Synopses & Reviews
The human sciences in the English-speaking world have been in a state of crisis since the Second World War. The battle between champions of hard-core scientific standards and supporters of a more humanistic, interpretive approach has been fought to a stalemate. Joel Isaac seeks to throw these contemporary disputes into much-needed historical relief. In
Working Knowledge he explores how influential thinkers in the twentieth century's middle decades understood the relations among science, knowledge, and the empirical study of human affairs.
For a number of these thinkers, questions about what kinds of knowledge the human sciences could produce did not rest on grand ideological gestures toward "science" and "objectivity" but were linked to the ways in which knowledge was created and taught in laboratories and seminar rooms. Isaac places special emphasis on the practical, local manifestations of their complex theoretical ideas. In the case of Percy Williams Bridgman, Talcott Parsons, B. F. Skinner, W. V. O. Quine, and Thomas Kuhn, the institutional milieu in which they constructed their models of scientific practice was Harvard University. Isaac delineates the role the "Harvard complex" played in fostering connections between epistemological discourse and the practice of science. Operating alongside but apart from traditional departments were special seminars, interfaculty discussion groups, and non-professionalized societies and teaching programs that shaped thinking in sociology, psychology, anthropology, philosophy, science studies, and management science. In tracing this culture of inquiry in the human sciences, Isaac offers intellectual history at its most expansive.
Review
An altogether extraordinary book, a literate and erudite work which is sure to be a classic. Samuel Moyn, Columbia University
Review
A major breakthrough in American intellectual history, Working Knowledge illustrates the great value of the study of past debates to the future of the human sciences. A brilliant historian of twentieth-century American philosophy, Joel Isaac has written a literate and erudite work that is sure to be a classic. Those who read it will find their understanding of American intellectual life transformed. Samuel Moyn, Columbia University
Review
Joel Isaac deftly balances contextualist intellectual history with science studies and the sociology of knowledge in this bracing account of the human sciences. Examining crucial incubators (the Pareto Circle, the Society of Fellows), tools (the case method, operationalism, behaviorism, logical empiricism), and pioneers (Talcott Parsons, B. F. Skinner, W. V. O. Quine, T. S. Kuhn, among many others), Isaac masterfully illuminates the practices engineered in Harvard's "interstitial academy." All historians and social scientists--even those allergic to positivism--will find in Working Knowledge a feast for the mind. James Kloppenberg, Harvard University
Review
This is the forgotten story of how collaborative projects for teaching and research changed the face of American social sciences forever. Isaac's novel and brilliantly argued account of how Kuhn's radical Structure of Scientific Revolutions matured in this matrix will be news to almost every reader. Ian Hacking, University of Toronto
Review
Joel Isaac's Working Knowledge is intellectual history at its best. Isaac's subject is the development of several of the human sciences (psychology, sociology, anthropology, history of science) at Harvard University between 1920 and 1960. But as Isaac makes clear, this is more than a story of disciplinary expansion; as the social sciences took root at America's most prestigious university, so did a distinctive view of the epistemological underpinnings of social-scientific inquiry. Given both the centrality of Harvard in the twentieth-century academic world and the importance of many of the figures at the center of this shift--James Bryant Conant, Thomas Kuhn, Talcott Parsons, W. V. Quine, and B. F. Skinner, among others--Working Knowledge is a local study of broad implication and interest. Robert Westbrook
Review
Unlike physics, chemistry and biology, which took on their modern forms in the nineteenth century, the social sciences coalesced only during the twentieth. The tale of their consolidation, rise and subsequent slide is often narrated as a clash of ideologies: scientific versus humanistic. In Working Knowledge, historian Joel Isaac reveals how institutional circumstances shaped the field. He does so by putting its pioneers, including sociologist Robert K. Merton, psychologist B. F. Skinner and philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn back into the contexts in which they learned their crafts. He explores Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where each spent formative periods. Isaac documents brilliantly how they made their ways on the margins of departments. Elders of the university aimed to restrict specialization, so rising fields such as psychology and sociology were pursued in informal, interdisciplinary groups. Isaac's elegant study shows how debates over method spring from efforts to embed new types of inquiry in the classroom. Bookforum
Review
Isaac presents a far-ranging, groundbreaking, cogent, and intellectually stimulating account of the making of the 'human sciences' during the middle years of the 20th century. The work exemplifies the best traditions of the history, philosophy, and social studies of the social sciences and humanities. David Kaiser - Nature
Review
and#8220;Broadly revelatory. . . . The authors show how dangerous our behavioral scientists (and by implication their human and social science kin) might have been, co-opted as they were into the military and political decision-making in crisis situations just as physicists were co-opted into the construction of the bomb.and#8221;
Review
andldquo;This is an important book, one that should be read not just by historians of science but by anyone interested in the unique intellectual culture of Cold War America. In this context, reason was redefined, reduced, and simplified into a rule-governed thingandmdash;a seemingly universal technology for making choices in an uncertain world. This is a brilliant insight, and the authors carry its illumination into a range of fields, from game theory and operations research to studies of heuristics and biases in individuals and decision making in groups, from the lab and the andlsquo;situation roomandrsquo; to the wilds of Washington policy making.andrdquo;
Review
andldquo;The inhuman assumptions of the postwar human sciences form the problematic for this fascinating book. If not quite a
fons et origo, the Cold War arms race appears here as the uniquely disturbing frame for a wide-ranging campaign to extirpate irrationality by implementing strict rules of human reasoning.andrdquo;
Review
and#8220;In the wake of World War II, a generation of self-proclaimed and#8216;action intellectualsand#8217; fought to save the world from nuclear Armageddon. They nearly destroyed it. This extraordinary book explains how and why a generation of American social scientists reconceived human reason as algorithmic rationalityand#8212;and how, when they did, they delivered us into a world that remains anything but rational. If youand#8217;ve ever wondered where Dr. Strangelove was born, you need look no further.and#8221;
Review
andldquo;Traversing territory from Micronesia to Berlin, from Kant to Kantorovich to Schelling, from psychology to economics, How Reason Almost Lost Its Mind offers novel insights about a whole way of thinking.and#160;Moving beyond discipline-by-discipline studies, this all-star team of scholars sets the standard for new histories of American intellectual life and the vexed question of andlsquo;Cold War thought.andrsquo;andrdquo;
Review
and#8220;Cohen-Coleand#8217;s fascinating new book The Open Mind tells the story of liberal tolerance since World War II, examining how an ideal of open-mindedness was deliberately cultivated in psychology, pedagogy, and social science. Exposing all the contradictions of liberalism, Cohen-Cole has written a highly illuminating prehistory of the muddles and riddles of contemporary political rhetoric.and#8221;
Review
and#8220;Cohen-Coleand#8217;s book not only offers a fascinating glimpse into the development of mid-century psychology and cognitive science but also shows the deep connections among what was happening in what might otherwise be considered separate social and political spaces that include laboratories, classrooms, cocktail parties, conferences, academic departments, and various physical and textual loci of political and social engagement. It is exceptionally clear in its narrative structure, prose style, and argument, and it offers a fresh perspective on how we understand the co-creation of science and society in Cold War America.and#8221;
Review
and#8220;In this fascinating book, Jamie Cohen-Cole illustrates the surprisingly strong relations among conceptions of the human mind, models of the academy, and images of the ideal American citizen, as well as the ultimate fragility of these relations in the face of disruptive political forces.and#8221;
Review
and#8220;The Open Mind is an elegant and important book that makes a major contribution to rethinking the Cold War and its many legacies. Jamie Cohen-Cole has written a prismatic history, one that reflects the academic disciplines, the institutions of higher education and their funders, and the social and intellectual networks of its principle figures as they shaped Cold War politics and education policy. And it even has a chapter on and#8216;Man: A Course of Studyand#8217; (MACOS), a subject I have puzzled over since the fifth grade. Meticulously researched and argued, the narrative is compelling, surprising, and refreshingly free of conventional wisdom about the period. As we come to question the self-evident value of open-mindedness in the process of seeing it historicized, Cohen-Cole allows us to see our own values and habits of thought in a new way.and#8221;
Review
and#8220;Charting the political and psychological resonance of and#8216;the open mindand#8217; in the postwar United States, Jamie Cohen-Cole himself opens up wholly new ways of conceiving the relationship of the human sciences to public culture. His compelling account of the ways intellectuals brought the democratic citizen, the scholarly self, and the normative human into alignment in this era fundamentally alters what we know about the and#8216;liberal consensusand#8217;: both how it was knit together and how it unraveled. Deeply original and provocative, The Open Mind reveals how thinking about thinking changed, and why it matteredand#8212;for the academy, for science, and for American political culture.and#8221;
Review
and#8220;Who could be against an open mind? In this lucid and humane book, Jamie Cohen-Cole shows how psychologists tried to model Americans on themselvesand#8212;as autonomous, creative, experimental scientists. Ultimately, however, their subjects kicked back. A salutary reminder of the limits to the authority of science in postwar America.and#8221;
Review
and#8220;Anyone who wants to know about American democracy in the postwar era, and the special place of psychology within it, will profit enormously from reading Cohen-Coleand#8217;s excellent study.and#8221;
Review
"Paul Erickson has written a vital book. Game theory has been a critical part of the social, mathematical, and biological sciences for several decades. It has also seeped into the popular imagination. Yet until now no one has tracked the theory's odyssey across the disciplines, or explained its peculiar appeal and adaptability. Treating game theory as both tool and ideology, The World the Game Theorists Madeand#160;thrillingly fills out this story. Perhaps most strikingly, Erickson shows how game theory has survived despite its repeated failure to fulfill the highest hopes of its exponents. This is an outstanding and sure-to-be influential study of twentieth-century science and social thought."
Review
"As intellectual history, Cohen-Cole's broadly researched, closely argued study does not provide easy reading. But the attention it demands is worthwhile for its important, fresh outlook on significant developments during the Cold War era. Highly recommended."
Review
andquot;The authors do an excellent job of probing debates about the meaning, possibilities, and limits of rationality between the 1940s and the 1970s. . . . This masterly book makes a crucial contribution to understanding of Cold War thought, opens many new avenues for further research, and raises important questions about the durability of Cold War thinking in contemporary American social science.andquot;
Review
andquot;The authors of How Reason Almost Lost Its Mind have made a particularly insightful contribution by showing how and#39;rationalityand#39; has a time and a place; by laying bare its historical contingency, they have taken and#39;rationalityand#39; off its methodological pedestal. . . . In this sense, this kind of scholarship empowers us as humans when we are confronted with the institutional authority of the social sciences.andquot;
Review
andldquo;Whereas the literature in game theory is vast, critical studies of its philosophy and history are scarce. The World the Game Theorists Made narrates the early development and dissemination of game theory, from von Neumann and Morgensternandrsquo;s Theory of Games and Economic Behavior onward, displaying thorough knowledge of the primary texts and novel insights into the theoryandrsquo;s idiosyncratic development. The field of game theory has met its match in Ericksonandrsquo;s steady unraveling of the threads of the intricate tapestry its legacy now represents.andrdquo;
Review
andldquo;This is the first work I am aware of that treats the history of game theory as a whole, rather than restricting itself to game theory in a specific discipline. In light of the highly interdisciplinary nature of game theory (just look at the schedule for the Game Theory World Congress!), this represents an obvious hole in the literature, one that The World the Game Theorists Made is poised to fill.andrdquo;
Review
andquot;A dream team of historians of science and technology.andquot;
Review
andquot;Through six roughly chronological chapters, the authors demonstrate that this austere, antihumanistic concept of rationality underpinned the work of a far-flung and heterogeneous group of scholars pursing a truly dizzying variety of research programs. . . . How Reason Almost Lost Its Mind advances a provocative argument about a period of American social science that is now attracting increasing and well-justified attention. Historians of post war social science will certainly read this book with profit, as will scholars of the history of thought and, indeed, more generally of scientific practice in the United States.andquot;
Synopsis
Isaac explores how influential thinkers in the mid-twentieth century understood the relations among science, knowledge, and the empirical study of human affairs. He places special emphasis on the practical, local manifestations of their complex theoretical ideas, particularly the institutional milieu of Harvard University.
Synopsis
Finalist, 2013 S-USIH Book Award, Society for U.S. Intellectual History
Synopsis
2012 Gladstone Prize, Royal Historical Society
Synopsis
In the United States at the height of the Cold War, roughly between the end of World War II and the early 1980s, a new project of redefining rationality commanded the attention of sharp minds, powerful politicians, wealthy foundations, and top military brass. Its home was the human sciencesandmdash;psychology, sociology, political science, and economics, among othersandmdash;and its participants enlisted in an intellectual campaign to figure out what rationality should mean and how it could be deployed.and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;How Reason Almost Lost Its Mind brings to life the peopleandmdash;Herbert Simon, Oskar Morgenstern, Herman Kahn, Anatol Rapoport, Thomas Schelling, and many othersandmdash;and places, including the RAND Corporation, the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, the Cowles Commission for Research and Economics, and the Council on Foreign Relations, that played a key role in putting forth a andldquo;Cold War rationality.andrdquo; Decision makers harnessed this picture of rationalityandmdash;optimizing, formal, algorithmic, and mechanicalandmdash;in their quest to understand phenomena as diverse as economic transactions, biological evolution, political elections, international relations, and military strategy. The authors chronicle and illuminate what it meant to be rational in the age of nuclear brinkmanship.
Synopsis
The Open Mind chronicles the development and promulgation of a scientific vision of the rational, creative, and autonomous self, demonstrating how this self became a defining feature of Cold War culture. Jamie Cohen-Cole illustrates how from 1945 to 1965 policy makers and social critics used the idea of an open-minded human nature to advance centrist politics. They reshaped intellectual culture and instigated nationwide educational reform that promoted more open, and indeed more human, minds. The new field of cognitive science was central to this project, as it used popular support for open-mindedness to overthrow the then-dominant behaviorist view that the mind either could not be studied scientifically or did not exist. Cognitive science also underwrote the political implications of the open mind by treating it as the essential feature of human nature. and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160; and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160; While the open mind unified America in the first two decades after World War II, between 1965 and 1975 battles over the open mind fractured American culture as the ties between political centrism and the scientific account of human nature began to unravel. During the late 1960s, feminists and the New Left repurposed Cold War era psychological tools to redefine open-mindedness as a characteristic of left-wing politics. As a result, once-liberal intellectuals became neoconservative, and in the early 1970s, struggles against open-mindedness gave energy and purpose to the right wing.
Synopsis
In recent decades game theoryandmdash;the mathematics of rational decision-making by interacting individualsandmdash;has assumed a central place in our understanding of capitalist markets, the evolution of social behavior in animals, and even the ethics of altruism and fairness in human beings. With game theoryandrsquo;s ubiquity, however, has come a great deal of misunderstanding. Critics of the contemporary social sciences view it as part of an unwelcome trend toward the marginalization of historicist and interpretive styles of inquiry, and many accuse its proponents of presenting a thin and empirically dubious view of human choice.
and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;
The World the Game Theorists Made seeks to explain the ascendency of game theory, focusing on the poorly understood period between the publication of John von Neumann and Oscar Morgensternandrsquo;s seminal Theory of Games and Economic Behavior in 1944 and the theoryandrsquo;s revival in economics in the 1980s. Drawing on a diverse collection of institutional archives, personal correspondence and papers, and interviews, Paul Erickson shows how game theory offered social scientists, biologists, military strategists, and others a common, flexible language that could facilitate wide-ranging thought and debate on some of the most critical issues of the day.
About the Author
Paul Erickson is assistant professor of history and science in society at Wesleyan University.
Judy L. Klein is professor of economics at Mary Baldwin College.
Rebecca Lemov is associate professor of the history of science at Harvard University.
Thomas Sturm is a Ramandoacute;n y Cajal Research Professor in the Department of Philosophy at the Autonomous University of Barcelona.
Michael D. Gordin is professor of the history of science at Princeton University.
Table of Contents
IntroductionThe American MindChapter 1. Democratic Minds for a Complex SocietyChapter 2. The Creative AmericanThe Academic MindChapter 3. Interdisciplinarity as a Virtueand#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;Chapter 4. The Academy as Model of AmericaThe Human MindChapter 5. Scientists as the Model of Human NatureChapter 6. Instituting Cognitive Science
Chapter 7. Cognitive Theory and the Making of Liberal AmericansThe Divided MindChapter 8. A Fractured Politics of Human NatureConclusion. The History of the Open MindAcknowledgmentsNotesReferences
Index