or textbooks
• The smooth Arc of Discovery is a myth; science stumbles along
• If there is free food, get their early
There are very many lessons to learn and insights to be remembered from this book. My early objections, including that Firestein does not differentiate between failure in the scientific fields from failure in other fields, nor a discussion of objective versus subjective notions of failure, were mitigated by later chapters where his conception of failure is qualified. In these later chapters, he finally address the philosophical aspects of the scientific method, along with discussing Karl Popper and falsifiability, Isaiah Berlin’s “value pluralism” (as a contrast to relativism or subjectivism) and Berlin’s mental ordering of “hedgehogs” (who know one big thing) and “foxes” (who know lots of little things), and also calls Sir Francis Bacon an “empiricist” rather than a philosopher. Well, OK, scientists do not like to bow to philosophers, I understand. To me, a non-scientist lawyer with many friends in the STEM fields, and with a history of reading and enjoying philosophy, these were the most stimulating and enjoyable chapters.
However, the book did seem to have a quality of being less-than-finished, which he admits, as the chapters take on discrete topics (like science funding, science education, and pharmaceutical funding and failure), and then offer a perfunctory conclusion.
In sum, this is certainly a much-needed and illuminating milestone along his development as a public face of science, and would benefit both scientists and those who work with them.
Firestein, a biologist by training and professor of biology with experience in the history and philosophy of science, investigates and argues persuasively that science, and progress in science, is a messier and less-certain endeavor that most people believe. Furthermore, he shows that progress is driven by slow and continual failure just as much as through instants of profound insight, or through serendipities accidents. As such, science is really advanced by repeated failure, and that this truth should be recognized, accepted, and embraced.
Firestein asserts that science education should not be merely “a memorization marathon,” and that science is not a body of infallible work, of immutable laws and facts. Rather, the work of science grows in “the mulch of puzzlement and of bewilderment, of skepticism and experiment.” A much needed clarity, I should think.
He lists these insights he learned about science while in graduate school:
• Questions are more important than facts
• Answer or facts are temporary, data, hypotheses(models) are provisional
• Failure happens...a lot
• Patience is a requirement; there is no substitute for time
• Occasionally you get lucky – hopefully you recognize it
• Things don’t happen in the linear or narrative way that you read about in papers or textbooks
• The smooth Arc of Discovery is a myth; science stumbles along
• If there is free food, get their early
There are very many lessons to learn and insights to be remembered from this book. My early objections, including that Firestein does not differentiate between failure in the scientific fields from failure in other fields, nor a discussion of objective versus subjective notions of failure, were mitigated by later chapters where his conception of failure is qualified. In these later chapters, he finally address the philosophical aspects of the scientific method, along with discussing Karl Popper and falsifiability, Isaiah Berlin’s “value pluralism” (as a contrast to relativism or subjectivism) and Berlin’s mental ordering of “hedgehogs” (who know one big thing) and “foxes” (who know lots of little things), and also calls Sir Francis Bacon an “empiricist” rather than a philosopher. Well, OK, scientists do not like to bow to philosophers, I understand. To me, a non-scientist lawyer with many friends in the STEM fields, and with a history of reading and enjoying philosophy, these were the most stimulating and enjoyable chapters.
However, the book did seem to have a quality of being less-than-finished, which he admits, as the chapters take on discrete topics (like science funding, science education, and pharmaceutical funding and failure), and then offer a perfunctory conclusion.
In sum, this is certainly a much-needed and illuminating milestone along his development as a public face of science, and would benefit both scientists and those who work with them.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews