Gerald Holton on the Anti-Science Phenomenon—And Why It Should Not Be Dismissed As a Harmless Fringe

Current Comments@ EUGENE GARFIELD INSTITUTE FOR SCIENTIFIC WFORMATICWS s501 MARKET ST WILAOELFHA, PA 19104 Parascience, Pseudoscience, and Political Power: Gerald Holton on the Anti-Science Phenomenon—And Why It Should Not Be Dismissed as a Harmless Fringe

Number 45 November 9, 1992

Introduction: Homage to a Mentor

1’ve often written of the many historians of science who have been mentors in my career. 1-3We sometimes take mentors for granted, neglecting to tell the world how they played a role in our personal or professional lives. It came as a surprise to re- alize I hadn’t yet acknowledged Gerald Holton as an important mentor or expressed my appreciation of his influence. An em- barrassing surprise, really, since he wrote the foreword to a volume of Essays of an Information Scientist.4 The Current Con- rentsm (Cd) essay which follows is an op- portunity to makeup for this oversight. Many CC readers will know from previous essays that Holton is Mallinckrodt Pro- fessor of Physics and professor of history Gerald Holton of science at Harvard University, Cam- ties.”s The lecture was cited in a previous bridge, Massachusetts. He has distinguished CC essay on the bicentennial of the US himself both in science and (he “science of Constitution.6 I’ve also cited Holton’s work science’’—that is, his seminal contributions on metaphors in science.’.s His book, The- on the social and cultural aspects of sci- matic Origins of Scientific Thought: Kepler ence. It is here that our interests intersect to Einstein, 9 was featured as a Citation and where I first “met” him. Classic@ in CC. 10These are in addition to our continuing discussion and correspcm- Intersecting Interests: dence on art and science. Jefferson and Einstein Thomas Jefferson said science is funda- For example, whenever I hear “Thomas mental to the health of the US.5 It is re- Jefferson” I recall his 1981 Jefferson Lec- freshing to recall how much of its current ture in Washington, DC. Selection to this research leadership the US owes to the in- award by the National Endowment for the flux of brilliant European scientists, like Humanities is “the highest honor the fed- Albert Einstein, around the time of World eral government confers for distinguished War H. Like so many others, I have an intellectual achievement in the humani- abiding interest in the life and work of

172 Einstein, a subject which Holton has re- text in Public Understanding of Science to searched so welI. 11 fully appreciate Holton’s insights. Refugees from intolerant, intolerable, to- talitarian states, these erni~ant researchers About the Author reinforced the intellectual infrastmcture of generations of scientific progress in the US, Holton received a bachelor’s and mas- where both the “freedom and happiness of ter’s degree in physics from Wesleyan Uni- man” and the advancement of knowledge versity. He also earned a master’s and PhD were the two goals of science, to quote degree, both in physics, from Harvard. Jefferson again.5 Holton, too, emigrated to Concurrent with his Harvard appointments, the US to escape Nazi persecution in Ger- Holton is a visiting professor at the Massa- many, where he was born in Berlin of Aus- chusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), trian parents. And our social sciences schol- where he was a founding faculty member arship has been enriched as a result. of the Program on Science, Technology, and Society. A member of numerous pres- Parascience and Pseudoscience: tigious professional organizations world- Not a Harmless Fringe wide, he has also received many honors and awards-including the Millikan, Oer- Holton sent me a presentation he made sted, and Sarton medals. to a conference on “Anti-Science and Anti- Over the past decades, Holton has pur- Technology Movement in the US and sued three related research interests. One USSR,” which was recently published in a has been the relation between science and new journal, Public Understanding of Sci- culture, which has involved the founding ence. 12It was a penetrating analysis of the of Daedalus and the publication of numer- gamut of “fringe science’’—from astrology ous books and essays. Another interest has to Lysenkoism to creationism. It also ex- been the intersection between science, tech- plained why it is unwise to dismiss this nology, and society. This has encompassed “anti-science” phenomenon as a harmless the founding of Science, Technology and fringe at a time when it is building politi- Human Values, the MIT educational pro- cal momentum and influence. Finally, gram, and other major activities. His third Holton constructed a theoretical framework major interest is the dynamics of growth in and practical strategy for dealing with the science, including sociological models for phenomenon. the expansion of research. His publications The relevance and interest of the paper on this topic are too numerous to mention to CC readers seemed obvious. However, here. space would not permit a reprint of the complete 26-page original. So it was de- A New Journal on the Public cided we would condense the paper. The Understanding of Science resulting digest follows. Although the digest is only about one-third the length of As noted earlier, the article digested in the original manuscript, it preserves the the following was published in the inaugu- thrust of Holton’s thoughts on anti-science. ral issue of Public Understanding qf Sci- However, the digest by no means substi- ence, on whose editorial advisory board tutes for Holton’s originaf article on the Holton serves. Launched by IOP (Institute anti-science phenomenon. It is meant to of Physics) Publishing and the Science Mu- draw attention to an important issue for the seum, London, its goal is to provide an research community by presenting his el- international forum for studies on the pub- egant and incisive analysis of it. We hope Iic dimensions of science, technology, and it will encourage you to read the entire medicine by educators, historians, sociolo- gists, policy makers, media analysts, and Ithaca, New York; Dorothy Nelkin, New others. In particular, it has positioned itself York University; Arie Rip, University of as the one journal “wholly or mainly de- Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands; and voted to” public understanding of science, John Ziman, Science Poiicy Support Group, as explained by the editor, John Durant, London. the museum’s assistant director and head Interested readers can order a free sample of science communication as well as visit- issue of the new quarterly journal by con- ing professor at Imperial College of Sci- tacting IOP Publishing, Techno House, ence, Technology and Medicine, London. 13 Redcliffe Way, Bristol BS 1 6NX, UK. Eu- I was pleased to learn that a number of ropean orders can be placed by phone colleagues and friends are among the asso- (0272-29748 1) or fax (0272-294318), The ciate editors and editorial advisory board. numbers for North America are 516-349- These include Subbiah Arunachalam, Cen- 7800, ext. 628, and 516-349-7669, respec- tral Electrochemical Research Institute, tively. Karaikudi, India, who also serves on the editorial board of Current Science; Sir ***** Walter Bodmer, Imperial Cancer Research Fund, London; David Edge, University of My thanks to Eric Thurschweil and Al Edinburgh, Scotland; Bruno Latour, Ecole Wel~ams-Dorof for their help in the prepa- Nationale Sup&ieure des Mines, Paris; ration of this essay,

Bruce Lewenstein, Cornell University, o ISI 1992

REFERENCES

1. Garneld E. Mel Kranzberg receives Bemal Prize as pioneering historian of technology. Currenr Conrenn ( 13):3-9,30 March 1992. 2------Robert K. Merton: among the giants. Essays of an information scientisr. Philadelphia: 1S1Press, 1980, Vol. 3, p. 176-8. 3------George SarLon: the father of the history of science. ParI 1. .%wton’searly life in Belgium. Part 2, Sarton shapes a new discipline. Ib,d., 1986, Vol. 8, p. 24 I-7; 248-53. 4, Holton G. Foreword. (Gartleld E.) Essays o~tm information scientisr: the awards of science and orher essays. Philadelphia: 1S1Press. 1985. Vol. 7. p. xiii-xxi. 5------The advancement of science, and its burdens: the Jefferson Lecture and other essays. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1986.351 p. 6. Gartleld E. The bicentennial of the US Constitution: the American Philoaophlcat .%ciety and the role of scholarship in the creation of the US republic. Op. cit., 1989. Vol. 10. p. 13I-7. 7. Holton G. Metaphors in science and education. (Taylor W, cd.) Metaphors of educaficm. London: Heineman, 1984. p. 91-113. (Reprinted in reference 5 above.) 8. Garfield E. The metaphor-science connection. Op. ci[., 1988. Vol. 9. p. 316-23. 9. Holton G. Thematic origim of scientific kmghr: Kep/er ro Einstein. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973.495 p, (Revised edition, 1988.) 10. ------On the origins of Thematic origins. Citation Classic, Commentary on Thematic origins of ~cientijic dlought; Kep/er to Einswin. Current Conrenrs/Arts & Humanities 1I(9): 14, 24 April 1989; currmt ConrenO/ Engineering, Technology & Applied Sciences 20( 17): 14, 24 April 1989; Current Contents/Physical, Chemical & Earth Sciences 29( 17):14,24 April 1989; Current Contents/Social& Be/mviora[ Sciences21 ( 17):16,24 April 1989. 11. ------Aiben Einstein, historical and cultural perspectives. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1982.439 p. 12------How to think about the ‘anti-science’ phenomenon. Pub/it Understand. Sci. 1(I ):103-28, January 1992. 13. Durant J. Editorial. Public Understand. SCI. 1(1): I-5, January 1992,

174 How to Think About the ‘Anti-Science’ Phenomenon* By Gerald Holton

Opposition to science as conventionally defined can take a great variety of forms, from interest in astrology to attacks on relativity theory, from false beliefs based on scientific illiteracy to support of Lysenkoism or Creationism. Which of these are relatively negligible, and which are potentially dangerous? What do these symptoms of disaffection portend, for science and culture in our time?

Belief in anti-science (or ‘alternative science’, ‘parascience’ ) is grounded in a person’s functional worldview, and is one symptom of a long-standing struggle over the legitimacy of the authority of conventional science. This analysis leads to the identification of a set of strategies for dealing with the counter-visions which periodically attempt to raise themselves from the level of apparent harmlessness to that of politically ambitious success.

The surface of the problem theory and quantum mechanics, and on cos- mologists who were thought to have of- My main task is to outline how to think fended against the doctrines of Engels’s about anti-science at the proper level. The Anti-Duhring. term anti-science can lump together too Much of what looks at first glance like many, quite different things that have in anti-science turns out to be something else. common only that they tend to annoy or For example, much of tabloid sensational- threaten those who regard themselves as ism involving UFOS is merely hucksterism more enlightened. We must disaggregate feeding on primitive ignorance (unless, as from the disparate jumble that which is the with the reputed inauguration of a section truly worrisome part of anti-science, so that on ‘UFO-logy’ in the Soviet Academy of we can discriminate between ‘real’ science Science, the craze gets official backing). (good, bad, and indifferent; old, new, or Yet, if our aim is to filter out, name, and just emerging; etc.); pathological science analyse the really dangerous segment of (as in Irving Langmuir’s essay on people what some call the anti-science movement, who thought they were doing real science we shall not find much help in the litera- but were misled:); pseudo-science (astrol- ture, There exists no adequate, serious treat- ogy and the ‘science’ of the paranormal); ment of it, nor even of the modem outbok blatant silliness and superstition (’pyramid that feels threatened by anti-science. All of power’ ); scientism (the exaggerated claims us enter this study equally in need of a of technocrats for scientific and technologi- better understanding. cal powers, as in ‘Star Wars’ projects); and other forms. Why does the ‘anti-science Thereby we shall be able to focus on the phenomenon’ concern us? single most malignant part of the phenomenon: the type of pseudo-scientific nonsense In a democracy, no matter how pcmriy that manages to pass itself off as an ‘alter- informed the citizens are, they do properly native science’, and does so in the service demand a place at the table where deci- of political ambition. Here our Soviet col- sions are made which have a large scien- leagues will be able to instruct us because tific/technical component. In that mismatch of their unhappy experience in past decades of rights and knowledge base lies the po- with Lysenkoism. attacks on the relativity tential for erroneous policy and eventual

● Greatty condensed from an article in Public Understanding ofScierrce 1(1):103-28, January 1$92.The complete version will be publishedin Holton G. Onscience and anri-science. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press, 1993 (chapter 6). Based on a presentation to the Joint US-USSR conference on ‘Anti-Science and Arrri-Technology Movement in the US and USSR’, held 2-3 May 1991at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, US.

175 social instability. History has shown repeat- the financial support given last year as pri- edly that a disaffection with science can vate donations to religious organizations turn into a rage that links up with far more amounted to a remarkable $54 billion. Still, sinister movements. the large majority of average Americans Thoughts of this kind are really behind report experiencing no conflict at all be- the concerns that the phenomenon of anti- tween science and faith, despite the fact science raises in the minds of many intel- that the modem science-based worldview lectuals, West and East. By themselves, all evolved in good part from the reaction to the astrologers, anti-evolutionists, spiritu- contradictions between these two undeni- alists and peddlers of new-age thinking able imperatives.2 could otherwise be merely a source of con- descension or amusement. We seem to dis- Anti-science as counter-vision cern behind these multi-faceted phenom- ena something perilous, a potentially fatal The anti-science phenomenon is not at flaw in the self-conception of the people all just an incomplete or ignorant or dam- today. Could it be, at this end of the cen- aged form of the ‘proper’ worldview that tury, that the widespread lack of a proper many of us here believe should character- understanding of science itself might be ei- ize our civilization at this time in history. ther a source, or a tell-tale sign, of a Instead—and leaving aside the banal, rela- culture’s decline? tively harrrdess or ignorant varieties-what One may try to shrug off such dark the more sophisticated so-called anti-sci- thoughts by pointing to the bright side, not entists offer is, to put it bluntly, an articu- least the practically universal popular en- lated and functional, and potentially pow- chantment with high-tech. One may seek erful counter-vision of the world, within comfort in the fact that even though only which there exists an allegiance to a ‘sci- less than half of the US adult population ence’ very different from conventional sci- believes in the evolutionary descent of hu- ence. man beings from eadier species, and even Today there exist a number of different though half has trouble finding one side of groups which from their various perspec- a square when given one of the other sides, tives oppose what they conceive of as the the US public at large reports to pollsters a hegemony of science-as-done-today in our greater level of belief in the potential of culture. These groups do not form a coher- science and technology as a force for the ent movement, and indeed have little inter- good (at least in the abstract) than equiva- est in one another. But what they do have lent tests have shown for other major in- in common is that each, in its own way, dustrial countries, such as France and Ja- advocates nothing less than the end of sci- pan. ence as we know it. This uninfomted assertion of interest is Let me just name the four most promi- not troubled by the well-documented, con- nent portions of this current countercon- tradictory feeling about scientists, which is stituency. Starting from the intellectually less positive. In America at the end of the most serious end, there is a type of modem twentieth century it is not science but reli- philosopher who asserts that science can gion which, as in the days of the seven- now claim no more than the status of a teenth-century Pilgrims, is perhaps the useful myth—the term is used by Mary strongest force in private and national life— Hesse—not to speak of a new wing of so- just as Tocqueville had noticed in the 1830s. ciologists of science who, going far be- About one-third of our adults, and a large yond their reasonable task, wish, in Bruno fraction of these from evangelical sects, Latour’s words, to ‘abolish the distinction now say they are ‘born-again’ believers; between science and fiction’, over half believe in the possibility of the Next, there is a group, small but very daily occurrence of miracles through praye~ influential, of alienated intellectuals, of 60% say they believe in the literal exis- whom Arthur Koestler served as prominent tence of Hell for the eternally damned. And :xemplar. For them to be doomed to igno-

176 rance is the worst wound. But the fantastic The need for ecological-systems think- growth rate of new knowledge, and our ing, both for its benign significance and spotty record as educators, has inflicted on because of the evident threats, is rather new, them, as Lionel Trilling honotrrabl y con- having emerged into global thought only fessed, a devastating ‘humiliation’.3 in the last third of the twentieth century, Third, there is a resurgence among what and is bound to become a chief preoccupa- I have called the Dionysian, with their tion of the twenty-first. There were of dedication ranging from ‘New Age’ think- course very significant pioneers earlier, ing to wishful parallelism with Eastern such as John Muir and Patrick Geddes, who mysticism, from intellectual anarchy to prepared our minds in terms of their local crystal power.4 Some have their roots in or localizable concerns. Even Rachel nineteenth-century Romanticism, some in Carson was focusing only on the threats to the 1960s’ counter-cultures; but all agree the ecosystem from certain chemicals. We that one of the worst sins of modern now treasure these pioneers even more, be- thought is the concept of objectively cause they prepared us to understand better reachable data. the global meaning that had to be extrapo- A fourth group, again very different, is a lated from their messages. radical wing of the movement represented Last but not least, with the rise of many by such writers as Sandra Harding, who scientists to visibility and prominence in recently said physics today ‘is a poor model our own nation’s life, something was trig- [even] for physics itself’. For her and her gered in the American response which is like-minded colleagues, science now has perhaps idiosyncratic for this country but the fatal flaw of ‘androcentrism’; that, to- in fact is fundamentally healthy-namely, gether with faith in the progressiveness of skepticism against this, as against any, form scientific rationality, has brought us to the of strong, organized authority. point where, she writes, ‘a more radical intellectual, moral, social, and political Three types of ameliorating strategies, revolution [is called for] than the founders and their limits of modern Western cultures could have imagined’ .s I began by asking the question whether That these groups have been able to gain the multifaceted anti-science phenomenon, considerable attention is due in part to the even if widespread, is at bottom only a fact that the ground for dismay with mod- more or less harmless diversion, or whether em science and technology has been pre- it signals an important cultural challenge pared by three different factors, all operat- and therefore must be taken seriously. ing in the same direction. My answer is now clear. If we leave aside First, with science and engineering now as intrinsically unimportant the passing central components of modem life, from fads, ignorance, canalizations, etc. (and birth to death, it is not surprising that con- their commercial exploitation). we can fo- cern is widespread over some real or imag- cus on pseudo- or parascientific schemes ined consequences of science-driven tech- that arise from deep conviction. These are nology, nor that some of these concerns grounded in a fairly stable and functional, have in fact been first examined and made motivating worldview. It is these that can public by scientists and engineers. be directed at the core of contemporary ctrl- This leads to the second factor, of which ture (as would, for example, an analogous the now international ecology movement is anti-literature phenomenon: in fact, some an indicator. Earlier than even most scien- of the new cultural movements in the USA tists, some critics intuited the fragility and have just that purpose). Even though the delicacy of the interconnections that gov- counter-constructs embodying parascience ern the well-being of all species on Earth. are a minority view today in the USA, their Their methodology and their rhetoric may entrenchment is a living reminder of an not always have been sound, but their mo- old, worldwide struggle of mutual delegiti- tivation has been a Darwinian one. mation of rival cultural claimants.

177 How alarming this is felt to be depends 1930s. In the early phase of the growth of of course on whether earnest and success- Nazism in Germany, there arose, in the ful interventions are undertaken in oppo- words of Fritz Stem, the ‘cultural Luddites, sition to the counter-construct, or whether who in their resentment of modernity sought intellectuals and policy makers on the to smash the whole machinery of culture.” whole will lazily continue to give only In looking back on such historic cases, lip service to this problem, as they have we can draw two important lessons. The done with scientific and general cultural first is that alternative sciences or parasci- illiteracy. ences by themselves may be harmless As a practical matter, there seem to be enough (except as one of the opiates of the only three types of interventions that make masses), but that when they are incorpo- sense: rated into political movements they can be- 1, The traditional one: formation, from come a time bomb waiting to explode. an early age on, of a modem worldview We have recently been watching just such that will preempt the attractions of its op- a possibility in the USA. Among the rel- posite. This implies not only early nurtur- evant documentation is an essay by James ing of the chi Id by a sound educational Moore, released by the American Acad- system designed for this purpose; one would emy of Arts and Sciences, entitled ‘The also need the support by that individual’s Creationist Cosmos of Protestant Funda- parents, teachers, and other cimegivers who mentalism’.8 It chronicles the recent rise themselves should have passed through an and political power of the anti-evolution education of this kind. movement in the USA. While opposition 2. Interactions of the sort that bring to to evolutionist teachings has a long history light directly the internal contradictions in in America, Moore notes that ‘today, Fun- the alternative picture; or massive and per- damentalists may have a fair claim that up sistent adult education efforts. to a quarter of the population of the US, 3. Widely visible exposure of the fail- and a rapidly increasing number of con- ures of the claims of parascience, and per- verts worldwide, live in a universe created sistent political action to prevent its formal miraculously [in six days] only a few thou- acceptance into schooling systems. Thus, sand years ago, and on an earth tenanted while convinced followers of ‘creationism’ only by those fixed organic kinds that sur- themselves are probably unreachable ow- vived a global Ffood .... The creationist cos- ing to the robustness and internal function- mos of Protestant Fundamentalism has ac- ality of their supporting world picture, at quired an authority rivalling that of the least one can reverse, as was done recently established sciences’ (p. 46).8 in Texas after a decade-long fight, the The most noteworthy point is the joining stranglehold of these powerfully presented of ‘Creationism’ with the agenda of politi- minority views on the selectors of textbooks cally ambitious evangelists such as Falwell, for the whole state’s school system. Robertson, Swaggert, Bakker, and Ken- nedy. As the proponents’ published view Toward a conclusion shows, the stakes are much higher for them than merely displacing current biology Among examples that help us derive texts. They focus on the traditional Funda- guidelines are two in particular. One is the mentalist task: how to prepare this world rise of the machine-breaking Luddites in for the coming of the next. Britain in 1811 to 1816. It was a move- On the way to that goal, they have en- ment first spawned by economic grievances, countered surprisingly little vocal opposi- but eventually became a violent explosion tion from the world of scholarship, science, against the technological symbols of a suf- w theology in the USA. On the contrary, focating and unyielding factory systems they have acquired powerful aflies in high Here I wish only to refer to it, as it has a places. Their sympathizers included a Presi- certain overlap with the other example, ient of the USA in the 1980s; he is on which took place in the 1920s and early record as holding to a worldview that has

1 open arms not only for astrology, but also less commitment and staying power than for UFOS, for Creationism, and for a form did their opponents. of Fundamentalism that concerns itself with As we have seen, history records that the inevitable approach in the near future the serious and dedicated portion of the of an apocalyptic Ending. anti-science phenomenon, when married The other lesson to draw from our his- to political power, does signal a major toric cases is simply this. History records cultural challenge. In short, it is prudent an important and revealing asymmetry: the to regard the committed and politically original Machine Luddites of the nineteenth ambitious parts of the anti-science phe- century were soon brutally crushed; but the nomenon as a reminder of the Beast that Cultural Luddites have often, at least for a slumbers below. When it awakens, as it time, been the winners, although at great has again and again over the past centu- cost to their civilization. ries, and as it undoubtedly will again some It is sobering that in every case there day, it will make its true power known. were intellectuals who tried to stand up to Those who care to learn the lessons of the Cultural Luddites, but they rose too late, the past may be well advised to try to were far too small in number, received little defang the counter-vision even in its encouragement from their peers, and had present, less virulent state.

References

1,Langmuir, 1., 1989, Pathological science. Physics Today, 42( 10),36. 2. Niemi, R. G., Mueller, J., and Smith, T. W., 1989, Trends in Public Opinion: A Compendium of Survey Data (New York Greenwood Press). 3, Trilling, L., 1972,Mind in the Modem World: The 1972 Jefferson Lzcture in the Humanities (New York Viking). 4. I have treated this phenomenon in Holton, G., 1986, Dionysians, Apollonian, and the scientific imagination. The Advancement of.$cience, and Its Burdens (Cambridge University Press), Chap. 3. A thorough, carefully supported analysis of the fashionable attempts to link modem science and Eaatem lore is Restive, S., 1978and 1982,Parallels and paradoxes in modem physics and Eastern mysticism. Social Studies of Science, 8.143-181 (Part I) and 12,37-71 (Part 11), 5. Hadng, S., 1986, The Science Quewicm in Feminism (Ithaca: Cornell University Press), p. 10 see the trenchant reviews of this issue in Levin, M., 1988,American Scho.kw,57, 10C-106,and in Geertz, C., 1990,A lab of one’s own. New York Review of Books, 37(8 November), 19-23. 6. See, for example, Thonris, M. 1., 1970,The Luddites: Machine-Breaking in Regency .Errgland (Hamden, CT M. Archon Books); DarvaO,F. O., 1934,Popular Disturbances and Public Order in Regency England (London: Oxford University Press); and Pearamr,G., 1979,Resistance to the machine. Counrer- Movemenrs in the Sciences, edkd by H. Nowotny and H. Row (Dnrdrechc Reidel). 7. Stem, F., 1961,The Politics of Cultural Despair: A Study of the Rise of Gerrnonic Ideology (Berkeley, CA: University of Crdifomia press), p. xvii. See also the important bcok Beyerchen, A., 1977, Scientists under Hitler.’ Politics in the Third Reich (New Haven, CT Yale University Press). 8. In Marty, M. E., and Appleby, R. S., 1992,Fundamentalisms and Sociery: Reclaiming the Sciences, the Family, and Society, vol. 2 (University of Chkago Press).

Author

Gerald Holton is Mallinckrodt Professor of Physics and professor of history of science at Harvard University, and concurrently visiting professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is based at the Jefferson Physical Laboratory, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, US. Among his publications are: Thematic Origins of Scient@ Thought: Kepler to Einstein (Harvard University Press, 2d ed. 1988), The Advancement of Science, and Its Burdens (Cambridge University Press, 1986), and The Scientific Imagination: Case Studies (Cambridge University Press, 1978).

179