Scientific Authority and Scientific Controversy in Nature: North Britain against the X Club

Author(s):  
Ruth Barton
1989 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 299-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Olby

The increasing attention which has been given to social history of science and to the sociological analysis of scientific activity has resulted in a renewed interest in scientific controversies. Furthermore, the rejection of the presentist view of history, according to which those contestants who took what we can identify, with the benefit of modern knowledge, as the ‘right’ stand in a controversy, were right and their opponents were ‘wrong’, left the subject of scientific controversies with many questions. What determines their emergence, course and resolution? When Froggatt and Nevin wrote on the Bio-metric-Mendelian controversy in 1971 they called their article ‘descriptive rather than interpretative’, so they avoided the very questions we would like to ask. Provine, in the same year, concentrated on the strong personalities of the contestants, their clashes, and the scientific arguments in play. But in 1975 Mackenzie and Barnes argued that the controversy could not be accounted for unless recourse was had to sociological factors. Their view has become widely known and figured prominently in 1982 in Steven Shapin's recital of the empirical achievements of the application of the sociological approach. I have returned to this subject because I do not yet feel altogether convinced by Mackenzie and Barnes' analysis. Even if their analysis of the controversy between Pearson and Bateson be accepted, it is not so obvious how effectively it can be used to explain the controversy between Weldon and Bateson, and I am not confident that it is adequate for an understanding of the evolution of their differing views of the mechanism of evolution.


1826 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 314-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Hall

The public attention, animated by scientific controversy, has of late years been much directed to Geological subjects; and the certainty of many important facts, has in consequence been ascertained beyond dispute, which were formerly unknown, or at least involved in such obscurity, that no person could have ventured to assert them, without being charged with extravagance. But though, no doubt, many branches of this science still remain to be investigated, such inquiries may now be said to have acquired a considerable degree of consistency and interest, from the substantial basis upon which they have been found to rest.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Dawn LaValle Norman

Abstract The contest over the resurrection of the body used the scientific authority of Aristotle as ammunition on both sides. Past scholars have read Methodius of Olympus as displaying an anti-Aristotelian bias. In contrast, through close reading of the entire text with attention to characterization and development of argument, I prove that Methodius of Olympus’ dialogue the De Resurrectione utilizes Aristotelian biology as a morally neutral tool. To put this into higher relief, I compare Methodius’ dialogue with the anonymous Dialogue of Adamantius, a text directly dependent upon the Methodius’ De Resurrectione, but which rejects arguments based on scientific reasoning. Reading Methodius’ De Resurrectione with greater attention to the whole and putting it in the context of its nearest parallel text retells the traditional story of early Christian resistance to Aristotle. Methodius of Olympus’ characters, although they view scientific knowledge as subordinate to philosophy, see it as neutral in and of itself.


2021 ◽  
pp. 014616722110394
Author(s):  
Laurent Bègue ◽  
Kevin Vezirian

The present research investigated how scientific authority increases the lethal use of animals in biomedical experimentation. In two behavioral studies ( N = 151 and 150), participants were required to incrementally administer 12 doses of a toxic chemical to a 53-cm fish (in reality, a biomimetic robot) for research on animal learning. Consistent with the Engaged Followership Theory on obedience, participants placed in a pro-scientific mindset more severely harmed the laboratory animal. In a cross-sectional study ( N = 351), participants in medical fields endorsed a more pro-scientific attitude than those in paramedical fields, which mediated their support for animal experimentation. Drawing on a representative European sample ( N = 31,238), we also confirmed the specificity of this link by controlling for potential demographic and ideological confounds. In a final study ( N = 1,598), instrumental harm was shown as mediating the link between a pro-scientific attitude and support for animal experimentation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 460-482
Author(s):  
Matthew Lavine

While earlier marital advice literature treated sexual intercourse as a matter of conditioned instinct, marriage manuals in the mid-twentieth century portrayed it as a skill, and one that was rarely cultivated adequately. The didactic, quantified, objectively examined and rule-bound approach to sex promulgated by these manuals parallels other ways in which Americans subjected their personal and intimate lives to the tutelage of experts. Anxieties about the stability of marriage and family life were both heightened and salved by the authoritative tone of scientific authority used in these books.


2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 164-199
Author(s):  
Adam M. Sowards

Exploration has always centered on claims: for country, for commerce, for character. Claims for useful scientific knowledge also grew out of exploration’s varied activities across space and time. The history of the Canadian Arctic Expedition of 1913–18 exposes the complicated process of claim-making. The expedition operated in and made claims on many spaces, both material and rhetorical, or, put differently, in several natural and discursive spaces. In making claims for science, the explorer-scientists navigated competing demands on their commitments and activities from their own predilections and from external forces. Incorporating Arctic spaces into the Canadian polity had become a high priority during the era when the CAE traversed the Arctic. Science through exploration—practices on the ground and especially through scientific and popular discourse—facilitated this integration. So, claiming space was something done on the ground, through professional literature, and within popular narratives—and not always for the same ends. The resulting narrative tensions reveal the messy material, political, and rhetorical spaces where humans do science. This article demonstrates how explorer-scientists claimed material and discursive spaces to establish and solidify their scientific authority. When the CAE claimed its spaces in nature, nation, and narrative, it refracted a reciprocal process whereby the demands of environment, state, and discourse also claimed the CAE.


2003 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 194-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lundy Braun ◽  
Anna Greene ◽  
Marc Manseau ◽  
Raman Singhal ◽  
Sophie Kisling ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document