The Decline of the Eppur si muove Spirit in North American Science: Professional Organizations and PC Pressures

Mankind Quarterly

Volumn 38, Issue 1-2, 1997, Pages 55-63

  Furedy, John J ^a  

^a NONE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Culture of Comfort; Disinterestedness; Political Correctness; Scientific Organizations

Indexed keywords

EID: 0346789235     PISSN: 00252344     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. For a more detailed account of disinterestedness, see John J. Furedy, "Daniel Berlyne and disinterested criticism: Inter- and intradisciplinary discourse", In G. Cupchik & J. Laszlo (Eds), Emerging visions of the aesthetic process: Psychology, semiology, and philosophy. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, U.K., 1992.
2. John Burnet, Early Greek philosophy. London: Adam & Charles Black, 1930, p. v.
3. For this constructionist view see, for example, the assertion of an eminent social psychologist that "we do not discover facts; we invent them" (Scarr, 1985, p. 499). "Constructing psychology: Making facts and fables for our times". American Psychologist, 40. 400-512.
4. For a more detailed analysis, see John J. Furedy, "Academic freedom versus the velvet totalitarian culture of comfort on current Canadian campuses: Some fundamental terms and distinctions". Interchange, in press, 1996. The culture of comfort, moreover, encompasses both intellectual and emotional discomfort, and many put these considerations ahead of disinterested enquiry. As a Canadian historian concerned with academic freedom has noted, "Many people, not a few of them teaching in universities, find a threat in the unhindered discussion of ideas or the implications of certain lines of research. Such people wish to control or eliminate sources of intellectual or emotional discomfort, or to end the 'waste' of money that is implied by the term 'idle curiosity', [and wishing to] restrict academic freedom, will warn that 'excessive' freedom turns into licence, with harmful consequences for the university and the public." (Michael Horn, "Academic freedom and tenure. Part one: an academic good, a societal benefit," Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship Newsletter, #15, Dec. 1996, p.4.
5. For a more detailed analysis, see John J. Furedy, "Academic freedom versus the velvet totalitarian culture of comfort on current Canadian campuses: Some fundamental terms and distinctions". Interchange, in press, 1996. The culture of comfort, moreover, encompasses both intellectual and emotional discomfort, and many put these considerations ahead of disinterested enquiry. As a Canadian historian concerned with academic freedom has noted, "Many people, not a few of them teaching in universities, find a threat in the unhindered discussion of ideas or the implications of certain lines of research. Such people wish to control or eliminate sources of intellectual or emotional discomfort, or to end the 'waste' of money that is implied by the term 'idle curiosity', [and wishing to] restrict academic freedom, will warn that 'excessive' freedom turns into licence, with harmful consequences for the university and the public." (Michael Horn, "Academic freedom and tenure. Part one: an academic good, a societal benefit," Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship Newsletter, #15, Dec. 1996, p.4.
6. Moreover, to actually argue about any of the controversies requires not only expertise in the cognate discipline, but also a detailed familiarity with the recent relevant literature. As neither I nor most readers can satisfy the joint requirements of background and familiarity, I have deliberately not offered any evaluation of the merits of the rival positions in each controversy.
7. For a relatively uncommitted psychological perspective on this aspect of the nature/nurture controversy, see John J. Furedy, "Race studies: Contentious but legitimate science - review of J.P. Rushton's Race, Evolution and Behavior: A Life History Perspective, and R.J. Herrnstein and C. Murray's The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class in American Life. Toronto Star, Book Section, October 12, 1994.
8. For a relatively uncommitted psychological perspective on this aspect of the nature/nurture controversy, see John J. Furedy, "Race studies: Contentious but legitimate science - review of J.P. Rushton's Race, Evolution and Behavior: A Life History Perspective, and R.J. Herrnstein and C. Murray's The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class in American Life. Toronto Star, Book Section, October 12, 1994.
9. This presidential talk, with a new title ("Ideology and censorship in behavior genetics") and a brief new introduction, has been published by Glayde Whitney in The Mankind Quarterly, vol. 15, #4, pp. 327-42, 1995. For brief accounts of the sequel in leading scientific journals, see Declan Butler, "Geneticist quits in protest at 'genes and violence claim', Nature, Vol. 378, p. 224, and two reports by Constance Holden in Science, 1995, entitled, respectively, "Specter at the Feast of Science' (Vol. 269, p. 35) and "Behavior Geneticists shun colleague' (Vol. 270, p. 1125). My account here is based on letters circulated on email by BGA members on a list serve (bganet@lists.Colorado.edu), where every message is signed by an individual, and includes the disclaimer that the message "does not necessarily represent the opinions of the Behavior Genetics Association, its members, or the maintainers of BGAnet". I am grateful to Glayde Whitney for providing me with this material, but of course I accept full responsibility for my interpretation of it.
10. This presidential talk, with a new title ("Ideology and censorship in behavior genetics") and a brief new introduction, has been published by Glayde Whitney in The Mankind Quarterly, vol. 15, #4, pp. 327-42, 1995. For brief accounts of the sequel in leading scientific journals, see Declan Butler, "Geneticist quits in protest at 'genes and violence claim', Nature, Vol. 378, p. 224, and two reports by Constance Holden in Science, 1995, entitled, respectively, "Specter at the Feast of Science' (Vol. 269, p. 35) and "Behavior Geneticists shun colleague' (Vol. 270, p. 1125). My account here is based on letters circulated on email by BGA members on a list serve (bganet@lists.Colorado.edu), where every message is signed by an individual, and includes the disclaimer that the message "does not necessarily represent the opinions of the Behavior Genetics Association, its members, or the maintainers of BGAnet". I am grateful to Glayde Whitney for providing me with this material, but of course I accept full responsibility for my interpretation of it.
11. This presidential talk, with a new title ("Ideology and censorship in behavior genetics") and a brief new introduction, has been published by Glayde Whitney in The Mankind Quarterly, vol. 15, #4, pp. 327-42, 1995. For brief accounts of the sequel in leading scientific journals, see Declan Butler, "Geneticist quits in protest at 'genes and violence claim', Nature, Vol. 378, p. 224, and two reports by Constance Holden in Science, 1995, entitled, respectively, "Specter at the Feast of Science' (Vol. 269, p. 35) and "Behavior Geneticists shun colleague' (Vol. 270, p. 1125). My account here is based on letters circulated on email by BGA members on a list serve (bganet@lists.Colorado.edu), where every message is signed by an individual, and includes the disclaimer that the message "does not necessarily represent the opinions of the Behavior Genetics Association, its members, or the maintainers of BGAnet". I am grateful to Glayde Whitney for providing me with this material, but of course I accept full responsibility for my interpretation of it.
12. This presidential talk, with a new title ("Ideology and censorship in behavior genetics") and a brief new introduction, has been published by Glayde Whitney in The Mankind Quarterly, vol. 15, #4, pp. 327-42, 1995. For brief accounts of the sequel in leading scientific journals, see Declan Butler, "Geneticist quits in protest at 'genes and violence claim', Nature, Vol. 378, p. 224, and two reports by Constance Holden in Science, 1995, entitled, respectively, "Specter at the Feast of Science' (Vol. 269, p. 35) and "Behavior Geneticists shun colleague' (Vol. 270, p. 1125). My account here is based on letters circulated on email by BGA members on a list serve (bganet@lists.Colorado.edu), where every message is signed by an individual, and includes the disclaimer that the message "does not necessarily represent the opinions of the Behavior Genetics Association, its members, or the maintainers of BGAnet". I am grateful to Glayde Whitney for providing me with this material, but of course I accept full responsibility for my interpretation of it.
13. This presidential talk, with a new title ("Ideology and censorship in behavior genetics") and a brief new introduction, has been published by Glayde Whitney in The Mankind Quarterly, vol. 15, #4, pp. 327-42, 1995. For brief accounts of the sequel in leading scientific journals, see Declan Butler, "Geneticist quits in protest at 'genes and violence claim', Nature, Vol. 378, p. 224, and two reports by Constance Holden in Science, 1995, entitled, respectively, "Specter at the Feast of Science' (Vol. 269, p. 35) and "Behavior Geneticists shun colleague' (Vol. 270, p. 1125). My account here is based on letters circulated on email by BGA members on a list serve (bganet@lists.Colorado.edu), where every message is signed by an individual, and includes the disclaimer that the message "does not necessarily represent the opinions of the Behavior Genetics Association, its members, or the maintainers of BGAnet". I am grateful to Glayde Whitney for providing me with this material, but of course I accept full responsibility for my interpretation of it.
14. Commenting on an earlier draft of this paper, another journal's editor has indicated that, in his view, "our readers will probably need to know a bit more of what Glayde Whitney actual said that so infuriated his colleagues", and noted that I have given "considerable space to the aftermath, but very little to the incident that occasioned it". However, in my view the information I have provided (together with the reference above to a published version of Whitney's address) is sufficient. Just exactly what may have caused Dr. Whitney's fellow scientists to get so angry is a matter of psychological speculation. It may also be that Whitney did not convey his material with sufficient "sensitivity" to satisfy so-called experts in sensitivity training. All this, however, is not only speculative. It is also irrelevant for determining whether the BGA's treatment of this controversy constituted an abandonment of the eppur si muove spirit.
15. Nor did the Board make any effort to scientifically investigate "what most members would wish to see expressed" at any time during this controversy, although, as Dr. David Lykken's October 30 email (see below in text) noted, the wording of appropriate questions would be an embarrassing task. For example, given that in his talk Dr. Whitney referred to data from FBI Uniform Crime Reports, a question suggested by Dr. Lykken was: "Do you agree that any officer of BGA who publically cites data from the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports shall be deposed and defamed?"
16. One is reminded of Chamberlain's 1939 September ultimatum, but his deadline to Hitler was for an hour earlier.