Jewish scientists as geniuses and epigones: scientific practice and attitudes towards Albert Einstein, Ferdinand Cohn, Richard Goldschmidt

Studia Rosenthaliana

Volumn 40, Issue , 2007, Pages 75-108

  Charpa, Ulrich ^a   Deichmann, Ute ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 70849087339     PISSN: 17817838     EISSN: 17831792     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2143/SR.40.0.2028837     Document Type: Review

References (73)

1. Cf. L.S. Feuer, 'A Narrative of Personal Events and Ideas', in: S. Hook, W.L. O'Neill, and R. O'Toole (eds.) Philosophy, History and Social Action (Dordrecht 1988), p. 1-85
2. Historically, the neglect of this constraint is due to the antithesis of scholarship and poetic imagination in the context of eighteenth century aesthetics. In the sequel, the poet's genius is either seen as being originated by mere thinking (enlightenment) or noble emotions ('Empfindsamkeit', romanticism). In both cases it is considered as non-professional, all-embracing excellence in contrast to any domain-specific competence (cf. The German idea of the 'Universalgenie' Goethe). On the history of this tendency, see J. Schmidt, Die Geschichte des Genie-Gedankens in der deutschen Literatur, Philosophie und Politik 1750-1945 (Darmstadt 1985)
3. A typical case of the wide-spread naive adoption of the romantic attitude is conveyed in the concept of the collecation P. Murray (ed.), Genius: the History of an Idea (Oxford 1989), and many of its contributions
4. This is mirrored by the use of the concept of genius in the sense of professional achievement, respectively disciplinary contributions, such as 'the genius of X'. Cf. for instance P. Compton, The Genius of Louis Pasteur (London 1933)
5. C. Smith, 'The Genius of Michael Faraday', Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London 46 (1992), p. 317-323
6. B.R. d'Este and G.B. Porchedda, 'Il genio de Leonardo: dall' anatomica descrittiva alla biomeccanica', Quaderni internazionali di storia dall medicina e della sanità 4 (1995), 5 (1996), p. 87-93
7. C.U.M. Smith and R. Arnett, The Genius of Erasmus Darwin (Ashgate 2004)
8. R. Petrov and T.I. Ulyankina, 'The Genius of E. E. Metchnikoff: Discoveries over the Centuries', Bioscience Reports 16,2 (1996), p. 189-205
9. Therefore, if 'genius' is used a predicate for the whole person within the historiography of science at all this usage stays in a close connection to the meaning of a professional achievement (see, e.g. A. Pais, The Genius of Science - A Portrait Gallery [Oxford 2000]), and it appears appropriate to name the sphere of excellency, for example, that of science awards
10. (D. Brian, Genius Talk: Conversations with Noble Scientists and other Luminaries [New York 1995], or more exactly the disciplinary context
11. Cf, e.g. J. Gleick, Genius: Richard Feynman and Modern Physics (London 1992)
12. Not all vague expressions admit comparative analysis, but here it is obvious. On the topic in general, see. e.g., D. Graff and T. Williamson 2002 (eds.), Vagueness (Aldershot 2002)
13. See the pioneering approach of A.I. Goldman, 'Foundations of Social Epistemics', Synthese 73 (1987), p. 109-144
14. applications are to be found, e.g. P. Thagard, How Scientists Explain Disease (Princeton 1999), p. 167-184
15. more closely to the topics discussed here: U. Charpa and U. Deichmann, 'Vertrauensvorschuß und wissenschaftliches Fehlverhalten - Eine reliabilistische Modellierung der Fäll, Abderhalden, Goldschmidt, Moewus and Waldschmidt-Leitz', Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte 27 (2004), p. 187-204
16. This is in contrast to the empirical sciences such as chemistry and biochemistry, where experimentation and the reliability of its results are central. Thus Otto Warburg, arguably the greatest biochemist in the first third of the twentieth century, prided himself that all his results were readily reproducible (even though his interpretations were sometimes untenable), Hans Krebs, O. Warburg, Cell Physiologist, Biochemist and Eccentric (Oxford 1981), p. 76
17. This is mirrored on the level of the historical reconstruction. The voluminous catalogue of the Wellcome Library, one of the world's greatest collections of publications in the field of the history of science does not show one (!) entry on 'epigone', 'epigonic' etc. The only title that matches refers to a curiosity-like piece by A. Helmstadter, 'Dr. Peter Natilis Elektrophysiopathie: Ein Mönch als Nachahmer Cesar Mattheis', Geschichte der Pharmazie, 45 (1993), p. 9-13
18. Not surprisingly, when historians of science deal with what might be labelled 'epigonic' they prefers to discuss 'traditions', 'schools' etc. Cf. The volume of Osiris dedicated to this issue: G.L. Geison and F.L. Holmes (eds.), Research Schools: Historical Reappraisals, Osiris 8 (1993)
19. A reconstruction of this process in a prominent case is offered by R. Yeo, 'Genius, Method, and Morality: Images of Newton on Britain - 1760-1860', Science in Context 2 (1988), p. 157-284
20. Sarton combines his approach with that of eugenic ideas of his own days, but it seems plausible to consider Cartesianism with its epistemological individualism and autarkism as the older root. Some materials taken from older histories of science are collected in D. v. Engelhardt, Historisches Bewußtsein in der Naturwissenscbaft von der Aufklärung bis zum Positivismus (Freiburg 1979). The 1913 volume of Isis contains two other articles on geniuses that are purely racist
21. Fisch does not deny the relevance of learning, that is transmitting theories and data from one actual or future participant of the research process to the other (which is in conflict with Popper's anti-personalism) but his Popperisanism leads him to overestimate criticism as well as provisional opinions and to underestimate the role of infallible 'hard' knowledge. 'If Einstein's scientific revolution and Popper's philosophical revolution have taught us anything about science, it is that all, but all human knowledge, even the most seemingly sound, is fallible and that the essence of rationality is forever to treat it as such.' M. Fisch, Rational Rabbis - Science and Talmudic Culture (Bloomington 1997), p. 38. But indeed, our knowledge about Einstein's and Popper's approaches is not controvertible. And the same holds for our knowledge about Ptolemy's and Copernicus's models of planetary motion. Fisch himself admits (p. 36-37) that belief in a theory is not a relevant ingredient of the scientific progress but he does not take the next step - that is to accept that scientific knowledge is not the same as believing certain theories to be true. Scientific knowledge is a stable acquaintance with theories, data, patterns of argument etc, and these bases of research grow continually. It is cumulative and not controvertible. Ironically, Einstein's as well as Popper's 'revolutions' are based to a great deal on the uncriticised, not even commented work of others. On some dependencies of Einstein's work see below, on the 'unoriginality' of Popper's falsificationism see the early reaction of Reichenbach and others. The central idea of the asymmetry of verification and falsification can be traced to Aristotle's Analytica posteriora and countless other lesser known treatises on scientific method (among them texts of Grossetest, Hooke and of the younger Herschel). In many cases the latter refer to other sources in this regard
22. E.g. J.F. Fries, Die mathematische Naturphilosophie nach philosophischer Methode bearbeitet (1822)
23. reprinted in: G. König and L. Geldsetzer (eds.), Fries, Sämtliche Schriften, vol. 13 (Aalen 1979), p. 23, that pays tribute the 'falsificationist' botanist Heinrich Friedrich Link (1767-1850)
24. An interesting, but philosophically cautious attempt to defend the Talmudic attitude against the idea of epistemic autonomy can be found in M. Sokol, 'Personal Autonomy and Religious Authority', in: idem, Rabbinic Authority and Personal Autonomy (Northvale 1992), p. 169-216
25. J. Sacks, 'Creativity and Innovation in Halakhah', in: Sokol, op. cit., p. 123-168, p. 167
26. Speech at the Savoy Hotel, on cd, Albert Einstein - Historic recordings 1930-1947, British Library (2005)
27. A. Rothenberg, 'Psychopathology and creative recognition: A comparison of hospitalised patients, Nobel laureates, and controls', Archives of General Psychiatry 40 (1983), p. 937-942, p. 938
28. cf. D.K. Simonton, Creativity in Science. Chance, Logic, Genius, and Zeitgeist (Cambridge 2004), p. 116-118
29. The German original is quoted in the German translation of the canonical biography: A. Pais, 'Raffiniert ist der Herrgott' - Albert Einstein. Eine wissenschaftliche Biographie ('Subtle is the Lord'. The Science and the Life of Albert Einstein, [Oxford 1982]), (Brunswick 1986), p. 175
30. See the disputed books of C.J. Bjerkness
31. Cf. R. Huber, Einstein und Poincaré. Die philosophische Beurteilung physikalischer Theorie (Paderborn 2000)
32. Cf. S. Mohorovicic, Die Einsteinsche Relativitätstheorie und ihr mathematischer, physikalischer und philosophischer Charakter (Berlin 1923), p. 23-24
33. See J. Renn and J. Stachel, Hilbert's Foundation of Physics: From a Theory of Everything to a Constituent of General Relativity, Max-Planck-Institut für Wissenschaftsgeschichte, preprint 118 (Berlin 1999)
34. L. Corry, J. Renn and J. Stachel, 'Belated Decision in the Hilbert-Einstein Priority Dispute', Science 278 (14 Nov 1997), p. 1270-1273, 1271
35. To Arnold Sommerfeld, 14 January 1908, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, vol. 2 (Princeton 1990)
36. 'Religion and Science', New York Times Magazine (9 November 1930)
37. On the popular iconisation and Einstein's value to Jewish 'pride and nationalisation', see e.g., M. Berkowitz, The Jewish-Self-image - American and British Perspectives, 1881-1930 (London 2000), p. 48-49, 86-92
38. On this and some other historical details cf. M. Jammer, Einstein and Religion (Princeton 2002), p. 15-63
39. Cf. especially M. Kellner, Must a Jew Believe Anything? (London 1999)
40. A. Einstein, Autobiographical Notes', in: P. Schilpp (ed.), Albert Einstein. Philosopher-Scientist (Evanston 1951; 2nd ed.), p. 33
41. On this see Kaplan, Marion A. 'Redefining Judaism in Imperial Germany: Practices, Mentalities, and Community', Jewish Social Studies 9, Number 1, Fall 2002 (New Series), p. 1-313
42. P 78-79
43. At first one could think of the impact of the protean Nietzschism of Jewish intellectuals. Cf. S.E. Aschheim, 'Nietzsche and the Nietzschean Moment in Jewish Life (1890-1939)', Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook XXXVII (1992), p. 189-212
44. See U. Charpa, 'Judentum und wissenschaftliche Forschung - Einstellungscluster im späten 19. Jahrhundert und ihr Fortwirken', Yearbook of the Simon-Dubnow-Institute, vol. 3 (2004), p. 175-198
45. F. Cohn, Blatter der Erinnerung. Zusammengestellt von Pauline Cohn, mit Beiträgen von Prof. Felix Rosen, 2 aufl. (Breslau 1901), p. 8-12
46. B. Hoppe, 'Die Biologie der Mikroorganismen von F.J. Cohn (1828-1898)', Sudhoffs Archiv 67 (1983), p. 158-189
47. see also assessments in P Collard, The Development of Microbiology (Cambridge 1976), p. 78 ff
48. P. Diepgen, Geschichte der Medizin, II, bd. 2. Hälfte (Berlin 1955), p. 118-124
49. W.C. Summers, History of Microbiology, in: J. Lederberg e.a., Encyclopedia of Microbiology (New York 2000; 2nd ed.), p. 3-4
50. F. Cohn, Die Entwicklung der Naturwissenschaft, in den letzten fiünfundzwanzig jahren. Ein Vortrag, 2nd ed. (Breslau 1872), p. 33
51. Schleiden's treatise on Die Bedeutung der Juden für die Erhaltung und Wiederbelebung der Wissenschaften im Mittelalter (1877), a work that was widely distributed and translated several times, is a rejoinder to the anti-Semitism of Billroth's Über das Lernen der medzinischen Wissenschaften an den Universitäten der deutschen Nation (Vienna 1876)
52. cf. U. Charpa, 'Matthias Jakob Schleiden (1804-1881): The History of Jewish Interest in Science and the Methodology of Microscopic Botany', Aleph - Historical Studies in Science and Judaism, vol. 3 (2003), p. 213-245
53. F. Cohn in BreslauerZeitung (17 December 1890)
54. R. Goldschmidt, In and Out of the Ivory Tower: An Autobiography (Seattle 1960), p. 4
55. R. Goldschmidt, 'Untersuchungen über Intersexualität VI', Zeitschrift für induktive Abstammungs- und Vererbungslehre 67, (1934), p. 1-40
56. Goldschmidt also applied his concept of inter-sexuality to humans. In 1916 he presented the concept of homosexuality as an intersexual phenomenon. He developed this idea over a period of fifteen years. Though he changed his view in 1931, his theory of homosexuality continued to be influential during the Nazi era, particularly in the work of Theo Lang (C.S. Koehler, The Sex Problem: Thomas Hunt Morgan, Richard Goldschmidt, and the Question of Sex and Gender in the Twentieth Century, doctoral dissertation [University of Florida 1998], p.222-223)
57. He rejected the idea of the particulate nature of genes, claiming that chromosomes acted as a whole. Goldschmidt gives a summary of his theory of genes in: 'The Theory of the Gene: Chromosomes and Genes', CSH Symposia (1951), p. 1-10
58. American geneticists rejected, for example, Goldschmidt's concept of quantitative gene action, which implied a disintegration of the chromosome during interphase. For details see M. Richmond, Richard Goldschmidt and Sex Determination: The Growth of German Genetics, 1900-1935, PhD dissertation (Indiana University, Ann Arbor, 1986), p. 344-358
59. R. Goldschmidt, The Material Basis of Evolution (New Haven 1940)
60. For details see M. Dietrich, 'Richard Goldschmidt: Hopeful Monsters and other "Heresies"', Nature Review Genetics 4 (2003), p. 68-74
61. R. Goldschmidt, Physiologische Theorie der Vererbung (Berlin 1927), p. 5 (translation UD)
62. 'Goldschmidt's attempt - of course not in its content - reminds us of Weismann's theory of germ plasm that a generation ago was to raise understanding also for inheritance and speciation - here, too, a courageous construction ingeniously erected on a heterogeneous and partly insecure ground, very impressive in its intellectual consistency, altogether not compelling...' (A. Kühn, Review of R. Goldschmidt's Physiologische Theorie der Vererbung, in Die Naturwissenschaften 16 (1928), p. 336-338; translation UD)
63. 'Für unser Objekt [Solenobia] gilt das Zeitgesetz nicht!' (J. Seiler, 'Das Intersexualitätsphänomen. Zusammenfassende Darstellung des Beobachtungsmaterials an Solenobia triquetrella und Deutungsversuch', Experientia 5 (1949), p. 425-438, esp. 438)
64. R. Goldschmidt, 'The Interpretation of the Triploid Intersexes of Solenobia', Experientia 5 (1949), p. 417-425
65. Jacob Seiler to Curt Stern, 19 October 1963, Goldschmidt Papers, Bancroft Library, call no. 72/241
66. M. Hartmann, Die Sexualität. Das Wesen und die Grundgesetzlichkeiten des Geschlechts und der Geschlechtsbestimmung im Tier- und Pflanzenreick (Stuttgart 1956), p. 314-321
67. Hans Bauer to Max Hartmann, 8 July 1955, Archiv der MPG, III. abt. no. 26B
68. G.C. Mosbacher, 'Die Intersexualität bei Lymantria dispar L. (Lepidoptera). Analyse der morphologischen Charaktere bei WZ- und ZZ-Intersexen im Hinblick auf die Interpretation des Intersexualitätsphänomens', Zeitschrift für Morphologie der Tiere 76 (1) (1973), p. 1-96
69. Sir Cyril Clarke F.R.S. and E.B. Ford F.R.S, 'Intersexuality in Lymantria dispar (L.). A Reassessment', Proceedings of the Royal Society London B BIO 206 (1165) (1980), p. 381-388
70. 'Intersexuality in Lymantria dispar (L) - A further reassessment', Proceedings of the Royal Society London B BIO 214 (1195) (1982), p. 285-288
71. 'Lymantria dispar (L) - A 3rd reassessment', Proceedings of the Royal Society London B BIO 218 (1212) (1983), p. 365-370
72. See also S.F. Gilbert, Cellular Politics: Ernest Everett Just, Richard B. Goldschmidt, and the Attempt to Reconcile Embryology and Genetics, http://zygote.swarthm0re.edu/gene2.html (14 July 2003), p. 19
73. H. Muller, 'Variation due to Change in the Individual Gene', American Naturalist 56 (1922), p. 32-50, esp. 49