The first few chapters I read in this book “Critical Mass” by Philip Ball, really amazed me with their unusual high level of ‘informedness’ the author displays. A scientist from the realm of real hard-nosed physics, Ball possesses rational, straight forward academic discipline as well as a very riveting way of writing things down. Besides the thorough and knowledgeable impression he gives in his amazing book, he also has a very pleasant sense of humour.
A very revealing quote Ball uses in his book – taken from a professor originating from India – is the following: “If an economist behaves like a good scientist, he will reincarnate as a physicist. If he doesn’t, he will reincarnate as a sociologist.” Well, having said that, Ball does show what his opinion on social scientists is and how well he “appreciates” their methods. Being one of those social scientists myself, or at least trained in their mysteries, I vaguely feel like I’ve been taken for a ride.
But, since I grew up amongst the real hard-core stuff that all my friends and house mates from long ago were learning at the (poly-technical) university here in Delft, I can take a little abuse from these people. Hence my ability to look through the sometimes blatant cynicism that shines through Ball’s narrative. He doesn’t like social scientists, because – I suspect – he doesn’t really consider them to be scientists.
Hmm, I think we are scientists, although indeed our academic title suggests that we are “artists”.
The book is definitely worth reading. It makes a very interesting connection between the real physical world, where substances, networks, vapours and atoms seem to follow certain laws which appear to be equally suited to describe phenomena in the social world of human interaction. That is, the world of the stock exchange, elections of representatives, the diffusion of opinions through groups and the spreading of political preferences as well as formation of businesses, the dynamics of globalisation, etc.. They are described in terms of “phase-transitions” and “power laws” and within frameworks like game theory and thermodynamics. No need to be scared away by this; the book is very readable and accessible.
For me the main lesson learned was the revelation that the normal distribution or bell curve, used by “us” sociologists to describe everything and all we see, is maybe not the best basis on which one comes to real understanding of the world of people around us, or of their way of clustering themselves or their ideas. I will keep my eyes open for new directions to think in; maybe for catastrophic paradigm shifts even… I am open for change.
