Beach Haven

Bibliography
Howe, Joshua P. 2014. Behind the Curve: Science and the Politics of Global Warming. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press.
 
Review by Michael Beach
​
There are two curves that give reference to the title of this book. The first was developed by Charles David Keeling in 1958. This was his projection linking increased carbon dioxide levels measured in the atmosphere with increased temperatures globally. As the book notes, much of the science of what today is called climate change is connected in one way or another with that original dataset and its resulting graphical curve. Politically, being behind the curve in this sense relates to actions taken or deferred by various national and international organizations.

The other curve Joshua Howe is more focused on, is about the assumptions that are made within the scientific community. Essentially, many scientists find data such as that developed by Keeling, then share that data assuming it will speak for itself and everyone will recognize the need to act. This thinking is linear in that science ‘discovers’, society ‘accepts’ and technology ‘enables’ some sort of course correction. Instead what the science community finds is that unless the political discussion happens throughout, or even if it does, the data will seldom ‘speak for itself’. In fact, much of the data has been called into question by all sorts of communities, professional and societal. The fact that scientists must form consensus on issues such as global climate change brings pause to the non-scientific. To some, consensus means not all scientists, and it also means not proven. To those connected with science, consensus has always been a part of how facts are established.

In fact, Howe points out how this relationship within the science industry, and between science and the community at large, is a long held tension that has always existed. He argues that science as a community should accept a need for contextual social influence and communication to help ‘sell’ findings. Limiting findings to just the ‘facts’ of research data is not likely to get the sort of outcomes science advocates hope for. The controversies created by the case of the Keeling curve and climate change is a good example of how science and society as a whole need to find ways to co-produce information from the facts of data. Howe notes that in some ways the science community has come to learn this lesson, yet stumbles still happen. One need only look at recent controversies over COVID-19, shutdowns, masks, and vaccines to see how the tension still exists. 
​

Bibliography
Fujii, Lee Ann. 2018. Interviewing in Social Science Research: A Relational Approach. New York, London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
 
Review by Michael Beach
​
In the discipline of social science, the ability to conduct effective interviews of research subjects is a must. If any sort of validity can be given to research findings then some form of objective data extracted through interviews is one tool. Another is using data from interviews to help drive the direction of research. This book is a how-to from selecting research candidates, building relationships, and strategic approaches in the actual interviews, to how to interpret data.

In particular, the section of ferreting out data patterns I found particularly helpful. There are all sorts of ways to preset questions, but unless one is using a set survey tool, topics will present themselves that were not imagined ahead of time by either party in an interview. Applying an ethical approach to coding the unanticipated information is perhaps more important than information one is specifically seeking. Many a research project has changed course mid-stream as these kind of sociological interviews get conducted by researchers.

​At the end of the book there are four sample research approaches that were a part of real research projects. They are diverse. One is about a Rwandan prisoner, another is on a multi-generation resident of Maryland thought of as an ‘old timer’. The third example interview is of a clergyman in Northern Ireland who had lived through the sectarian violence with Britain. Finally, the attitudes of a sex worker attempting rehab in California wraps up the book, and the examples.

Bibliography
​Churchill, Winston S. 1948. The Second World War: The Gathering Storm. Cambridge: Houghton Mifflin Company.
 
This is one volume in a series written by the former British Prime Minister. I only have this particular book and not the entire series. This is a personal memoir, and as such depicts events either within his direct experience as he recalls them, or related events as he came to understand them through others. Churchill directly shares in appendices copies of documents that he refers to such as letters, official transcripts, or published government forms. Comparing his earlier works on his experiences during WWI, in this case he claims more authoritative views. “I am perhaps the only man who has passed through both the two supreme cataclysms of recorded history in high Cabinet office. Whereas, however, in the First World War I filled responsible but subordinate posts, I was for more than five years in the second struggle with Germany the Head of His Majesty’s Government. I write, therefore, from a different standpoint and with more authority than was possible in my earlier books” (Churchill 1948, iii).

The period covered begins in the immediate aftermath of WWI in which Churchill makes the argument that the seeds of WWII were sown between 1919 and 1929 by the victors of the first war by how they set treaties and requirements heaped on the German government. He shares some of the warning signs missed as political unrest in Germany grew, and complacency in both the UK and France did also. Often Churchill as a member of the Cabinet or Parliament was ignored or countered when he would share concerns coming to him through intelligence reports or other means. Given the assumed military size differences between the French and German armies, any aggression was thought to be easily quelled. Yet, as Hitler took power, a warning in itself, he was also building military equipment and growing the ranks of the army and navy. All of this was in violation of the imposed treaties, and many in allied authority simply did not believe it was really happening until it was too late.

For a casual history consumer like me, there was much I didn’t know about how events flowed. In particular I found the section on Hitler’s excuses for moving against Austria particularly foreboding. One can take the rhetoric of Hitler about ethnically German people in Austria, or the need to defend Germany against western or Russian aggression and shift the time and circumstance to today. Recent justification by Vladimir Putin as concerning the Ukraine are pretty much word for word the arguments used by Hitler in his eventual advancements in Austria, then eastern Europe. Serendipitously, I happen to be going through this portion of the book as Russia’s aggression in the Ukraine was beginning, and the similarities were uncanny.

This is an insightful historical work by someone who had a great deal to do with how things went. One can question any sort of memoire for accuracy, or for subjectivity, but then again, the same can be said no matter the historical author even when the work is not autobiographical.
​

Bibliography
​Heilbron, J. L. (1996). The Dilemmas of an Upright Man: Max Planck and the Fortunes of German Science. Cambridge & London: Harvard University Press.
 
Max Planck was a contemporary of Albert Einstein. They knew each other and worked on projects together in their respective roles in the physics community in Germany before WWI and in the interwar years. Plank provided some theoretical ideas that helped Einstein work out his special and general theories of relativity. Unlike Einstein, and many other of their colleagues, Planck was not Jewish. As Hitler’s Nazi party came into power, Germany’s scientists had to decide. Would they continue in Germany and serve ‘from the inside’, making the best they could of it? Would they stay and risk whatever the Nazis decided about their fate? Would they leave Germany and continue to pursue their scientific careers elsewhere? How vocal should they become, supportive of the new regime, publicly opposed it, or stay relatively quiet about political issues. Einstein left for America and became very vocal about his opposition to Hitler’s government. Plank decided to stay in Germany and continue his scientific leadership role.

For Planck, his decision, he said afterwards, was not to support Hitler, but to try to preserve German science and scientist from within. He encouraged Jewish scientists to remain in Germany as WWII approached. He also worked to shield them from policies that would put their positions and their lives at risk. Eventually he failed at both. In fact, he was even pressured to be openly supportive of Hitler’s government. On one occasion he attended a public meeting about the German scientific industry. It’s not clear how much pressure was placed on him, but he attended dressed in Nazi regalia and joined the crowd at the end in the Nazi salute, visibly mouthing a “Heil Hitler” as the meeting closed.
​
German science, at least in the field of quantum mechanics, we often at the forefront of advancement. During WWII, theoretical lost to practical weapons creation. Most of the best minds left Germany so the field suffered even more from a sort of ‘brain drain’. Heilbron concludes, “Planck remained in office largely from a sense of duty owed not to individuals, certainly not to the state, but to the institutions of German science he served” (Heilbron, 1996, p. 207). Others noted by Heilbron thought of Planck more as a coward, or worse, a sympathizer. Perhaps his motivation is impossible to know for sure, even by Planck himself, yet his actions are unavoidable. In attempting to maintain status quo while everything was changing around him, his own standing and Germany’s as well were permanently damaged in the 1930s and 1940s. Nations that benefited by the emigration of German scientists are still world scientific leaders, especially in quantum mechanics.

Bibliography
​Cronon, W. (1991). Nature's Metropolis: Chicago and the Great West. New York & London: W.W. Norton & Company.
 
In this work, William Cronon examines various boundary topics between human environments and ‘nature’. In reality, what today many people think of as natural spaces are really a human-made environments that differ from other human-made environments. For Cronon, Chicago and its markets, driven by the farms of the Midwest and transportation networks formed between them, are simply parts of a larger socio-economic system. “Although this book takes Chicago and the Great West as its immediate focus, its broader ambition is to explore century-old economic and ecological transformations that have continued to affect all of North America and the rest of the world besides” (Cronon, 1991, p. xvi).

The initial incentive to ‘tame’ the land through displacement of indigenous flora, fauna, and people in favor of European style farming was for local economic value. As Chicago began to transform first it’s ports, then the rivers through canal creation, and finally overland transport through a network of railroads, its leaders also increased a financial hold over farmers and competing cities through a number of cooperatives. The Chicago Board of Trade helped solidify definitions of grain quality types and associated monetary values. Similar pricing and quality controls expanded to beef and pork. By becoming the de facto ‘middle man’ between farmers and large markets along the east coast of the US, many of Chicago’s business leaders, and seedier elements as well, grew very wealthy. Tactics such as downgrading quality ratings when paying farmers, then mixing grains to claim higher quality when selling to large markets were common place.

​William Cronon’s work is a story of boundary definition. Wilderness and farm, rural and urban, buyer and seller, controller and controlled, these are the sort of boundaries explored in the book. In each case, human invention (technical or sociological) define the metamorphosis from what one might call ‘nature’ to what today is more about ‘human nature’. Cronon calls the former ‘first nature’ and the human created version ‘second nature’. 

BibliographyHughes, T. P. (1983). Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society, 1880-1930. Baltimore & London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
 
Electrical power and ‘modern’ society are often linked in many ways. Areas of the world not using electricity may be seen as ‘backward’. Even in the U.S. these days there is much debate about movement from fossil fuels to sustainable electricity for more parts of technology. Many Americans would be lost if they had to go 24 hours without access to their electrically powered cell phones and computers. There are plenty who might argue the opposite, that ever-changing technology, at least communications technology, tends to isolate us more than bring us together. Where electricity prevails, time has less meaning. Any activity can be lighted at any time of the day. Sleep patterns also tend to be altered in societies with electrification. For example, despite changing daylight hours throughout the year people will likely keep the same work schedule. Students may be accustomed to all-night cramming sessions the night before a big test. Many people fall asleep to the musings of late-night comics. Before electrification, circadian rhythms tended to be primarily timed with the rising and setting of the sun.

In this work, Thomas Hughes shares historical events as electrical power was harnessed from the early days of Edison and Tesla. He pays attention to expansion of electrical technology within the United State, particularly in Chicago and California. He further reviews electrification in London and Berlin. Hughes also comments on how electricity and society affected each other in these four cities. Students of technology and society will recognize these topics. Technology transfer refers to the spread of ideas and invention beyond national borders. He looks at critical problems in advancing technology, sometimes referred to as reverse salients. Hughes examines social conflict and its affect on electrification. This includes personal rivalries among inventors, as well as companies attempting to grow within each of the cities examined. Technological momentum and the effects of World War I (both advancing and inhibiting electrical growth) offer an interesting take. Many scientists and technologists continued to share information despite the war, though others were prohibited. Berlin, for example, was somewhat isolated from others during the war, but war needs caused the German government to channel funds into electrical power for manufacturing of weapons and munitions. Unlike World War II, there was little air bombardment beyond the front lines, so industry by and large remained intact.

Thomas Hughes does not discuss electrification in eastern or southern societies. Perhaps this is a function of scale. One can only put so much into a book. Perhaps it is because he feels these particular cities are similar enough to point to socio-technical trends that perhaps would be different in other societies. Even among the focus histories he has included, there are significant differences as noted in his work. For example, each of the histories show different political and economic contexts. As a result, electrical power generation and transmission grew in very different ways. Standardization was difficult in some locations and centrally managed in others. By looking at the growth of a single technology, Hughes is able to expose the co-production (even co-dependence) of these societies and electricity.
​

Bibliography
Monsarrat, Nicholas. 1951. The Cruel Sea. Harmondsworth (England): Penguin Books Ltd.
 
The reader is treated to a fictional depiction of an English corvette during World War II. It begins with the ship still in the yard with it’s first captain, Lieutenant-Commander George Ericson, arriving. Monsarrat introduces the crew as members come and go. The interactions, personal circumstances and levels of sea-going experience all add to the drama as they slowly meld into a successful ship’s company. The corvette was a sort of small escort vessel designed to protect merchant convoys from German U-boats. They were hastily constructed with no air-conditioning and limited heating. Crew accommodations were spartan and armament limited.

The name of the specific ship from the story was the HMS Compass Rose. Along the way, the crew and ship engage a number of U-boats and sink several. They also conduct a number of rescue operations where the Germans are successful in sinking ships leaving many sailors in the water. All the action takes place in the Atlantic theater. In the end, Compass Rose is lost to a German torpedo. Not all the crew survive, and some survivors suffer what today would be called PTSD.

​The book is a good mix between personal conflict, team building, high-stakes warfare, and character retrospection. There was at least one full-length motion picture based on the book. 

BibliographyKaiser, David. 2011. How the Hippies Saved Physics: Science, Counterculture, and the Quantum Revival. New York, London: W.W. Norton & Company.

Reviewed by Michael Beach 

The title of this book makes the topic quite clear. David Kaiser compares the state of theoretical physics post World War II (particular the 1960s and 1970s) as compared with pre-war science. In particular he looks at a group that formed primarily at UC Berkeley known as the Fundamental Fysics Group (sic). Members of this at first informal group were generally trained in traditional experimental physics, but longed for the days of European salons of the 1920s and 1930s that included the likes of Albert Einstein and Michael Polanyi where one was more free to speculate.

The author makes a central point how in order to advance understanding, “a critical mass of researchers needed to embrace a different mode of doing physics” (Kaiser 2011, xiv). “They had to incorporate philosophy, interpretation, even bald speculation back into their daily routine” (Ibid.).

Members of the Berkeley interlocutors embraced ‘new age’ ideas around eastern mysticism, spiritualism, and the like. They looked to link physics with human psychological power through use of experimental drugs, among other empirical approaches. They called this sort of ‘science’ after the Greek letter psi with a goal “to plumb the foundations of quantum mechanics in search of explanations for parapsychological… phenomena: extrasensory perception, psychokinesis, the works” (Kaiser 2011, 65).

So how did the group of mostly grad students and dropouts employ ‘drugs, sex, and rock-n-roll’ to ‘revive’ theoretical physics? After WWII, most practitioners of physics were focused on empiricism and number crunching. The work was not appealing to the book’s documented physicists who fancied themselves above what Thomas Kuhn called ‘normal science’. They were looking to create revolutionary ideas in the tradition of Einstein. Their group discussions often revolved around ‘Bell’s Theorem’ that postulates how “quantum mechanics worked impeccably ‘for all practical purposes’” (Kaiser 2011, 25). Success of a number of them waxed and waned. Some of them produced very popular books. There was a great deal of focus on mental performances by the likes of Uri Geller. As the hype gained more notoriety, a number of debunkers emerged. One of the primary members, Ira Einhorn emerged as a sort of leader and guru to the group, and to non-physicists who shared similar interests. Unfortunately, Einhorn spiraled downward. He eventually killed his girlfriend and fled to Europe to avoid prosecution. Physics as an industry began to be less funded, and psi topics in particular became eschewed. Members of the group who did not get wealthy on their earlier popular books were forced to seek other ways to make a living including taking on everyday jobs.
​
Kaiser notes how more recently a sort of resurgence of theoretical physics is upon us, and some members of the Fundamental Fysics Group have reemerged in the field. In general, they are avoiding the link with parapsychology. Event he idea of ‘psi’ has changed. The group no longer exists, but some of its early participants redubbed a more modern version as “PSI: Physical Sciences Institute” (Kaiser 2011, 241). One might recognize later versions of physics speculation in the form of ideas like chaos theory or the more recently debated string theory. 

Bibliography:

Sarewitz, Daniel. 1996. Frontiers of Illusion: Science, Technology, and the Politics of Progress. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Temple University Press.

Review by Michael Beach

Vannevar Bush was the head of the Office of Scientific Research and Development for presidents Roosevelt and Truman. He was charged to write a vision for the United States of post World War II science and technology. There had been debate over how much or little US government and military participation (read funding and oversight) was necessary in the pending peace time. The result was a report published under the name Science, the Endless Frontier. The report made a number of overarching suggestions. These assertions included that science brings ‘indefinite benefit', and that research is best left ‘unfettered’. Bush also argued that the scientific community holds itself accountable given it’s processes, and such accountability then gives science trusted authoritativeness. He concludes that if all this effort were sufficiently funded and left alone, that knowledge produced through science represents a form of endless frontier that is ever-advancing.

Daniel Sarewitz wrote the book referenced in this review as a sort of critique to the Bush report. He frames each of Bush’s major points as ‘myths’. He links them with Thomas Kuhn's 'paradigm' concept. From that perspective, those engaged in 'normal science’ would naturally question those seeking to overthrow that paradigm. After arguing against each Bush-myth, Sarewitz proposes in several chapters that science is a sort of marketplace and a “surrogate for social action” (Sarewitz 1996, 141). He finished the book making the case for a “new mythology” (Sarewitz 1996, 169). In his version of science, he stresses five ‘policy suggestions’ in lieu of Vannevar Bush’s policies. Sarewitz calls for expanding diversity among the ranks of scientists and an integration of what he calls “the human element” (Sarewitz 1996, 173). He goes on to suggest the need for more “honest brokers” (Sarewitz 1996) in science as described by Roger Pielke in his book by that name.

Here’s a link to my review of Pielke’s book:
http://bhaven.org/reviews/the-honest-broker

Sarewitz completes his policy suggestions by advocating a sort of scientific democracy that includes a worldwide R&D community. Bush might have found Sarewitz heretical to put social science on par with 'hard' science in terms of priority. Yet, what part of science does not involve the social? I assert that one can understand neither except in light of the other.