[What exactly are scientists doing?] Reading "Introduction to Scientific Thinking" by Ryo Uehara (Kodansha Gendai Shinsho) (Impressions, Book Review, Critique, Commentary)

[Text]
"Introduction to Scientific Thinking" (Kodansha Gendai Shinsho) by Ryo Uehara

Impressions: An Adventure to Increase the Resolution of Thought

The feeling of being about to drown in an ocean of information can now be said to be a part of daily life for those of us living in the modern age.

The mix of truth and falsehood flowing through SNS timelines, the health fads that appear one after another, and economic forecasts spoken with plausibility.

If one were to try to face each one of these sincerely, one's thinking would immediately become paralyzed.

"Oh, I want a more reliable compass.

I want the ability to judge things correctly with my own head."

It was with such earnest thoughts that I was led to pick up Ryo Uehara's "Introduction to Scientific Thinking".

To be honest, the title "Scientific Thinking" made me brace myself a little.

Is it not a specialized and difficult way of thinking, like what a researcher in a white coat does in a laboratory?

However, that prejudice was pleasantly betrayed as I read on.

The themes the book takes up at the beginning are familiar ones that everyone has thought about at least once, such as "sleep paralysis" and "the causes of catching a cold."

Taking these everyday phenomena as examples, it leads the reader very smoothly to the question, "So, how do you verify that scientifically?"

Thanks to this introduction, I was able to easily accept that "scientific thinking" is not a story from a distant world, but something continuous with my own daily life.

What was most shocking about reading this book was realizing how many things I had been getting by with "thinking I knew."

For example, the causal relationship that "A causes B to happen."

We use these words as a matter of course in daily conversation, but have we ever thought deeply about what conditions are necessary for that relationship to be established?

This book clearly distinguishes between correlation and causation, and carefully explains, with concrete examples, the difficulty of concluding that a certain event is truly the cause.

As I read the explanations of experimental design and methods of data comparison, which included illustrations, I felt as if scales had fallen from my eyes, thinking, "Ah, so this is how you eliminate possibilities one by one and increase the certainty of a causal relationship."

It felt as if clear outlines were being drawn onto a landscape of my own thoughts that had previously been hazy and obscured.

What left a particularly strong impression was the description regarding the importance of "definitions."

When a discussion fails to connect, the cause often lies in the fact that the definitions of the words each party uses are different.

This book teaches us how clearly defining the words that serve as the premise for a discussion (stipulative definition) and defining them in a measurable way (operational definition) form the foundation for productive dialogue.

I felt that this is extremely practical wisdom that can be applied in all communication situations, such as work meetings and conversations with friends.

Furthermore, the section explained in Chapter 3 on "what hinders scientific thinking," namely cognitive biases and naive theories, was a good opportunity to re-examine my own thinking habits.

We are prone to falling into various psychological traps, such as "confirmation bias," where we only gather information that supports the conclusions we want to believe, and the "anchoring effect," where we are strongly influenced by the information presented first.

This book cuts through the notion that such "psychology" does not necessarily guarantee "truth," and it preaches the importance of doubting one's own intuition and senses and making judgments based on objective evidence.

This was a reading experience akin to a vaccination, helping one acquire "immunity" for living in an information society.

Now that I have finished reading it, I think the way I see the world has changed just a little.

Even when looking at research results reported in the news, I have started to pause and think, "What is the design of this study?" or "Have confounding factors been considered?"

My way of thinking has been organized, and a desire to grasp things more logically and from multiple perspectives has welled up within me.

Of course, reading this book once does not mean one will perfectly master scientific thinking.

However, this book taught me the "form" of thinking.

By consciously continuing to use this "form," the precision of my thinking should certainly improve.

"Introduction to Scientific Thinking" is not a difficult book intended only for experts.

Rather, it is the best introductory book open to everyone, including those like me who feel "not confident in their thinking" or those who wish to "make the 'whys' hidden in daily life clearer."

The phrase on the book band, "Everyday science that strengthens the foundation of thinking," accurately captures the essence of this book.

For me, encountering this book was the beginning of a stimulating and fruitful adventure to increase the resolution of my thinking.

Book Review: An Intellectual Navigation System for Modern People

In an era where information overload and misinformation have become social issues, cultivating autonomous thinking skills is an urgent task for every individual.

Against this backdrop, Ryo Uehara's "Introduction to Scientific Thinking," published in February 2025 as part of the Kodansha Gendai Shinsho series, is a timely publication.

The author, a specialist in the philosophy of science and neuroethics, unravels the essence of the scientific endeavor in a way that is accessible to general readers, and the book has attracted the attention of many readers immediately upon its release.

This book is not merely an explanatory guide to scientific knowledge; it is a practical volume that installs an "operating system for thinking," teaching readers how to approach various problems encountered in daily life and work logically and objectively.

(1) Comprehensive and Systematic Structure

The greatest strength of this book lies in its comprehensiveness.

Spanning 328 pages across seven chapters, the elements that constitute scientific thinking are systematically organized.

Chapter / Main Theme / Content

Chapter 1 / Sketching Scientific Thinking / Explains the overall picture of scientific thinking and the importance of "definitions" (such as stipulative definitions and operational definitions) as the foundation for discussion.

Chapter 2 / Thinking About Causality / Details the difference between correlation and causation, and points to be aware of when inferring causal relationships (such as the possibility of a third variable).

Chapter 3 / What Hinders Scientific Thinking / Analyzes psychological factors that impede objective judgment, such as cognitive biases and naive theories.

Chapter 4 / The Method of Experimentation / Explains the logic and design of "experiments" (such as randomized controlled trials), which are powerful tools for identifying causal relationships.

Chapter 5 / What It Means to Explain Scientifically / Examines what "explanation" and "understanding" mean in science from a philosophical perspective.

Chapter 6 / Reasoning and Evaluating Scientifically / Introduces "abduction" for generating new hypotheses in addition to deduction and induction, and discusses criteria for evaluating theories.

Chapter 7 / Thinking Scientifically Together / Touches on contemporary scientific issues such as the social nature of science and the replication crisis, demonstrating that science is a communal endeavor.

As one reviewer pointed out, this book is so substantial that it feels as if it has condensed the themes of excellent preceding works, such as Kazuhisa Todayama's "Lessons in 'Scientific Thinking'" and Makiko Nakamuro and Yusuke Tsugawa's "The Economics of 'Cause and Effect'," into a single volume.

Beginners will be able to efficiently grasp the overall picture of scientific thinking by starting with this book.

(2) Simplicity and Concreteness for "Everyday Use"

Another appeal of this book is that, while dealing with specialized content, it consistently uses plain language and familiar examples throughout its explanation.

The author avoids the use of difficult technical jargon and carefully traces the process of scientific thinking while addressing the daily questions that readers might face (e.g., "Is this supplement really effective?").

Concrete examples such as sleep paralysis, colds, and fortune-telling not only help the reader's understanding but also teach us that "science" is by no means something confined to an ivory tower, but a practical tool for enriching our lives.

This concept of "everyday science" is precisely what prevents this book from being merely an introductory text and gives it the power to encourage behavioral change in readers.

(3) Uniqueness not found in similar books

"Introduction to Scientific Thinking" follows the framework of existing introductory books while showing unique depth in several respects.

First, the section titled "Various Definitions," which organizes definitions by clarification, operational definitions, and definitions by necessary and sufficient conditions, is a feature rarely seen in other introductory books on the philosophy of science.

This is extremely useful for honing the very act of "how to formulate questions," which is the starting point for all intellectual inquiry.

Second, the fact that it delves into the philosophical question of "understanding in science" in Chapter 5 is also worth noting.

By not stopping at a mere explanation of methodology and offering a glimpse into the horizon that the enterprise of science aims for, it further stimulates the reader's intellectual curiosity.

And third, themes such as "the weaknesses of falsificationism and the comprehensive evaluation of theories" covered in the columns, and the "replication crisis" discussed in the final chapter, show that science is by no means monolithic but a dynamic process of constant self-criticism and innovation, giving this book a contemporary reach.

(4) Recommended readership

This book can be recommended to a very wide range of readers.

First, it can be called a must-read for all business people and students who wish to acquire the literacy needed to navigate the rough seas of the information society.

Also, for students who are about to start working on reports or theses at university, it will serve as an ideal textbook for learning how to construct logical arguments and present evidence.

For students studying psychology, economics, etc., it is also highly valuable as a supplementary reader for understanding the content learned in statistics and research methods classes more deeply.

The book "The Book of Why: The New Science of Cause and Effect" by Pearl, which the author brings up, is specialized, but this book will also serve as a bridge to such advanced content.

"The Book of Why: The New Science of Cause and Effect" by Judea Pearl and Dana Mackenzie, translated by Dai Natsume, supervised and explained by Yutaka Matsuo

(5) Conclusion

Ryo Uehara's "Introduction to Scientific Thinking" is a monumental introductory book that explains the essence of scientific thinking comprehensively, systematically, and above all, in an easy-to-understand manner.

Providing "intellectual immunity" to protect oneself from harmful information, avoid unconscious biases, and think for oneself, this book will surely become a reliable navigation system for modern people living in an uncertain age.

It is a book that gives you intellectual excitement and a solid sense of accomplishment, making the world look a little different after you finish reading it.

Critique: Updating the OS of Thought—The Achievements and Scope of "Introduction to Scientific Thinking"

Ryo Uehara's "Introduction to Scientific Thinking" should be evaluated as a book that has shown an outstanding achievement among recent enlightenment books.

The achievement of this book lies in the fact that it has translated the specialized knowledge of philosophy of science and cognitive science into remarkably simple language and everyday examples, delivering it to general readers as "everyday science."

It is an attempt not merely to impart knowledge, but to update the reader's own thinking OS and provide a new framework of perception for the information society.

In this article, while highly evaluating this achievement, I would like to critically examine the scope of "scientific thinking" presented in this book and several points inherent therein.

(1) Strengths and Skillfulness of the Theoretical Framework

The structure of this book is full of logical and educational considerations, ranging from the basics of thinking to its application and then to its social context.

Thoroughness of the Basics:

The fact that this book starts with "definitions" is insightful.

Every intellectual inquiry begins with clearly separating the phenomena to be questioned.

The stance of seeking operational definitions not only supports the foundation of science, which is verifiability, but is also practical wisdom for preventing fruitless misunderstandings in daily discussions.

A Cautious Gaze at Causality:

Next, it focuses on "causality," which is most misunderstood in modern society.

From the basic principle that correlation does not imply causation, to the existence of confounding factors (third variables), and even the introduction of experimental design, the skill with which it carefully explains the logic of causal inference is magnificent.

This allows readers to develop a healthy skepticism toward the simplistic causal discourse reported in the media.

Awareness of the inner enemy:

By discussing cognitive biases in Chapter 3, the book makes readers aware that the enemies of thought are not only external misinformation but also their own internal psychological tendencies.

This suggests that scientific thinking is not merely a technique, but has an aspect of self-discipline, involving distancing oneself from one's own intuitions and emotions.

Presentation of the dynamism of science:

By delving into the challenge of the "replication crisis" facing modern science in the final chapter, the book portrays science not as a completed body of knowledge, but as a process of constant mutual verification and self-correction, which demonstrates the book's sincerity and modernity.

By combining these elements, readers can master scientific thinking not as static knowledge, but as a dynamic toolkit for problem-solving.

(2) Critical examination: Scope and limitations

Despite its excellent achievements, several points can be raised regarding the nature of "scientific thinking" presented in this book.

First is the issue regarding the universality of the thinking model.

The model of scientific thinking presented in this book has strong validity mainly in the natural sciences and quantitative social sciences (such as economics and psychology), where randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the golden rule.

However, careful consideration is required when attempting to apply this model universally to all domains of knowledge.

For example, in the humanities, such as the interpretation of historical documents in history, the analysis of precedents in law, or the criticism of literary works, controlled "experiments" are impossible, and "reproducibility" also has a different meaning.

The pursuit of knowledge in these fields places more weight on the interpretation of meaning and the understanding of context rather than the identification of causal relationships.

Naively applying the book's model carries the risk of stripping away this diversity of knowledge and falling into scientism.

Second is the challenge suggested by the evaluation of it being "obvious."

There is a possibility that some readers who have received science education may comment that "it only writes about obvious things."

While this is a natural reaction considering the book's nature as an introductory text, if considered more deeply, it reflects the problems of the modern specialized education system.

In other words, it is the existence of an intellectual disconnect where a way of thinking that is "obvious" in a specific field is not shared at all outside of that field.

While this book plays an important role in bridging this gap, we must also consider the possibility that it could create a new divide, where those who have acquired scientific thinking become intolerant of others who have not.

Third, the flip side of the ideal of objectivity.

Scientific thinking aims to view the world from a "God's-eye view" that excludes subjectivity and emotion.

This orientation toward objectivity is essential for escaping bias.

However, if this pursuit is taken too far, it can lead to the neglect or dismissal of important, non-quantifiable elements such as human values, ethics, and cultural context.

For example, there is the danger that when judging the merits of a policy, one might focus solely on "scientific" indicators like economic efficiency, while overlooking values such as social justice and individual dignity.

Scientific thinking is a powerful tool, but it merely provides the material for value judgments about "what should be done"; it does not replace the value judgments themselves.

Being aware of these limitations as a tool is a prerequisite for its wise use.

(3) Conclusion

"Introduction to Scientific Thinking" provides an excellent map and compass for modern people to escape the maze of thought.

Its achievement is unshakable.

This book will likely liberate many people from blind obedience to authority and intuition, leading them to the joy of exercising their own reason.

However, we must also keep in mind that this map is not omnipotent.

What is required of us after reading this book is not merely to master the powerful tool of scientific thinking.

It is to discern the scope of the tool's application, understand its limits, and build a richer, more multifaceted way of thinking by engaging it in dialogue with other forms of knowledge (for example, historical imagination, ethical sensitivity, and artistic intuition).

Mr. Uehara's work is not the end of a journey of thought, but the starting gun for a new beginning.

Perhaps what the author desires most is for each reader to use this book as a catalyst to critically examine their own methods of thinking.

Critique: "Introduction to Scientific Thinking" as a Modern Practice of Enlightenment — Its Structure, Scope, and Social Implications

Introduction: The Demand for Reason in an Information Society

We live in an era where we have access to more information than ever before.

However, this abundance has simultaneously normalized the danger of an "infodemic," where misinformation, conspiracy theories, and baseless discourse run rampant.

In this chaotic intellectual environment, for individuals to survive as sound citizens and autonomous beings, it is essential to possess the ability to judge the truth and validity of the information flooding in for themselves, rather than taking it at face value.

This is nothing less than the modern demand for the "courage to use one's own reason," which Immanuel Kant expounded upon in "An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?"—namely, "Sapere aude" (Dare to know).

"Toward Perpetual Peace / An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment? and 3 Other Essays" (Kobunsha Koten Shin'yaku Bunko), by Immanuel Kant, translated by Hajime Nakayama

Ryo Uehara's "Introduction to Scientific Thinking," published in 2025, is a powerful response to this demand of the times from the perspective of the philosophy of science.

This book attempts to liberate science from being a privileged activity for experts alone and translate it into "everyday science" that anyone can utilize in their daily life.

This critique treats "Introduction to Scientific Thinking" not merely as an introductory book, but as an intellectual toolkit for practicing the ideals of enlightenment in modern society, and it analyzes and examines its internal structure, its scope within the system of knowledge, and its implications for society from multiple perspectives.

Part 1: Anatomy of "Introduction to Scientific Thinking" — Structure as a Toolbox for Thought

The excellence of this book lies in the fact that it breaks down and reconstructs the complex activity of scientific thinking, presenting it as modules that readers can master step by step.

Chapter 1: Foundations of Thought — Re-examining "Definition" and "Causality"

The book explains the importance of "definition" as the starting point for scientific thinking.

This is an endeavor situated at the root of intellectual inquiry, much like how Socrates in ancient Greece continued to ask "What is virtue?" through dialogue.

However, definition in science goes beyond mere clarification of concepts.

Through the procedure of "operational definition," abstract concepts are converted into observable and measurable variables.

For example, by operationally defining the concept of "happiness" as a "score on a 10-point scale asking about subjective well-being," hypotheses such as "the relationship between happiness and income" can finally descend into the realm of verifiability.

The fact that this book carefully explains this procedure gives readers a perspective to distinguish between unverifiable metaphysical arguments and empirical scientific inquiry.

The "causality" that the book addresses next has remained a philosophical conundrum ever since David Hume cast doubt on its objective existence.

This book strikes at the core of causal inference at a practical level without letting the reader get lost in its depths.

In other words, it thoroughly establishes the principle that temporal succession, such as "B happened after A," or correlation, such as "A and B are observed simultaneously," is insufficient to conclude causality.

It warns of the existence of the greatest confounding factor, the "third variable," and presents the logic of "experiments," particularly "Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs)," as a method to eliminate it.

This is an attempt to translate the essence of modern causal inference science, developed by Judea Pearl and others, for a general audience, and it forms the theoretical backbone of this book.

Chapter 2: Obstacles to Thinking — Overcoming Cognitive Biases and Naive Theories

The discussion in this book gains depth by clarifying that obstacles to thinking are rooted not only in the quality of external information but also within the thinking subject themselves, namely, human cognitive characteristics.

As revealed by the behavioral economics of Daniel Kahneman and others, human thinking consists of an intuitive, fast "System 1" and a logical, slow "System 2."

Many of our daily judgments rely on System 1, which is full of heuristics (discovery-based problem-solving methods) formed during the process of evolution.

However, in modern complex society, these heuristics produce systematic errors, or "cognitive biases."

The confirmation bias, availability heuristic, and hindsight bias mentioned in this book are precisely caused by the workings of this System 1.

Scientific thinking is, so to speak, nothing less than training to consciously intervene in the automatic workings of System 1 and activate the effort-intensive System 2.

As Makoto Mitsui points out in "Reportage: People Are Bad at Science," humans may essentially be beings who prefer stories, seek causality hastily, and are poor at statistical thinking.

"Reportage: People Are Bad at Science - From the Front Lines of 'Science Distrust' in America" (Kobunsha Shinsho) by Makoto Mitsui

If that is the case, scientific thinking is not "natural" thinking, but a "cultural" endeavor that must be acquired postnatally.

This book provides a map of self-awareness for acquiring that culture.

Chapter 3: The Engine of Science — The Essence of "Experiments" and "Inference"

Why are experiments, especially RCTs, considered the "gold standard" for identifying causal relationships?

It is because by homogenizing all conditions other than the factor one wishes to compare (e.g., administration of a new drug) through randomization, one can artificially create a "counterfactual" of "what would have happened if the drug had not been administered."

This book clearly explains the logic of this experiment.

Furthermore, in addition to the classical forms of inference—deduction (from general laws to individual cases) and induction (from individual cases to general laws)—this book sheds light on "abduction," a concept proposed by Charles Sanders Peirce.

Abduction is an inference that forms the most likely hypothesis to explain a surprising fact.

For example, observing that "the road is wet" and forming the hypothesis that "it must have rained" is abduction.

While this does not guarantee logical necessity or probabilistic certainty, it serves as a source of creativity in scientific discovery.

If deduction and induction are inferences for organizing and verifying existing knowledge, abduction is the catalyst for the leap required to generate new knowledge.

The fact that this book addresses this form of inference suggests that science is not merely data processing, but a human endeavor that requires creative imagination.

Part 2: The Scope and Limits of Scientific Thinking

Having acknowledged the effectiveness of the toolkit provided by "Introduction to Scientific Thinking," the next questions to ask concern its scope of application and the areas it does not illuminate (its limits).

Chapter 4: The Sociality and Community of Science — The Significance of "Thinking Together"

One of the highlights of this book is that in the final chapter, Chapter 7, it reframes science not as an individual endeavor, but as the work of a social community.

The objectivity of scientific knowledge is not guaranteed by the genius or neutrality of individual scientists.

Rather, as Robert Merton called "organized skepticism," it is secured by the norms of the community, which involve publishing research results and exposing them to constant criticism and verification by others.

The "replication crisis" mentioned in this context is often viewed as a failure of science, but it can also be seen as evidence that this self-correcting mechanism is functioning healthily.

The fact that fraud and errors are discovered within the community and become subjects of debate itself demonstrates the robustness of the scientific system.

However, at the same time, this event has exposed a significant challenge in science communication.

Healthy skepticism within the expert community can be perceived by the outside society as a "loss of scientific credibility," potentially fueling distrust in science.

The popularization of "everyday science" that this book aims for has significant meaning in bridging the intellectual gap between scientists and citizens, preventing such misunderstandings, and building a more mature relationship between science and society.

Chapter 5: Crossing Borders in Scientific Thinking — Applicability to the Humanities and Social Sciences and the Plurality of Knowledge

Is the model of thinking presented in this book truly applicable to all domains of knowledge?

This question is central to considering the scope of scientific thinking.

In fields such as sociology, anthropology, history, and literary studies, the establishment of laws or the identification of causes in the natural scientific sense is often not the primary objective of inquiry.

In those fields, the hermeneutic approach—that is, "understanding the meaning" of social phenomena and cultural events—plays a central role.

Max Weber's "interpretive sociology" seeks to elucidate the subjective motives and meanings behind actions, which is a mode of knowledge distinct from the search for objective causal laws.

Furthermore, the further one moves away from the realm of rigorous science, the more the importance of "analogy" increases.

While analogy may deviate from the strict logic advocated in this book, it is a powerful thinking tool for understanding unknown phenomena by applying them to known structures or for generating entirely new ideas (as a source of abduction).

The "scientism" that views scientific thinking as the sole and absolute model of knowledge risks suppressing these diverse ways of knowing.

Therefore, while acknowledging the effectiveness of scientific thinking, it is essential to recognize that it does not cover the entirety of human intellectual activity and to keep open a dialogue with other modes of knowledge (e.g., narrative thinking, dialectical thinking, ethical thinking).

Conclusion: "Introduction to Scientific Thinking" as a Tool for Enlightenment, and Beyond

Ryo Uehara's "Introduction to Scientific Thinking" is a groundbreaking work that embodies the ideals of enlightenment in contemporary society.

It teaches readers not "what" to think, but "how" to think, providing the basic weapons to break free from easy reliance on authority or intuition and to face the world using one's own reason.

In this sense, the book deserves to establish its status as a must-read liberal arts text for the modern age.

However, as discussed in this critique, this powerful weapon is not omnipotent.

Its use requires a higher level of metacognition—knowing its scope of application and its limitations.

Scientific thinking provides one, albeit very powerful, "resolution" for understanding the complexity of the world.

Yet, there exist dimensions in the world that cannot be measured by economic efficiency or statistical significance alone, such as human dignity, social justice, and cultural aesthetics, which must be captured with different "resolutions."

Ultimately, the greatest benefit brought by "Introduction to Scientific Thinking" is perhaps not to make the reader a mere "skilled user of scientific thinking."

Rather, it lies in serving as a starting point for mastering that way of thinking, calmly assessing its strengths and limitations, and growing into a "multi-faceted thinker" capable of making wiser judgments by combining it with other modes of thought depending on the situation.

This book teaches us how to use our reason.

And it confronts us with the eternal challenge of enlightenment: that we ourselves must continue to question the very way we use that reason.

This intellectual honesty is precisely what makes this book more than just an introductory text, inviting the reader into deep contemplation.