Steven  Johnson's "Natural History of Innovation" shines some light on the  first question as he tells us "Where Good Ideas Come From." Johnson  looks back through science history as he teases out from science  history, and from natural history, seven "patterns" in which new ideas  are formed. Johnson backs up with examples each of the seven groups in  his taxonomy of the origins of ideas. Good examples, well told, are what  make the book. 
  Johnson writes science history well. Like in Johnson's earlier book, The  Invention of Air, the science history he writes here reads like a  fascinating tale of adventure. Although a bit breathless at times, and  sometimes drawing too much from too little, Johnson caught my attention  early and held it all the way through this fairly long new book. 
  And it's not just a history of scientists and discoveries. Johnson  looks too at nature - like how reefs pack together life and promote  evolution - and society - like how larger cities generate exponentially  more innovation than smaller towns. 
  On occasion, Johnson's taxonomy is a tad bit tortured. The seven  patterns each get a chapter in the book. But for me, the names of the  patterns and the particular examples grouped in them do not give much  insight. The patterns - while interesting - seem more organizational  groupings than anything else. The patterns are the skeleton. Not much  flesh there. The meat in the book is in the examples. 
  In fact, the insight for me came from the light Johnson shines on my  second question - why didn't I think of that? To broaden that question  into its most compelling form, how can we, both personally and as a  society, increase the number of good ideas we have in the arts, in  science, in sociology and government, and in technology? 
  That $64,000 question Johnson does not really try to answer. He does  give some clues. (One thing he says caught my interest as a patent  attorney. That is, we get more good ideas by connecting them than by  protecting them. In other words, the patent system may be hurting,  instead of meeting, its goal of promoting innovation.) 
  Johnson's book is ambitious. He covers a lot of ground, from scientists  to nature to arts to government to society. His idea that good ideas in  all of these fields develop in the same recognizable patterns is a bold  one. In a sense, he is looking for a unified theory of innovation. 
  Did Johnson find that unified theory? If he did, you won't find it on a  particular page in this book. But by joining Johnson in exploring this  question, I learned a lot and thought a lot. That made the book  worthwhile for me.
No comments:
Post a Comment