- Paperback: 464 pages
- Publisher: Vintage (1 Jan 2009)
- Language English
- ISBN-10: 0099281937
- ISBN-13: 978-0099281931
- Product Dimensions: 19.6 x 13 x 3.2 cm
- Average Customer Review: 3.4 out of 5 stars See all reviews (7 customer reviews)
- Amazon Bestsellers Rank: 435,986 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
Sex, Science And Profits
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle .
Learn more
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Did you know you can trade in your old books for an Amazon.co.uk Gift Card to spend on the things you want? Plus, get an extra £5 Gift Certificate when you trade in books worth £10 or more before June 30, 2012. Visit the Books Trade-In Store for more details. |
Product details |
More About the Author
Product Description
Review
'Sparky, wide-ranging book' --Sunday Telegraph
`Kealey's gallop through capitalism, sociology, history, economics and science is a stimulating and splendid read' --The Times
`Kealey's gallop through capitalism, sociology, history, economics and science is a stimulating and splendid read' --The Times
Review
`A gloriously idiosyncratic work'
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organise and find favourite items. |
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful
Riddled with mistakes and flawed arguments but an interesting contribution to the debate
18 April 2009
Format:Paperback
This book builds upon the authors previous work looking at how science is funded. The author is the vice-chancellor of Buckingham University one of the very few private universities in the UK. So as you would expect given this position his argument is that science is better funded privately than by public funds.
His presentation is very biased and there are numerous mistakes in the text and in the facts and examples he uses. His worst mistake is confusing science with technology as applied science is something very different to the theory, but he is right in some cases that theory follows practice rather than the other way around as contended by governments. He is also right that funding academic science often gives poor results compared to industrial funding but that is the nature of academia which is much less focused especially towards short term goals.
So in the end I think he provides an interesting set of opinions and with more careful presentation of the facts and less emphasis on trying to sell the book (sex has nothing to do with it except for some very tangential and artificial points) then he might find more supporters for his argument.
His presentation is very biased and there are numerous mistakes in the text and in the facts and examples he uses. His worst mistake is confusing science with technology as applied science is something very different to the theory, but he is right in some cases that theory follows practice rather than the other way around as contended by governments. He is also right that funding academic science often gives poor results compared to industrial funding but that is the nature of academia which is much less focused especially towards short term goals.
So in the end I think he provides an interesting set of opinions and with more careful presentation of the facts and less emphasis on trying to sell the book (sex has nothing to do with it except for some very tangential and artificial points) then he might find more supporters for his argument.
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
I like reading about sex, have a passing interest in science, and who doesn't like to turn a profit now and then? So I thought this might be a book for me. Turned out to be a long tract against the public funding of scientific research and in praise of private and voluntary funding of R&D. It asserts the primacy of technology over 'pure' science, the victory of Adam Smith over Francis Bacon. No sex then, but I read it through to the end anyway. The romp through the history of science (from prehistory to modern times), and the funding of science in particular, was entertaining enough. Other reviewers, no doubt more erudite than me, have said that Kealey's arguments are flawed, and that many of his facts are not in fact facts. I even spotted one or two mistakes myself, which does suggest that those other reviewers are right. Never mind; this was an interesting book. Am I wiser and better informed for having read it? Who knows? How many stars will I give it? Well, no-one else has given it three, so here goes...
8 of 12 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
One starts this book thinking it will be a well researched and well argued historical analysis, but soon it becomes apparent the author is more interested in pushing his views that private enterprise is good and government action bad. That would be acceptable were it not for the fact that he skews the evidence, ignores or minimises those items that would undermine his cause and avoids difficult questions.
For example, the author praises the rise of the Dutch Republic in the 17th century as an example of the success of laissez faire policies, but the Dutch decline through the 18th century is dismissed as "they were invaded". True, but not till 1795, by which time the Dutch Republic was a shadow of its former self. As the Dutch had followed the same laissez faire policies through the 18th century decline, it would have been interesting to analyse why the results were so different during the second hundred years. No such luck though.
The credit crunch inevitably causes some of the assumptions the author is working with to be more critically examined, and that too undermines his approach
I would have welcomed a thorough analysis of science and markets, this book though isn't that.
For example, the author praises the rise of the Dutch Republic in the 17th century as an example of the success of laissez faire policies, but the Dutch decline through the 18th century is dismissed as "they were invaded". True, but not till 1795, by which time the Dutch Republic was a shadow of its former self. As the Dutch had followed the same laissez faire policies through the 18th century decline, it would have been interesting to analyse why the results were so different during the second hundred years. No such luck though.
The credit crunch inevitably causes some of the assumptions the author is working with to be more critically examined, and that too undermines his approach
I would have welcomed a thorough analysis of science and markets, this book though isn't that.
Would you like to see more reviews about this item?
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
Most Recent Customer Reviews
Interesting Perspective
A great antidote to the prevailing orthodox views of science, particularly as it is percieved in europe. Read more
Published on 5 Nov 2009 by Benjamin P. Ford
Fascinating insight into the mind of Terence Kealey
As other reviewers have pointed out, this book has factual misrepresentations aplenty. There's also a key problem of logic at the heart of Kealey's text. Read more
Published on 22 July 2009 by Mr. M. W. Hilton
Hugely entertained and informed
I thoroughly enjoyed this romp through the history of scientific development, its paymasters both public, private and the financially disinterested amateur scientists who have... Read more
Published on 3 Mar 2009 by P. Scrivener
Compulsory reading for politicians and University management
This is an excellent book that argues magnificently the reality of the economics of scientific research. Read more
Published on 13 Nov 2008 by Jorge Oliveira
Listmania!
|
|
Look for similar items by category
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
- I am the Author, and I want to comment on my book.
- I am the Publisher, and I want to comment on this book.
|
