I’ve Been Used!
|February 4, 2011|
by Juliana Adelman
In theory, there is nothing more exciting for the academic than to find that her work has actually been read by someone and even, gasp, cited! It is less exciting, however, to discover it being mustered in the cause of intelligent design. Someone in cyberspace has seized upon an article of mine as evidence that evolution never happened. Mind you my article does not have much at all to do with evolution or intelligent design. Instead it is about the importance of personality, reputation and media exposure in the consolidation of scientific opinion. Nonetheless, since I do mention Darwin one time it was doubtless this that brought the article to the reader’s googling. I am not going to provide a link to the website, but if you are curious you can google ‘Eozoon’ and it will come up.
The fact that my article is being used by a pro-creationist lobby is slightly disturbing, although I have to admit that the lobbiest in question clearly read and understood the article and used my ideas in a rather subtle and clever attack on scientific authority. While most historians of science are neither creationists nor relativists, recent historiographical trends have offered ample ammunition for these groups to seize upon. Historical narratives depicting a heroic quest for scientific truth are now limited to popular science. Instead, we tell stories of how one idea gathered support at the expense of others offering diverse nonscientific causes including social, political and cultural needs.
This puts us historians in a camp which might be uncomfortably adjacent to that of the proponents of intelligent design and other anti-scientific movements. Of course we claim that it is historical objectivity that tells us to question scientists’ motives and definitions of ‘truth’. I don’t doubt that the creationists believe they have truth on their side as well.
Historians generally like to claim some level of objectivity and avoid using their research to promote a particular social or political end However, there are historians who are open about the ideological inspirations for their work. One obvious example is the Marxist historical tradition led by figures like Eric Hobsbawm and E. P. Thompson. As any of you who have studied historiography have probably been told, every historian is imbued with certain ideological biases that he or she may not even be aware of. We, like the people we study, are creatures of our time and place.
Science, although overtly claiming to eschew social influences is no different. And historians of science are also equally susceptible to the world around them. My work, although it examines the nineteenth century, is informed and shaped to some degree by our current scientific concerns. In particular, recent developments in genetics, medicine and neuroscience all seem to push for a scientifically-bounded concept of what a human is and how it works. Scientists are not so limited as to see humans and society as a predetermined outcome of a set of chemical reactions, but the scientific explanation increasingly dominates. I am worried about the limitations of these explanations and the consequences they may have for human society as a whole. Therefore I acknowledge that I am inclined towards a critical perspective on science, which tends not to privilege scientists as arbiters of truth. So in some way the intelligent designers have simply managed to read between the lines quite precisely.
Piece crossposted with Pue’s Occurences
Merleau-Ponty’s Child Psychology
As much as death signals the end of the self, birth is just as mysterious. Both extend out to infinity and signal the brevity and contingency of our lives. As mysterious are those first few years of life that one does not have access to as an adult, I know I existed before my earliest memories. I know I interacted with others, I learned to walk and talk. I was willful from my parent’s tales.
William Pope.L: Reader Friendly
William Pope.L is famous for (among other things) carrying a business card that identifies him as “The Friendliest Black Artist in America.” It’s a clever gag because it makes itself true, in a way, every time it draws people closer. The card must be especially useful when Pope.L does business with people who dread Black men or Black artists.
10 Things the NSA Has Seen Me Do
One winter in my early twenties myself and some good friends — a merging of art, music and literary ladies of New York, full-grown girls aspiring to be women — got together, had a lovely dinner, some wine and delightful chat. Then we decided to spend an hour practicing “Teach Me How To Dougie”. NSA — can you teach me how to Dougie? You know why? “Because all my bitches love me.”
You may also like :
I was born in central London in 1947, a child in a very special generation. In no time at all it became perfectly clear to me that not just my parents but everyone had been awaiting my arrival and was delighted to see me. Grown-up people of all ages and genders peered into my pram and then my pushchair as if they were slightly distant relatives. They stopped on the street to chuck me under the chin and pinch my cheek (yes, well-fed, rosy with health) and congratulate the adult pushing me on bringing me into the world. Even old Queen Mary, Edwardian widow of George V, had her chauffeur stop the Rolls in St. James’s Park, where my father had taken me to feed the ducks.
Progress is never inevitable, even in reform eras. The United States at the turn of the twentieth century was in a progressive mood. It was a time in which the nation’s leaders tackled some of modern life’s most vexing problems: from taming rapacious industrialization to ensuring a clean food supply to cleaning up political corruption, American progressives were seeking a more harmonious and salubrious national life. But for African Americans, even those closest to progressive national leaders, this was a period of disappointment and devastation.
In 1983, Andre Schiffrin and Sara Bershtel, then of Pantheon Books, asked me to write a book on poverty for a new series on the politics of knowledge. The intended audience was non-specialist readers and college students. Reading extensively on the topic, I was struck by the repetitive quality of the literature: discussions of poverty revolved around the same themes stated and combined in different ways leaving the impression that there did not seem much new to say.