ALTERNATIVE SCIENCE
POLITICS MONEY
S & • BY ROBERT M. SCHOCH, PHD. D
espite the myth of the “objectivity” of “pure science,” there is nothing fully objective about the way prac- ticing scientists actually pursue their business. Scientists, like everyone else, are influenced either subtly or ex- plicitly by combinations of social, po- litical, and religious pressures (even when reacting against such factors) and by deeply ingrained assump- tions and worldviews that are virtually inescapable. The status quo rewards “good” scientists, those who tow the party line, with prestige, honor, promotions, grant money, personal gain, and even wealth. But those who step out of line may be severely punished.
Politicians often have the ability to halt the serious pursuit of certain sci- entific endeavors. This has been the case for thousands of years. Hero of Alexandria (first century AD) was well on his way to developing an ef- fective steam engine. However, the politicians and administrators wanted nothing to do with such a device. The Roman Empire widely employed slave labor. If me- chanical engines were used to irrigate fields or for other aspects of production, what would all those slaves do? Idleness could lead to rebellion. The first practical steam engine would have to wait another 1600 years. Ima- gine what the world might be like today if the politicians had not squelched the inven- tion of the steam engine two thousand years ago.
The patron of science, or of a particular scientist or field, can be all-important. A classic example is the Soviet agronomist Trofim Lysenko (1898-1976) who gained the
42 ATLANTIS RISING • Number 85 CIENCE
Who Really Decides Which Ideas Are Accepted and Which Are Not?
Hero’s Engine
personal support of the dic- tator Joseph Stalin (1878- 1953). Lysenko rose to promi- nence in the 1920s, garnering the attention of Soviet leaders as someone ideologically com- patible with the politics of the time. Lysenko had peasant roots; he despised classic aca- demic theory and mere labora- tory work, emphasizing prac-
Trofim Lysenko
tical techniques to increase crop yields. Lysenko was given the helm of the Academy of Agricultural Sciences of the Soviet Union and named director of the Institute of Ge- netics of the USSR Academy of Science. His
anti-Mendelian, neo-Lamarck- ian (inheritance of environ- mentally acquired characteris- tics) views received high- handed official approval. Statutes outlawed dissenting views. In the end, Lysenko’s “science” proved ineffective;
many of his supposed results were either greatly exaggerated or simply fraudulent. Ly- senko may be an extreme case, but it illus- trates the abuses possible when those with power and money decide to support an
Subscribe or Order Books, DVDs and Much More!
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84