35 pages • 1 hour read
How to Fly a Horse: The Secret History of Creation, Invention, and Discovery
A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Summary
Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Key Figures
Themes
Index of Terms
Important Quotes
Essay Topics
Tools
BetaChapters 5-6Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Chapter 5 Summary: “Where Credit Is Due”
Chapter 5 is bookended by the story of Rosalind Franklin to illustrate the debate of how and whether to give credit to new ideas. Franklin was a scientist who studied the structure of crystals (called a “crystallographer”), which led her to the nascent field of virus research in the 1950s. Through this work, she discovered the structure of RNA. She died young from cancer, in 1958, and Ashton writes that James Watson, Francis Crick, and Maurice Wilkins stole her work and later received the Nobel Prize for research based on it. He then goes on to review the discrimination women faced that prevented them from scientific work for centuries. Even when finally allowed to work, women received little credit and few prizes for their efforts.
A man named Robert Merton studied the “sociology of science.” He concluded that practitioners of science are not as objective as the discipline itself claims to be. He also believed that assigning credit for ideas to a single individual is problematic. It does not account for the aspects of many others’ work that leads one to a discovery. Newton referred to this when he spoke of “standing on the shoulders of giants” (130). Ashton shows, however, that at least five different people used the now famous phrase before Newton used it, dating back 500 years. This applies equally to research: Ashton argues that, given the abundance of ideas, it’s not “giants” so much as “generations” propping each up.
The author then traces Franklin’s own work back in a kind of research lineage, showing the various steps taken by predecessors that allowed her to produce the groundbreaking research she did. In an ironic twist, it was because of her work into genes that later generations could receive the test for the genetic mutation that ended her life so early. Soon we may be able to target treatment to prevent this mutation altogether. This stems from a person whose gender would have excluded her from this line of work only a short time earlier. Ashton concludes that because creation is necessary for the survival of humans, limiting the number of creators through arbitrary exclusion should be unthinkable.
Chapter 6 Summary: “Chains of Consequence”
This chapter examines the consequences of new creations—that is, what follows from them, whether it is good or bad, and what to do about this. Ashton begins with the familiar story of the Luddites, a group of weavers who attacked a weaving mill in England in 1812 because the owner had recently begun using an automatic loom. The term “Luddite” is commonly used today to refer to someone who is against progress and technology. However, Ashton claims that it was this working class as a group that benefited most from the new looms and other technological advances.
The increased machination and automation during the 19th century mainly replaced work performed by manual laborers but increased opportunities for those with more education. Machines required maintenance, along with the invention of new machines, and the management of businesses. Nations responded to this need by increasing public education, Ashton argues, so that the children and grandchildren of the weavers were able to get better jobs than they would have without the automation.
Because of the complexity of technology, its consequences are difficult to predict. To illustrate this, the author describes the process of producing a can of Coca-Cola, which involves bauxite from Australia, coca leaves from South America, and corn (to make high-fructose corn syrup) from the US, among other ingredients. “Like every other creation,” Ashton writes, “a can of Coke is a product of our world entire and contains inventions that trace all the way back to the origins of our species” (146). He traces the history of how Coca-Cola came to be, all the way back to humans’ need for water, through the history of vessels to carry drinks far away from their source, to the medicinal and refreshment uses of the product. No one could have foresaw these unintended consequences until they arose, such as rising obesity rates (from the corn syrup sweetener) and the environmental effects of discarded cans.
All this leads some people to oppose new technology because of the problems it can lead to. Ashton argues, however, that “[t]he answer to invention’s problems is not less invention but more,” calling this “the cycle of our species” (162).
Chapters 5-6 Analysis
These chapters deal with assigning credit to a new idea (involving what precedes the idea) and an idea’s consequences (involving what follows the idea). Who gets credit for what is a difficult question when so many people are involved in creating. Ashton’s main theme about everyone having the ability to create—not just the favored few—only makes this a more pressing debate. He discusses the phrase “standing on the shoulders of giants,” pointing out that the use of the word “giants” plays into the creativity myth that creative inspiration is a blessing for a few elite geniuses. This is why he prefers to say, “standing on the shoulders of generations.” His brief historical overview of research that led to Rosalind Franklin’s breakthroughs effectively argues his point, and is one of the book’s themes. So many people are involved in contributing ideas that it cannot really be fair or accurate to assign full credit to one individual. Another theme raised by Franklin’s story is that of opportunity. Ashton shows the necessity of her contribution (as it saved lives), just as anyone else’s contribution found acceptance. Artificial limitations on who can contribute go against the needs of humanity.
Chapter 6 examines the consequences of new technology. If the previous chapter dealt with assigning credit, this one can be seen as assigning blame. Ashton tackles the question of what to do when technology has negative consequences. He answers this question just like many scientists have when faced with criticism about negative applications of their research. Their argument is that science is neither good nor bad, and applications of it may be either. It is up to people to apply science for the common good. Similarly, Ashton writes that people should not dismiss new creations unless the results of these creations are clearly negative. The trouble is, consequences are very hard to predict given the complexity involved, as Ashton’s example of the can of Coca-Cola illustrates. And in the end, it’s up to creators to deal with any negative consequences by creating something else to solve the problems.
Unlock all 35 pages of this Study GuidePlus, gain access to 8,800+ more expert-written Study Guides.
Including features: