Nonsense on Stilts

How to Tell Science from Bunk

By: Massimo Pigliucci

Narrated by: Jay Russell

Recent polls suggest that fewer than 40 per cent of Americans believe in Darwin's theory of evolution, despite it being one of science's best-established findings. More and more parents are refusing to vaccinate their children for fear it causes autism, though this link has been consistently disproved. And about 40 per cent of Americans believe that the threat of global warming is exaggerated, despite near consensus in the scientific community that manmade climate change is real.

Why do people believe bunk? And what causes them to embrace such pseudoscientific beliefs and practices? Noted skeptic Massimo Pigliucci sets out to separate the fact from the fantasy in this entertaining exploration of the nature of science, the borderlands of fringe science, and - borrowing a famous phrase from philosopher Jeremy Bentham - the nonsense on stilts.

Presenting case studies on a number of controversial topics, Pigliucci cuts through the ambiguity surrounding science to look more closely at how science is conducted, how it is disseminated, how it is interpreted, and what it means to our society. The result is in many ways a "taxonomy of bunk" that explores the intersection of science and culture at large.

No one - not the public intellectuals in the culture wars between defenders and detractors of science nor the believers of pseudoscience themselves - is spared Pigliucci's incisive analysis. In the end, Nonsense on Stilts is a timely reminder of the need to maintain a line between expertise and assumption. Broad in scope and implication, it is also ultimately a captivating guide for the intelligent citizen who wishes to make up her own mind while navigating the perilous debates that will affect the future of our planet.

NOTE: Some editorial changes to the original text have been made with the author’s approval.

©2010 The University of Chicago (P)2010 Audible, Inc.

Critic reviews

"How can we decide what counts as science? That is the central question of this brilliant book, which ought to be required reading for, well, everyone." (New Scientist)

"Jay Russell's excellent narration guides listeners through the skeptic's arguments, even when Pigliucci bogs down in scientific language. Russell delivers the author's passion for his subject with some sarcasm or anger but, overall, maintains his role as a reasoned guide." (AudioFile)

well-done intro in scientific thinking

a good listen for getting into the debate between science and pseudo science that nourishes the appetite for more thinking. it is partly rather anecdotal, but a well-founded book. the discussion of feyerabend would have needed slightly more substance and I missed lakatos, but great overall! the main point, to distinguish from pseudo science in an easily accessible way, was nicely done.

A good philosophical discussion on science.

What did you like best about Nonsense on Stilts? What did you like least?

I rather enjoy Massimo's writings and thoughts and this book reads much like his discussions with Julia and others. However Massimo does sometimes need somebody to keep him "on track" at times as he has a tendency to wander. Many topics are introduced and then "we'll come back to that later in this book." It can be difficult to keep track! But overall I'm quite happy to listen to Massimo wax philosophic on the topic of pseudoscience.

Would you recommend Nonsense on Stilts to your friends? Why or why not?

Yes - if I had friends who would like a philosophical discourse on the nature of science...

Who would you have cast as narrator instead of Jay Russell?

Massimo! But failing that Mike Chamberlain would have been better.

Was Nonsense on Stilts worth the listening time?

Absolutely.

Any additional comments?

The narrator mispronounces a lot of words and some equations (e.g. "two times ten-twenty-three" rather than "two times ten TO THE 23" for scientific notation, and "chumsky" for "chomsky" which just sounds odd to me). Overall I felt the narrator could have done a lot better.

Part 2 is worth the entire book

If it was based on the first part alone, I would have been very disappointed with my purchase, but like I said, part 2 makes it worthwhile.

Excellent and superb book

I enjoyed listening to this audio book. The narration is excellent! If you love science, you will love listening to this book. I highly recommend it. The author talks about things like philosophy and science, how come scientists can predict the outcome of an experiment but they can't predict the future, history - things you never knew about Galileo and other interesting figures, and much more behind the scenes of science. Pseudoscience just doesn't cut it, and you'll find out why. Funny. Factual. You'll love it.

Interesting yet flawed

I thought this was a very interesting book. However in my opinion there is one major flaw. There is a distinct lack of objectivity in his book to the point of distraction.

I wish Dr Pigliucci would have toned down his obvious loathing of Christianity. I'm a Christian but I'm not saying this because I disagree with him. In fact I agree with his views on evolution. But his acrimony against Creationists was just distracting. He seemed compelled to make snide remarks against them at every turn; even in areas having nothing to do with evolution.

He also seemed very convinced about the "truth" of so called Man made Global warming. But his evidence was no better than that of the Global warming Deniers. I found it particularly galling how he listed various denier claims and simply labeled them as Myths. As if that were enough to settle the issue? For example He claims that the warming effects of heat islands caused by cities are a myth. But just last month Jan 2013 the University of California, San Diego stated that urban heat island do in fact increase the heat of faraway rural places. What else may he be wrong about in this area?He also claims that the majority of scientists in general and climate scientists in particular feel there is no doubt about human caused Global Warming. The funny thing is that the deniers also claim that the majority of scientists, feel that the issue is not settled! so who do I believe?

But enough negatives. If you filter out the obviously politically nonsense on stilts that Dr Pigliucci puts forward. What you are left with is a fascinating look at what science is and what it is not. I was particularly intrigued by his discussion on Pseudoscience! All in all a very entertaining and educational work!

Balderdash! Rubbish! Hooey! Identification Guide

Massimo Pigliucci's "Nonsense on Stilts: How to tell Science from Bunk" (2010) is a surprisingly in-depth history and analysis of critical thinking and scientific philosophy. It's surprising because a catchy title like "Nonsense on Stilts" implies a light, anecdotal read, perhaps with some pithy but shallow arguments to throw at earnest intelligent designers or creationists; or suggestions for explaining why, no matter what your friends say, you don't want to pick someone to date based on their "sign". I didn't expect a near screed about the difference between pseudoscience and actual science; a thorough but one-sided analysis of postmodernism criticism; or the history of philosophy and scientific philosophy. Those were all here, and more.

(Confession: until I read this book, I didn't know there was a difference between creationists and intelligent designerists. Or whatever the ID folks call themselves. And my understanding of postmodernism was limited to architecture I don't particularly appreciate.)

Listening to "Nonsense" was a little bit like overhearing half of a really impassioned debate on some issues. Pigliucci mentions some particular pseudoscientists he takes issue with, which actually lends those individuals and their arguments some credence. I'm very much a lay person when it comes to philosophy, and I had never even heard of the views those outsiders claim have merit.

One of Pigliucci's better known targets in general is Mayim Bialik, PhD, brilliant neuroscientist with a wide following. She is an example of someone who is an expert in one field who believes she's an expert in another field - but falls dangerously short. Having Bialik opine about autism and vaccines is like having Neil de Grasse Tyson, PhD, offer an opinion about trade patterns and location of economic activities. Sure, de Grasse Tyson is brilliant and admired, but he's not the economist Paul Krugman. Where Pigliucci falls very short is suggesting that theories deserve short shrift because the proponent is popular. Bialik's theories don't deserve more credence because she's got a fan base but as Hedy Lamarr's pioneering work in frequency skipping technology proved, a screen presence and scientific thought are not mutually exclusive. Bialik's theories about homeopathic medicine must be disregarded, though, because, when subjected to scientific proof, they fail utterly.

"Nonsense" did help me understand why some people refuse to 'believe' basic and widely accepted theories like evolution and global warming. It's a failure of logical reasoning, an inability to think scientifically. That problem can be fixed - if the problem is recognized.

The book was a bit of an unstructured slog and I had it several months before I was able to listen my way through the whole thing. But it's Audible, I had a choice to listen or return - and, you know what? I'm glad I listened.

[If this review helped, please press YES. Thanks!]

Perhaps not to listen but to study

Would you listen to Nonsense on Stilts again? Why?

No, I wouldn't. My mistake. This book is quite good if you like science thought, aca Richard Dawkins, S. Jay Gould and many others. But it doesn't taste as entertainment to be listen, perhaps I would have enjoyed much more if I could have underlined many passages. But then I am from the pre-Cloud generation, or the paper generation.

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

Never, too much to digest in one sititng

Forget the title; this is a seriously good work.

Where does Nonsense on Stilts rank among all the audiobooks you’ve listened to so far?

This is by far the best book on the topic I have come across. Accessible but dense with meticulous research and history, it is a joy to listen to.

What did you like best about this story?

It is a fascinating journey citing work of great scientists and philosophers. It is clear yet rich, and offers new, and well justified, perspectives on a few well known historical exemplars.

What does Jay Russell bring to the story that you wouldn’t experience if you just read the book?

The maintenance of enthusiasm, the tone and the pace all work nicely with the story.

If you could give Nonsense on Stilts a new subtitle, what would it be?

I'd change the title. I nearly did not buy this as the first part of the title sound a tad 'silly' to me. That would have been a big mistake. "How to Tell Science from Bunk" would do it.

Any additional comments?

Thoroughly recommend. Particularly if you are keen to hear some history of science in the argument. Don't expect a 'how to' manual. Think of it as excellent background needed to inform your thinking which will in turn assist you in determining "How to Tell Science from Bunk".

Good and detailed content, tolerable narration

As for the book itself, I concur with what others have said: a very detailed, compelling, and for the most part well-written account of the boundaries of science (as opposed to pseudoscience and emerging knowledge) with excellent accounts of specific topics like evolution vs intelligent design, various pseudo-scientific claims, etc. The author can be a bit dry or overly-lengthy in places, but that is the exception rather than the rule. Pigliucci does not pull his punches in defence of the scientific consensus on evolution, climate change, etc., which may come off as closed-minded for those who disagree with his stances.


As for the narrator... I'm afraid that you'll find a lot better ones on Audible, but for me it wasn't a consistent distraction. Notable mistakes include once saying "physics" rather than "psychics" in Ch. 2, which was actually funny in the context, and mispronouncing the name of well-known figure Noam Chomsky as "Noah Chumsky". It seems like someone should have caught those, but then I don't know much about the editing process that goes into these audiobooks.

With that qualification, highly recommended.

Excellent guide

This is a must read for anyone interested in science or philosophy of science. Pigliucci covers the topic of science vs pseudoscience thoroughly, and brings up many excellent points about the importance of skepticism.