Here are 68 books that Time, Love, Memory fans have personally recommended if you like
Time, Love, Memory.
Shepherd is a community of 11,000+ authors and super readers sharing their favorite books with the world.
Shepherd is reader supported. When you buy books, we may earn an affiliate commission.
As someone more drawn to writing and literature during my college years, I was fascinated to discover that science has a history. I had once thought of science as objective—distinct from liberal arts and social science disciplines in that it consisted of facts that could be proved. I came to understand that it’s just another field of human endeavor filled with flaws like any other. Sometimes, scientists cheat, lie, favor certain facts over others, or knowingly publish false results. It can become a cultural and political battleground—and to refer to something as “pseudoscience” is like calling a work of art you don’t like “pseudo-art” or a piece of music you don’t enjoy “pseudo-music.”
Haldane was not only one of the three founders of the field of biostatistics but was notorious for his support of Lysenko as well. In fact, the story of Haldane’s supposed advocacy of Lysenkoism is much richer and more complicated than it would seem—in the end, it was more a feature of his instinct for contrarianism, inclination to doubt what others assumed to be common sense, and faith that “the universe is not only queererer than we suppose but queerer than we can suppose.”
Haldane is one of the most fascinating figures in the history of science, and his role in the Lysenko controversy is just one of the many interesting stories the author describes in seamlessly poetic prose.
J. B. S. Haldane's life was rich and strange, never short on genius or drama-from his boyhood apprenticeship to his scientist father, who first instilled in him a devotion to the scientific method; to his time in the trenches during the First World War, where he wrote his first scientific paper; to his numerous experiments on himself, including inhaling dangerous levels of carbon dioxide and drinking hydrochloric acid; to his clandestine research for the British Admiralty during the Second World War. He is best remembered as a geneticist who revolutionized our understanding of evolution, but his peers hailed him as…
As someone more drawn to writing and literature during my college years, I was fascinated to discover that science has a history. I had once thought of science as objective—distinct from liberal arts and social science disciplines in that it consisted of facts that could be proved. I came to understand that it’s just another field of human endeavor filled with flaws like any other. Sometimes, scientists cheat, lie, favor certain facts over others, or knowingly publish false results. It can become a cultural and political battleground—and to refer to something as “pseudoscience” is like calling a work of art you don’t like “pseudo-art” or a piece of music you don’t enjoy “pseudo-music.”
The phrase “politics of science” has rarely been so well-described and analyzed than in the history Wolfe recounts. Her narrative of how the belief in “scientific freedom” was utilized as a weapon of ideology in the fight against communism shows how entangled the careers of politicians and scientists became during a period of intense struggle between two competing civilizations—the USA and the USSR—during the Cold War.
The Cold War ended long ago, but the language of science and freedom continues to shape public debates over the relationship between science and politics in the United States.
Scientists like to proclaim that science knows no borders. Scientific researchers follow the evidence where it leads, their conclusions free of prejudice or ideology. But is that really the case? In Freedom's Laboratory, Audra J. Wolfe shows how these ideas were tested to their limits in the high-stakes propaganda battles of the Cold War.
Wolfe examines the role that scientists, in concert with administrators and policymakers, played in American cultural diplomacy…
As someone more drawn to writing and literature during my college years, I was fascinated to discover that science has a history. I had once thought of science as objective—distinct from liberal arts and social science disciplines in that it consisted of facts that could be proved. I came to understand that it’s just another field of human endeavor filled with flaws like any other. Sometimes, scientists cheat, lie, favor certain facts over others, or knowingly publish false results. It can become a cultural and political battleground—and to refer to something as “pseudoscience” is like calling a work of art you don’t like “pseudo-art” or a piece of music you don’t enjoy “pseudo-music.”
Less than a decade after Lysenko’s downfall, Zhores Medvedev published The Rise and Fall of T.D. Lysenko, one of the first and most fascinating accounts of the controversy published during the Cold War.
For this and other acts of anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda, Medvedev was declared insane and forced into a mental hospital where the challenge of keeping one’s sanity around people telling you you are crazy became his daily existence. Chilling.
Zhores Medvedev, a Soviet biochemist and outspoken critic of the Soviet bureaucracy, who was railroaded into a mental hospital, and his brother, historian Roy Medvedev, who rallied the Soviet scientific and intellectual community in protest, together tell the story of "repression by psychiatry" in Russia today.
As someone more drawn to writing and literature during my college years, I was fascinated to discover that science has a history. I had once thought of science as objective—distinct from liberal arts and social science disciplines in that it consisted of facts that could be proved. I came to understand that it’s just another field of human endeavor filled with flaws like any other. Sometimes, scientists cheat, lie, favor certain facts over others, or knowingly publish false results. It can become a cultural and political battleground—and to refer to something as “pseudoscience” is like calling a work of art you don’t like “pseudo-art” or a piece of music you don’t enjoy “pseudo-music.”
Well before Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Fleck coined the term “thought collective” to explain how conformity and “group think” produce “truth” in a given social and political milieu.
In Fleck's account, what Kuhn would later term “paradigm shifts” were the result of the gradual change in agreement on what scientists consider to be true rather than some eureka moment where fact is suddenly revealed.
Originally published in German in 1935, this monograph anticipated solutions to problems of scientific progress, the truth of scientific fact and the role of error in science now associated with the work of Thomas Kuhn and others. Arguing that every scientific concept and theory-including his own-is culturally conditioned, Fleck was appreciably ahead of his time. And as Kuhn observes in his foreword, "Though much has occurred since its publication, it remains a brilliant and largely unexploited resource."
"To many scientists just as to many historians and philosophers of science facts are things that simply are the case: they are discovered…
I used to think that most nonhuman animals do not have minds in any rich sense of that word. After publishing a book about some influential philosophers who articulate and defend that view, I was pushed by a very good friend to get curious about what nonhuman creatures do. That led to years of reading, reflecting, teaching college courses, and eventually admitting that I had been profoundly wrong. My change of mind culminated in the publication of a book that explores the idea that plants have minds. The books on this list helped me tremendously along the way, and my students have also learned much from them.
I admire this book’s ingenuity. Bennett wants to understand how human minds differ from other animal minds. To figure this out, he starts from the assumption that language marks the difference. He takes for granted that honeybees communicate with each other, but they don’t use a language.
From there, Bennett asks: what would have to be added to the dances to make them a language of the sort that humans have and use? Adding one ability at a time—such as the ability to “deny” a dance—Bennett asks whether the honeybees yet have language. This strategy is so powerful to me because it allows me to respect how sophisticated honeybees actually are while discovering specific and significant ways in which their dances are limited.
This stimulating work takes the concept of 'rationality', a concept that more than any other is supposed to express the essence of what it means to be human, and submits it to a careful and penetrating analysis. The conclusions drawn often challenge those previously suggested by both philosophers and psychologists.
I used to think that most nonhuman animals do not have minds in any rich sense of that word. After publishing a book about some influential philosophers who articulate and defend that view, I was pushed by a very good friend to get curious about what nonhuman creatures do. That led to years of reading, reflecting, teaching college courses, and eventually admitting that I had been profoundly wrong. My change of mind culminated in the publication of a book that explores the idea that plants have minds. The books on this list helped me tremendously along the way, and my students have also learned much from them.
I think computers don’t think, and this book taught me how to think about that. I admire it in part because it showed me, a professor of philosophy, how to do scientifically informed philosophy. Unlike so many books on the history of thinking about thinking, just the first chapter of this book is clear, accurate, insightful, and exciting. Equally so is Haugeland’s explanation of what a computer is, making an intellectual adventure of theoretical computer science.
Haugeland uses this to make a compelling case for thinking that computers could genuinely reason. And then he does something that we philosophers tend to love; he launches a provocative critique of that claim, contending that computers can’t think because they don’t “give a damn.” Although it’s now three decades old, this is the book to read if you’re curious about artificial intelligence.
First Edition. Some markings on first end page. Some shelf and edge wear, small tears, to dust jacket. Pages are clean and binding is tight. Solid Book.
I used to think that most nonhuman animals do not have minds in any rich sense of that word. After publishing a book about some influential philosophers who articulate and defend that view, I was pushed by a very good friend to get curious about what nonhuman creatures do. That led to years of reading, reflecting, teaching college courses, and eventually admitting that I had been profoundly wrong. My change of mind culminated in the publication of a book that explores the idea that plants have minds. The books on this list helped me tremendously along the way, and my students have also learned much from them.
Psychology wasn’t always an empirical science; it became one; this book showed me how. What is an instinct? What is a reflex? What is an idea? How do we know what an animal is thinking? What is learning? What would be good evidence one way or another? Starting in the nineteenth century, Boakes tells the stories of several people who offered compelling answers to those questions, which continue to shape current discussions.
Although the book might appear to be a textbook, I experienced it more like a Netflix series with cliffhangers. Boakes portrays most of the people in the book—such as C. L. Morgan, Ivan Pavlov, and J.B. Watson—as explorers intrigued and perplexed by these questions, following up observations and experiments made by predecessors, raising further questions and challenges that made me want to turn to the next chapter.
This volume surveys the way that understanding of the minds of animals and ideas about the relationship between animal and human behaviour developed from around 1870 to 1930. In describing the research and theories which contributed to these developments, this book looks at the people who undertook such studies and the reasons why they did so. Its main purpose is to examine the different ways in which the outcome of this work affected their ideas about the human mind and exerted such a formative influence on psychology in general. This book will be used by first and second year undergraduates…
I used to think that most nonhuman animals do not have minds in any rich sense of that word. After publishing a book about some influential philosophers who articulate and defend that view, I was pushed by a very good friend to get curious about what nonhuman creatures do. That led to years of reading, reflecting, teaching college courses, and eventually admitting that I had been profoundly wrong. My change of mind culminated in the publication of a book that explores the idea that plants have minds. The books on this list helped me tremendously along the way, and my students have also learned much from them.
Bees, birds, frogs, and primates communicate with other members of their species, but this book helped me appreciate that they don’t use or have a language. I am fond of this book because Anderson works through the details of several different cases, taking pains to show how communication among bees, birds, frogs, and primates is impressive but still does not qualify as genuine language.
In doing so, Anderson offers an elegant and unique introduction to the science of linguistics. He makes it easy to see how this science is not only about the features of noises or gestures that creatures produce but also about their minds.
Dr. Dolittle-and many students of animal communication-are wrong: animals cannot use language. This fascinating book explains why.
Can animals be taught a human language and use it to communicate? Or is human language unique to human beings, just as many complex behaviors of other species are uniquely theirs? This engrossing book explores communication and cognition in animals and humans from a linguistic point of view and asserts that animals are not capable of acquiring or using human language. Stephen R. Anderson explains what is meant by communication, the difference between communication and language, and the essential characteristics of language. Next…
Even though I am a scientist who has written over 130 scientific articles, I have a longstanding passion for scientific books that are written for non-scientists. I love books about science, no matter how distant they are from my area of expertise. To me, the best science books convey the excitement of science and scientific thinking in an accessible manner, but without pandering or dumbing things down. My favorite books tackle big ideas and respect the reader’s intelligence. My choices here reflect my core interests in biology, evolution, and behavior—and the aesthetics of science, too. I hope you enjoy them as much as I have.
Genes have variously been described as selfish and controlling—as providing a blueprint or a program for development—as even “the cell’s brain”. These descriptions of genes get in the way of our understanding of what genes actually do—and what they don’t (and cannot) do. Evelyn Fox Keller provides an antidote to the simplistic notions of genes that permeate our society and infect our scientific discourse. She carefully walks us through the history of the field and provides us with a much more realistic view of the intricacies of DNA. By the end of this marvelous book, you may not even think that genes are a thing at all.
In a book that promises to change the way we think and talk about genes and genetic determinism, Evelyn Fox Keller, one of our most gifted historians and philosophers of science, provides a powerful, profound analysis of the achievements of genetics and molecular biology in the twentieth century, the century of the gene. Not just a chronicle of biology's progress from gene to genome in one hundred years, The Century of the Gene also calls our attention to the surprising ways these advances challenge the familiar picture of the gene most of us still entertain.
Keller shows us that the…
The library has always been my favorite place to visit. As a child, I would travel the world through books. I learned about different cultures and studied other languages. Through these experiences, I gained a deep appreciation for cultures around the world. I also learned an important lesson that inclusion is the thread that weaves together a rich multicultural tapestry. Fast forward to today, I share these lessons through my work as an author, leadership scholar, and law professor. My booklist reflects a celebration of diverse cultures, introduces learning tools for becoming an inclusive leader, and provides an invitation to join me in taking intentional action for justice and equity.
This book teaches the importance of community-building. It celebrates diversity and inclusion as both a strength and asset.
It dispels the myth of race by focusing on our shared humanity and common destiny. It gets to the basics that our DNA is 99.999% similar hence building common ground across differences.
It also encourages each of us to discover the values of love and kindness.
I shared this book with my students as a tool to explore their cultural heritage and build new connections.
Now a New York Times bestseller! Using child-friendly language, this playful picture book explains how genetics make each person unique and celebrates how we are more alike than different and are all part of the human race. In The Smallest Spot of a Dot: The Little Ways We’re Different, The Big Ways We’re the Same, Linsey Davis, bestselling children’s author, Emmy-winning correspondent, and host for ABC News, together with co-author Michael Tyler, encourages children to find their own unique dot with sweet, rhyming prose.
”Only .1% of our genes make us uniquely who we are. We are 99.9% identical, alike,…
