1 Unit 1: The Culture of Science
“The Bitter Aftertaste of Technical Sweetness.” Heather E. Douglas. Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus: Annotated for Scientists, Engineers, and Creators of All Kinds, edited by David H. Guston, et al., MIT Press, 2017, pp. 247–251.
Abstract: In this essay, science and society professor Heather E. Douglass explores how the pursuit of “technical sweetness” affected both Victor Frankenstein’s work and the work of the atomic scientists in the 1930s and 1940s.
- Supplement: “Why There are New Assessments of Oppenheimer’s Role in History.” William Brangham and Courtney Norris. PBS News Hour. 26 Dec. 2022 (8 minutes).
Abstract: Physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer led the Manhattan Project to develop nuclear weapons during World War II and is perhaps best known as the “Father of the Atomic Bomb.” But he was a complicated man. As William Brangham explains, there are new assessments of his role in history.
“Weaving Traditional Ecological Knowledge into Biological Education: A Call to Action.” Robin Wall Kimmerer. BioScience, vol. 52, no. 5, May 2002, pp. 432–438.
Abstract: Should Western science be valued over other forms of knowledge? In this peer-reviewed scientific article, plant ecologist Robin Wall Kimmerer explores why the traditional ecological knowledge of indigenous peoples should be recognized as “complementary and equivalent” to scientific knowledge and included in university science curricula.
“Objectivity is a Myth that Harms the Practice and Diversity of Forensic Science.” Allysha Powanda Winburn and Chaunesey M.J. Clemmons. Forensic Science International: Synergy, vol. 3, 2021, pp. 100196, doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2021.100196.
Abstract: Forensic scientists have long held that objectivity is a core tenet of our analyses and the expert-witness statements that can result. Certainly, the rhetoric of objectivity holds an undeniable allure given the fact that we, unlike many other scientists, may testify to our results in a court of law. However, our faith in objectivity is complicated by the facts that: (1) pure scientific objectivity does not exist; and (2) espousing the myth of objectivity is neither neutral nor benign. The authors consider both points and conclude with recommendations for a strong, realistic, and ethical practice of forensic science that does not require faith in a dangerous myth.
- Supplement: “Seeing How It Is: Can Empirical Observation Lead Us to the Truth?” With panelists Steve Fuller, Angela Saini, Rupert Sheldrake, Peter Atkins, hosted by Danielle Sands. Institute of Art and Ideas, 16 July 2022 (43 minutes).
Abstract: From Newton to Darwin, Curie to Einstein, science has been built on empirical observation. Now the very idea of neutral observation is under threat. In a postmodern world it is claimed all observation is perspectival, everything we see is influenced by what we already think. Heisenberg, the founder of quantum mechanics, went further arguing that observing reality was not even possible. Are we at sea in a world of competing models? Or is it time to reassert the value of empirical observation, supported perhaps by machine learning and big data, as a means of choosing between incompatible theories?
“Why Science Needs the Humanities to Solve Climate Change.” Steven D. Allison and Tyrus Miller. The Conversation, 1 Aug. 2019.
Abstract: Solving the world’s climate problems will require tapping into brainpower beyond science. That’s why the authors—an ecologist and a humanities dean—team up to rethink climate solutions. Recently they developed a program to embed humanities graduate students in science teams, an idea that climate research centers are also exploring.
“Unnatural Selection: How Racism Warps Scientific Truths.” Abacki Beck. Bitch Media, 5 Oct. 2017.
Abstract: In this article, social activist Abacki Beck critiques the assumption that scientific truths are “largely unbiased, nonpartisan, and universal” by examining how science is “wrought with violent, racist histories assumed as truth and presented as for the good of humanity.” Bitch Media is an online media organization whose mission is to provide and encourage an engaged, thoughtful feminist response to mainstream media and popular culture.
Case Study: Racism in Science
“From Birth to Death: Black Americans and a Lifetime of Disparities.” Kat Stafford. Associated Press, 23 May 2023.
Abstract: From birth to death, Black Americans fare worse in measures of health compared to their white counterparts. They have higher rates of infant and maternal mortality, higher incidence of asthma during childhood, more difficulty treating mental health as teens, and greater rates of high blood pressure, Alzheimer’s disease and other illnesses. The Associated Press spent the past year exploring how the legacy of racism in America has laid the foundation for the health inequities that Black people face.
-
-
- Chapter One, Birth: Why do so many Black women die in pregnancy? One reason: Doctors don’t take them seriously. Includes AP radio story (3 minutes) and video (5 minutes).
- Chapter Two, Childhood: Black children are more likely to have asthma. A lot comes down to where they live. Includes AP radio story (3 minutes) and video (5 minutes).
- Chapter Three, Teen Years: Black kids face racism before they even start school. It’s driving a major mental health crisis.
- Chapter 4, Adulthood: High blood pressure plagues many Black Americans. Combined with COVID, it’s catastrophic. Includes AP radio story (3 minutes) and video (4 minutes).
- Chapter 5, Elders: A lifetime of racism makes Alzheimer’s more common in Black Americans. Includes two videos (2 minutes and 5 minutes).
- Medical Racism in History: The health inequities documented in this project have their roots in a long history of medical racism. The AP has collected a small sample of that history related to every phase of life. Includes video (2 minutes).
-
“Racism: Overcoming Science’s Toxic Legacy.” A Nature special issue. 20 Oct. 2022.
Abstract: For centuries, science has built a legacy of excluding people of color and those from other historically marginalized groups from the scientific enterprise. Institutions and scientists have used research to underpin discriminatory thinking, and have prioritized research outputs that ignore and further disadvantage marginalized people. Nature has played a part in creating this racist legacy. After the killing of George Floyd by police in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in 2020, Nature committed to becoming an agent of change, and helping to end discriminatory practices and systemic racism. This special issue is part of that commitment, and the first in this journal’s history to be guest-edited.
Part One: Witnessing Racism
-
-
- Feature: ‘It’s a Constant Hum’: A Planetary Geologist Calls Out Racism in Academia
- Feature: The First Indigenous Female Surgeon in Canada Is Battling for Health Justice
- Feature: The Geoscientist Fighting For Universities to Confront Systemic Racism
- Feature: ‘There’s No Space For Us’: An Indigenous-Health Researcher Battles Racism in Australia
- Feature: ‘I Was Treated as if I Was Dirty’: A Paediatrician Decries Racism Against African Scientists
-
Part Two: Systemic Racism
Part Three: Building a Fairer Future
-
-
- Careers feature: Imperialism’s Long Shadow: The Uk Universities Grappling with a Colonial Past
- Comment: Counter the Weaponization of Genetics Research by Extremists
- News & Views in retrospect: The Unseen Black Faces of AI Algorithms
- Where I work: A Jamaican Medicinal-Plant Scientist Explores His African Roots
-