Science in the twentieth century

implied that he used pulse tracings to "interpret the blood pressure" which is certainly not the case. He thought, as late as 1908, that "the trained finger" was better than sphygmography in estimating blood pressure. Apart from this, and the failure to mention Thomas Young as the inventor of the kymograph (although he seems never to have used one) many years before Ludwig, no comment is needed on the factual content of the book. Above all, as has been said, the book is valuable for its appendix, which could be a useful source of reference for those concerned with the history of medical instrumentation. The bibliography and index are comprehensive and the book is nicely produced. The importance of science in our modern world cannot be underestimated. Yet, what this science constitutes and how it has affected society are continually debated. John Krige and Dominique Pestre's new edited volume on science in the twentieth century, illustrates the many different historical interpretations of science and its influence. Covering a wide range of disciplines from the physical and natural sciences to mathematics, social sciences and medicine, the book highlights the complex relationships between people, objects and institutions involved in scientific endeavour and its application to social issues. The book is divided into a number of sections: the first examines the image of science; the second looks at the interaction between science and society; the third explores the ways in which scientists conduct their research; and the last section investigates how the scientific enterprise has varied by region and nation in terms of government priority and funding. Each chapter is extremely diverse in subject matter and treatment of what can be counted as science. Scientific management, for instance, is included as a matter of science alongside that of physics and biochemistry. In some cases the reader can feel that the editors and authors have gone too far in their "refusal to adopt a single definition of science" (p. xxv). While this has allowed for a wide variety of subjects within the volume, the approach can leave the reader with the idea that almost any research enterprise or subject in the twentieth century can be defined as a science. Similarly some authors confuse the motivations of scientists with the steps it was necessary for them to carry out at any particular historical moment to achieve their goal. By conflating the two issues some authors …