a book
Critical Mass
Philip Ball · 2006 · 520 pages
Are there any "laws of nature" that influence the ways in which humans behave and organize themselves? In the seventeenth century, tired of the civil war ravaging England, Thomas Hobbes decided that he would work out what kind of government was needed for a stable society. His approach was based not on utopian wishful thinking but rather on Galileo's mechanics to construct a theory of government from first principles. His solution is unappealing to today's society, yet Hobbes had sparked a new way of thinking about human behavior in looking for the "scientific" rules of society.
Adam Smith, Immanuel Kant, Auguste Comte, and John Stuart Mill pursued this idea from different political perspectives. Little by little, however, social and political philosophy abandoned a "scientific" approach. Today, physics is enjoying a revival in the social, political and economic sciences. Ball shows how much we can understand of human behavior when we cease to try to predict and analyze the behavior of individuals and instead look to the impact of individual decisions-whether in circumstances of cooperation or conflict-can have on our laws, institutions and customs.
Lively and compelling, "Critical Mass" is the first book to bring these new ideas together and to show how they fit within the broader historical context of a rational search for better ways to live.
Adam Smith, Immanuel Kant, Auguste Comte, and John Stuart Mill pursued this idea from different political perspectives. Little by little, however, social and political philosophy abandoned a "scientific" approach. Today, physics is enjoying a revival in the social, political and economic sciences. Ball shows how much we can understand of human behavior when we cease to try to predict and analyze the behavior of individuals and instead look to the impact of individual decisions-whether in circumstances of cooperation or conflict-can have on our laws, institutions and customs.
Lively and compelling, "Critical Mass" is the first book to bring these new ideas together and to show how they fit within the broader historical context of a rational search for better ways to live.
recommended by 3 people
sourced from public statements
Nassim Taleb
“I have just read three “popular science” books that summarize the research in complex systems: Mark Buchanan’s Ubiquity, Philip Ball’s Critical Mass, and Paul Ormerod’s Why Most Things Fail. These three authors present the world of social science as full of power laws, a view with which I most certainly agree. They also claim that there is universality of many of these phenomena, that there is a wonderful similarity between various processes in nature and the behavior of social groups, which I agree with. They back their studies with the various theories on networks and show the wonderful correspondence between the so-called critical phenomena in natural science and the self-organization of social groups. They bring together processes that generate avalanches, social contagions, and what they call informational cascades, which I agree with. Universality is one of the reasons physicists find power laws associated with critical points particularly interesting. There are many situations, both in dynamical systems theory and statistical mechanics, where many of the properties of the dynamics around critical points are independent of the details of the underlying dynamical system. The exponent at the critical point may be the same for many systems in the same group, even though many other aspects of the system are different. I almost agree with this notion of universality. Finally, all three authors encourage us to apply techniques from statistical physics, avoiding econometrics and Gaussian-style nonscalable distributions like the plague, and I couldn’t agree more. But all three authors, by producing, or promoting precision, fall into the trap of not differentiating between the forward and the backward processes (between the problem and the inverse problem)—to me, the greatest scientific and epistemological sin. They are not alone; nearly everyone who works with data but doesn’t make decisions on the basis of these data tends to be guilty of the same sin, a variation of the narrative fallacy. In the absence of a feedback process you look at models and think that they confirm reality. I believe in the ideas of these three books, but not in the way they are being used—and certainly not with the precision the authors ascribe to them. As a matter of fact, complexity theory should make us more suspicious of scientific claims of precise models of reality. It does not make all the swans white; that is predictable: it makes them gray, and only gray.”
Mike Shellenberger
“@NitramNosirrag @Forbes Tell you what. Go read the best book on the subject, Critical Masses. Then come back and tell me if you think my characterization of the best-available history is wrong. Okay? Otherwise, by not discussing the evidence, you are trolling”↗
