Gould’s second chapter deals with the categorizing “Blacks and Indians as separate, inferior species”, however, while explaining that this idea was not one of wide spread popularity, because it was a contradiction of theology.
Gould makes a point to talk about prominent figures in history, such as Benjamin Franklin, and Abraham Lincoln to make the point that even though such figures are considered humanists that racism was inherent in their time. For example Franklin was cited as saying that his dream for America was a land free of the black race, and Lincoln stated “I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race”, when talking about the physical differences between the white race and the black race, and the impossibility of the two races achieving political equality. Again I think that the point to take away from this section is that even people, such as Lincoln, who are considered in our time as champions of racial equality, were a product of their time and were involved in a certain degree of racism.
Gould discusses the difference between Monogenism-or humans as a species with a single origin and degenerated accordingly from the ideal( Adam and Eve) with Blacks being further away from the perfection of Adam and Eve, than the White race, as well as Polygenism- Humans are derived from different sources and that is why there are different races.
“The idea that higher creatures repeat the adult stages of lower animals during their own growth”, to me seems to be a statement that gets to the core of these beliefs. By believing a statement such as this one implies a hierarchy that is meant to explain away any similarities between the different races, and therefore it seems more probable to focus on the differences between races.
Louis Agassiz:
A few beliefs, or practices that Agassiz upheld were key in the development of the theory of Polygeny in America. The fact that he believed that species generally did not migrate far from the centers around which they were created, with few exceptions such as humans, and he was considered a splitter, or that he broke species into separate species based on a minimal amount of difference, thus not accounting for variation within a species. I think that these are important because Agassiz’s practice of splitting species into separate species based on small differences would most surely lead him to divide the human species into distinct species based on skin color, or like attributes. The other part of Agassiz’s beliefs would have him believe that Blacks were created in Africa, because they are in their greatest numbers, however, if he was unable to separate the Caucasians from other population, into distinct species, than he was unable to account for the localities of certain races and the wide spread presence of Whites. This was in turn reflected in his belief that there were distinct species among humans, and they are better adapted to different geographic regions.
Samuel George Morton:
Morton measured the brain mass density of different races, believing that more intelligent or superior races would possess a higher brain mass. His hypothesis was that “a ranking of races could be established objectively by physical characteristics of the brain, particularly by its size”. This again returns to Gould’s main focus of the book, to examine the faults in science that has been conducted with the assumption that intelligence can be ranked in a linear hierarchical fashion, and therefore implies that intelligence is completely a biological phenomenon. Gould reexamines the data presented by Morton, and discovers that he inconsistently measures skulls, one example of this is the way that Gould suspects Morton was packing seeds into the skulls, by filling them and a few shakes for races Morton believed would be inferior, and by packing the seeds more tightly and pressing them in more forcibly for races, such as the Caucasian skulls, in order to maximize the amount of seeds in the skull. However, Morton did recognize the inconsistencies of using seeds to measure the brain; that is why he switched to lead shot, BB sized. Morton also did not account for the sex or size of the individuals. As well as, cropping his data source based on his personal beliefs of what the patterns should be. Gould does make the point to say that if Morton had believed what he was doing was wrong that he would have covered his tracks better. This suggests that the actions conducted by Morton were more reflective of the cultural expectations of his research than his own personal attitude toward other races.
Again returning to the social context within which research is conducted, this example shows that while Morton was susceptible to the cultural norms and beliefs, he may not have aware that they were influencing the way in which his research was conducted. By showing that even activists of the day were entrenched in the same types of beliefs, I think Gould is showing that racism was more wide spread through the society than just a few outspoken individuals, and that racism is present even if it is inherent and unbeknownst to the person that it affects, such as Morton.
Questions:
What kind of examples can you think of cultural norms being imposed on research in other fields?
What type of social implication do you think that research conducted, like Morton’s, under cultural standards may have? (other than establishing a ranked hierarchy of race)
In what ways do you think society has enabled biased research to take place (present and past)?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In what ways do you think society has enabled biased research to take place (present and past)?
ReplyDeleteResearch always requires some amount of funding and those most capable of funding are most often those already in power with money to burn, especially if burning that money further ensures their rank. A very relevant example to this discussion in light of our government’s current debate on health care reform is the role pharmaceutical companies play in funding research. These companies have a vested interest in the results. The quicker the studies are completed, the quicker the drugs can be sold on the market. This tends to allow for studies being done hastily and incomplete (just think about how many drugs are sold on the market that the consumers have absolutely no clue to the long term effects). Also, companies will fund research for drugs that have high commercial value over drugs that may be more valuable to a smaller demographic of the population (Viagra v. epileptic treatments).
What kind of examples can you think of cultural norms being imposed on research in other fields?
ReplyDeleteA good example is the turn of many sociology programs in the US turning toward criminal justice studies. Western is just an example of this among a larger trend. This translates to societies norms being reflected in the study of society toward controlling what we are afraid of in society. Rather than use the history of sociological theory (and modern theory) to put criminology into perspective and offer sociological change, sociology departments train students into the criminal justice fields of policing, the courts, and corrections for jobs - contradicting sociology as a broad science applying to all facets of human society.
Unfortunately, I agree with Anthony in the fact that research generally requires funding from sources that may have hidden agendas. Funding for drug research is just one of the many examples. Sometimes there is that push to get a product out on a market before another competitor is able to do so. Research methods may suffer as a result.
ReplyDeleteThe implications of research like Morton's are numerous. Aside from creating a hierarchy (both social and physical), it acts as an agent of repression and control over groups that are determined to be unequal. It also can act as an inhibitor to social progress.