Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:56:47.298Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Frank Sulloway's Born to Rebel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Miriam Solomon
Miriam Solomon*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Temple University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Born to Rebel (Sulloway 1996) is an innovative and important work with much to say to philosophers of science, as well as historians and sociologists of science. Sulloway uses, successfully, quantitative statistical methods that others have despaired of using to analyze the complexities of historical change. In particular, he investigates scientific decision-making during scientific controversies with a multivariate analysis. The goal is to discern, precisely, the contribution of factors such as religious belief, social class, age, years of education, nationality, sex and personality.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 65 , Issue 1 , March 1998 , pp. 171 - 181
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Send requests for reprints to the author, Department of Philosophy, Temple University 022–32, Philadelphia, PA 19122.

‡

I am grateful to Jonathan Adler, Gary Ebbs, David Hull, and Bob Richardson for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this review.

References

Bowler, P.J. (1983), The Eclipse of Darwinism. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Bowler, P.J. (1988), The Non-Darwinian Revolution. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, I.B. (1985), Revolution in Science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Collins, H. and Pinch, T. (1993), The Golem: What Everyone Should Know About Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Earman, J. and Glymour, C. (1980), “Relativity and Eclipses: The British Eclipse Expeditions of 1919 and their Predecessors”, Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 11, 1: 49–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giere, R.N. (1988), Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, D.L. (1988), Science as a Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitcher, P. (1993), The Advancement of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nisbett, R. and Ross, L. (1980), Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. Englewood Cliffs: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Solomon, M. (1992), “Scientific Rationality and Human Reasoning”, Philosophy of Science 59, 3: 439–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solomon, M. (1994a), “Social Empiricism”, Noûs 28, 3: 325–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solomon, M. (1994b), “A More Social Epistemology”, in Schmitt, F.F. (ed.), Socializing Epistemology. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 217–233.Google Scholar
Sulloway, Frank J. (1996), Born to Rebel: Birth Order, Family Dynamics, and Creative Lives. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Young, R.M. (1985), Darwin's Metaphor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar