Michael Strevens could have written a straightforward history of the scientific method. This easily could have been a dense and dull book. Instead, Strevens draws us in by asking us provocative questions. He then takes us along on the adventure of discovering the answers in a series of intriguing and varied anecdotes. Even when discussing familiar names, he chooses stories we haven't heard before and casts a new light on things we thought we knew. Along the way, he provides clear, concise explanations of complex concepts.

In an era when the media -- and dinner table conversations -- can easily have you questioning whether scientists are to be trusted, Strevens restores our faith in the scientific method.

Thanks, NetGalley, authors, and publishers, for the opportunity to review this work of art on science history, philosophy, and, as a matter of fact, knowledge generation principles.

This is a fundamental work on science philosophy & history, providing insights on powers propelling & determining scientific research and scientific idea generation, as well as powers that are challenging and stopping us, human scientists ( with all our human flows and ways of thinking).
In this work, the author presents the main and widely accepted scientific rules that are used for falsification and/or acceptance of the hypothesis, represents two main ways of scientific thinking and roles, that scientists ( and their minds) play in global academia, and does an amazing job equally accepting and rejecting both.

Science, being a "brainchild" of certain people, is certainly influenced by the era when it is conducted, by social, economical, political, intellectual, moral views and ideas of the era, and, certainly, by moral, social, and very personal desires of scientists.

Science is never in the vacuum, it is very much influenced by social and (very) personal factors, and these social and personal powers can greatly propel and at the same time just stop the progress of science, even for millennia...

As scientists, we need to accept and objectify science as much as possible, our personal feelings, hence ideas towards certain outcomes can make us very biased and imagine all scientists just follow one paradigm and be closed to an alternate idea, only because it is not yet giving all the explanation we want. On the other hand, we may waste a huge amount of time and resources researching hypotheses that may answer one question and yet leave all the others open...

Science is very human and follows the same principles, as human behavior.
It is biased, it may be very irrational at times, but it is the only way for us to generate knowledge.

Needless to say, this is a definitely 5-star read for me. The amount of research and accessibility for the researches in all academical fields, language, and logical reasoning and transitions, humor (the proposal image of two scientists ) made this book an exceptional material for both students of academia, who are doing their first steps in the research world, as well as established researches, as a kind reminder to look on their work from above. I am going to use this in my classes of history of psychological research as a mandatory read, as well as my small research group.

If possible, please share a copy of this book upon printing, I'd definitely treasure it in my library.