Bedeviled: A Shadow History of Demons in Science by Jimena Canales

Bedeviled: A Shadow History of Demons in Science Reviews

• 
  Ramin

  [Here's an excerpt of the review I wrote for Nature magazine. Please check out the whole essay here:
  https://www.nature.com/articles/d4158... ]
  
  The workings of powerful computers, the processes of evolution, the market forces that drive the global economy. To conceptualize such unseen forces, researchers have long invoked thought experiments involving demons, devils, golems or genies.
  
  These strange beasts aren’t creatures of superstition and pseudoscience. They are useful ideas that have had an important role in the advancement of science, argues historian of science Jimena Canales. Her latest book, Bedeviled, sizes up imagined imps over the centuries and follows their impacts.
  
  The seventeenth-century French philosopher René Descartes conceived of the disturbing possibility that some devious spirit could hijack our sense of reality. This ‘malicious demon’ would affect what we think we see, hear, smell and touch — presaging how virtual reality challenges us today. Descartes’s idea caused him to question his senses, and even his existence. He found his way back to reality by asserting that cogito ergo sum — he thought, therefore he was. A reasoning human being foiled the deceptive demon...
• 
  cardulelia carduelis

  This was the first book I received in the science-based book-box from 51st Street Seminary Books in Chicago.
  And I was a bit surprised when it arrived. For a popular-science litbox I was expecting: popular science. Not social histories written through the lens of a historian. Nevertheless I went into this with as open a mind as possible.
  
  Unfortunately, even before the main text started I was starting to worry. After finishing the introduction I got the impression that Canales intended to pathologise constructs in thought experiments and the way science approaches the unknown. There were some strange hyperbolae, e.g. "To catch them [demons], scientists must think like them." And I know this was meant in terms of planning for the unknown but it sounded so ominous. At the end of the foreword Canales writes about creating a "Modern demonology for the twnetieth century", which in this context seems absolutely contrived: unless she meant to factor scientific mishaps into this? (spoiler: she doesn't).
  
  The further I read the more frustrated I became. The author seems prone to hyperbolae and repetition. Her prose is clouded with peripheral quotes backing up every single statement made. For example in Chapter 3, Maxewell's Demon, the first 3 pages of the chapter serve to convince the reader than Maxwell was a big deal, but I'll be damned if there's an ounce of content in the entire thing. When we actually get around to describing the 'demons', and the hole in our knowledge they attempt to plaster over, the scientific question they're associated with is again seen through the obsfucated eye of a historian. I found myself more confused leaving the chapter than entering it.
  
  For the rest of the book Maxwell's demon resurfaces again and again. The most cringey moment for me was the bit about daemon programs: that literally are just programs running in the background on a computer. In Canales's frame though we get a goose chase going from the imitation game to machine learning. The whole book reads this way and it's exhausting.
  
  I will say that some of the actual content, when we got to it, was new to me and interesting, e.g. King James's demonology.
  I started skimming this book after the 50 page mark. Cannot recommend.
  
  
• 
  Tim

  I have a doctorate in the History of Science and teach science at a university. The best things about history of science is its ability to teach science by taking you through the process of how it was created. The history of science is invaluable this way. I am an old hat at most of these ideas, but my understanding was deepened by reading the thought processes from which these concepts arose. It is better to be "shown" than "told."
  
  There are some truly terrible history of science books that don't analyze. They simply narrate. This is not one. The key to this work's success lies in its power to see beyond the narrative.
  
  This book tends to lose some of its power when it tries to be overly comprehensive. I'm the first to understand the need for thoroughness as a scholar, however, this seems to be marketed to a general audience (obviously not the author's fault). The encyclopedic nature of the final chapters makes the latter portion of the book seem overwhelming. It begins to feel more like a chore at points.
  
  However, this is a fresh way to understand some important scientific principles.
• 
  Esteban Martínez

  A very original take on the history of science. Studying the analogies scientists use sheds light into the creative process of scientific discovery. I liked the approach, it kind of feels very novel, like a new way of thinking about science.
• 
  Kyle

  This is a good book for history but not as much for the details of the thought experiments themselves (at least from a math/physics detail perspective). I admit that I was hoping for a more technical read with a deeper dive into the various "demons", which led me to have different expectations for this book. Canales starts with Descartes' thought experiment (brain in a vat, essentially), goes on to Laplace's demon, and mostly stays with Maxwell's demon for the rest of the book with forays into daemons in computer science, applications in biology, and applications in economics.
  
  The book is not technical (there may have been one or two equations mentioned, but I don't think any were used), and so may be more ideal for a lay reader. I was familiar with these concepts in physics and so had hoped the book would dig deeper into the technicalities, and so did not always feel immersed in the book. The writing is good (not overly academic or flowery), and the basics of each of the thought experiments are explained well, but the book just was not quite what I was expecting and so I felt a bit disappointed.
  
  The history is interesting and well-explained as well so that this will serve as a good reference if I ever want to delve more into the thought experiments. I also thought the author made good points about what is "real" in science and how those conceptions affect scientific progress in the conclusion (although I would not agree with all these points), but felt this part was a bit too short to fully develop the nuance I think would have made these passages great.
• 
  Subhadra Jayaraman

  😈 𝐁𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐉𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐚 𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐬 😈
  .
  .
  "𝑴𝒂𝒏𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆𝒙 𝒕𝒆𝒄𝒉𝒏𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 𝒔𝒚𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒎𝒔 𝒂𝒓𝒆 𝒎𝒐𝒅𝒆𝒍𝒆𝒅 𝒂𝒇𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆𝒍𝒚 𝒔𝒊𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆 𝒄𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒆𝒔"
  .
  This shadow history of demons in science was a fantastic, artful take on the history of thought and scientific discoveries
  ⚛️
  Jimena Canales takes us through various philosophical and scientific theories and their development by thinkers who conjured up demons as tools of thought to answer the most fundamental questions and satiate the most fabulous curiosities
  ⚛️
  Descartes' philosophical demon, Maxwell's sorting demon, Laplace's statistics demon, and even Darwin's genetic demon - were all as important in the theories of these thinkers as were their intellectual observations of the physical world
  ⚛️
  The book is quite heavy on the scientific side, and it takes a while to absorb the laws and theories that are the sidekicks in this book to the demonic protagonists, so I would recommend this to anyone who loves everything science and is looking to explore the old and new ways of thinking
  ⚛️
  I absolutely loved the audiobook narrator, Peter Berkrot. He was just perfect for this book, with his Ramsay Bolton-like voice and accent, making the story of demons all the more real!
  ⚛️
  "𝑫𝒆𝒎𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒉𝒂𝒗𝒆 𝒉𝒆𝒍𝒑𝒆𝒅 𝒖𝒔 𝒍𝒆𝒂𝒓𝒏 𝒉𝒐𝒘 𝒕𝒐 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒓𝒐𝒍 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒇𝒖𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒆𝒔 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒉𝒐𝒘 𝒕𝒐 𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒔𝒆 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒖𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒑𝒂𝒔𝒕. 𝑻𝒉𝒆𝒚 𝒉𝒂𝒗𝒆 𝒂𝒍𝒔𝒐 𝒕𝒂𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒖𝒔 𝒉𝒐𝒘 𝒕𝒐 𝒆𝒔𝒄𝒂𝒑𝒆 𝒇𝒓𝒐𝒎 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒆𝒔 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒆𝒗𝒂𝒅𝒆 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒑𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒊𝒃𝒊𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒆𝒔"