Scienceblind Why Our Intuitive Theories about the World Are So Often Wrong

"[A] fascinating, empathetic book [...] Mr. Shtulman distills some useful ways to improve science education in the classroom and for the adult public."
– Wall Street Journal

"Although this book is thoroughly researched with a wealth of scholarly sources cited, Shtulman reaches a broad audience by investigating topics that everyone can understand."
– Library Journal

"Anti-vaxxers, creationists, global warming skeptics [...] I have devoted my career to understanding why people deny science in the teeth of overwhelming evidence. As the cognitive psychologist Andrew Shtulman shows in one of the most important books ever written on this most important subject, it turns out that it isn't the facts in dispute, but incorrect intuitive theories people hold about the world underlying the facts that is the problem. In this new age of fake news and pseudo facts, Scienceblind is a candle in the dark."
– Michael Shermer, publisher of Skeptic magazine, columnist for Scientific American, and author of Why People Believe Weird Things, Why Darwin Matters, and The Moral Arc

"At last, a fantastic book for the general reader on what intuitive theories are and why they are so important to our daily lives. Shtulman explains why we are all vulnerable to intuitive misconceptions, the potential harm intuitions can wreak, and why we should all follow Carl Sagan's advice, 'I try not to think with my gut.'"
– Bruce Hood, author of The Self Illusion and founder of Speakezee.org

"Cogently explained."
– New York Times Book Review

"In Scienceblind, Andrew Shtulman vividly presents an original and important idea, one that is highly relevant to science education, the public understanding of science, and the role of science in intellectual life."
– Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University, and the author of How the Mind Works and The Stuff of Thought

"Lucid and methodical."
– Nature

"This timely, important, and well-crafted book by Shtulman voices a convincing and unsettling argument about the persistence of science denial that has even broader implications for the state of public discourse [...] [A] thoughtful analysis."
– Publishers Weekly