DOCSLIB.ORG

Transformations and Survivals

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transformations and Survivals vidual contributions, the second mainly throughpublic activity and administration. The interestsand standardsof the two au- BOOK REVIEWSthorities have often conflicted, and this makesRussian science an interesting,even ideal, subjectfor socialhistory. LorenGraham has writtena book on the Transformationsand Survivals socialhistory of Russianscience, the aim of which is to providean introductionto the subject for a newcomer to it. I think it body the head of the Russiangovemment, serves that stated purpose,discussing in a Science in Russia and the Soviet Union. A whoeverit be at the moment. I am sorryto very simpleway severalkey issues, person- Short History. LOREN R. GRAHAM.Cambridge say that the most probableresponse would alities, and events. Instead of giving a University Press, New York, 1993. x, 321 pp. + be unanimousapproval. I wish that a pho- chronological narrative, it consists of a plates. $29.95 or ?30. Cambridge History of tographof such an enthusiasticproceeding, collection of essays on general featuresof Science. for instance of VyacheslavMolotov's elec- Russianscience, with impressiveand rich tion to honorarymembership in the Soviet factual details given in an appendix. The The book opens with a gallery of pictures of Academy of Sciences in 1946, had also book also reflectshow little of the subject famous Russian scientists, among them been includedso as to presentto the reader has been studiedand how many questions mythic founder Mikhail Lomonosov, ro- the other and equallyrepresentative face of and blank spots remain. mantic pioneer of non-Euclidean geometry Russianscience. The nation'sfirst important scientific in- Nikolai Lobachevsky, constructor of the What about independenceof thought, stitutions-the St. PetersburgAcademy of periodic table Dmitry Mendeleev, physiol- one might ask, and what are the reasons Sciences (1725), Moscow University ogist Ivan Pavlov, physicist Piotr Kapitza, behindthis doublestandard of thinkingand (1755), and a largernetwork of universities geneticist Nikolai Vavilov and his violent behavior?The shortestway to answeris to (around1805)-were oases of Westem sci- opponent Trofim Lysenko, mathematician call to mind the distinction between the ence in an alien, still quite traditionalsoci- Andrei Kolmogorov, and nuclear-weapons stateand civil societyand to understandthat ety. They dependedcompletely on the will creators Igor Kurchatov and Andrei Sa- the latter has played a very small role in of the centralgovernment to portrayitself as kharov. One might have added 18th-cen- science in Russiain any era, imperialor a modem Europeanpower. The Academy, tury genius Leonhard Euler and embryolo- soviet. This means that independentinsti- as a courtinstitution, remained in isolation gist Karl von Baer (who although not na- tutions of the scientificcommunity, indus- almostuntil the end of the imperialperiod. tive Russians cannot be excluded from the try, philanthropy,mass media, and public Universitiesestablished closer links with the history of Russian science), geologist opinionhave providedtoo little supportfor ever more emancipatedsociety in the first Vladimir Vemadsky, theoretical physicist science to securethat pluralityof sourcesof half of the 19th century.The demandfor Lev Landau, and space-program director authoritythat effectivelysubstitutes for free- universityeducation grew steadily; the aca- Sergei Korolev. In these figures we find dom. Only two authoritieshave been of demiccareer, however, was not attractiveto intelligent faces, independent minds, and a permanentcrucial importanceto Russian the elite. Graham'sbiographical essays on very impressive contribution to science. science-the world scientific community Lomonosov,Lobachevsky, and Mendeleev Now perform an experiment. Let these and native political power. A successful presenta pictureof the Russianscholar as mantled scholars get together to form, say, Russianscientist has had to meet the stan- typicallybeing of very modest and often the Areopagus of Russian science, and let dardsof both these "referencegroups," the provincialorigins, studying with statefinan- anybody suggest electing to this symbolic first mainly throughpublications and indi- cial supportin one of the "twocapitals" St. Petersburgor Moscowor abroad,and living a turbulent,if judgedby the standardsof democracies,public life. In the absenceof a well-developednative scientificcommunity with its discipline,persons like Lobachevsky and Mendeleevcould moreeasily introduce originaland radicalideas. The situationchanged in the secondhalf of the century,especially after the capitalist reformsof the 1860s. Massmedia created a cult of science and the public stronglyde- mandednew centersof leaming, while the govemmenttried to contain the spreadof the political opposition that quickly took hold in the universities.A new generationof professorsimported from Germany the idea that their task was not only teaching but doing research, and students and faculty struggledfor autonomy. Although public demand for education for women failed to change the rules of university admission, it led to the establishment of the first private The election of V. M. Molotov to membership honoris causa in the Soviet Academy of Sciences. and community institutions of higher learn- [ Vestnik Akademii Nauk SSSR, no. 1 1-1 2, 1946] ing. By 1914 these institutions matched the 1336 SCIENCE * VOL. 261 * 3 SEPTEMBER1993 state collegesin number,though not yet in forms of life and ways of expressingand Ol'denburgskii,and his readinessto com- size. The beginningof the presentcentury pursuingits particularinterests. Of course,the promisewith the Communistgovernment saw the emergenceof philanthropicinterest hidden life is much more difficultto study has to be explainedin anotherway. in science as such and the establishmentof than the open one, and therehas been very Writingon ideologyand science, Graham the first privateresearch institutions. Gra- little analysisof the scientificcommunity dur- providesa very good short summaryof the ham does not writemuch aboutthese insti- ing the Stalin period.Graham, in keeping principlesof dialecticalmaterialism relevant tutional developments,but he tells a story withthe currentstate of historiography,closes to science. He is also convincingwhen he that illustratesthe thesisfrom another side: his chapteron the scientificcommunity with arguesthat manygood scientiststook Marx- the triumphantreception of Darwinismin the early1930s. ism very seriouslyand usedit in their work. Russiawas shapedgreatly by public values The most apparentorganizational fea- His bestexamples are Lev Vygotsky's psycho- and the intelligentsia'soppositional and an- ture of Soviet science is the enormous logical theory of thought and language, tireligiousviews. Consciouslyand uncon- administrativerole of the Academyof Sci- AleksandrOparin's theory of the originof life, sciously,Russian interpreters deviated from ences. Having begun as the ImperialSt. VladimirFock's philosophy of quantumphys- Darwin,suppressing Malthusian and stress- PetersburgAcademy, it changed its name ics, and BorisHessen's social approach to the ing Lamarckianthemes in his doctrine. afterthe events of 1917 to "RussianAcad- historyof science. It is true that Marxist The Communistrevolution channeled the emy"and quicklyreached accord with the ideologyand philosophy were used as cultural processof modemizationin another resourcesand also as a strongweapon direction.The new governmentwas in scientists' conflicts. I suspect, willingto supportscience on a much however,that behindGraham's dis- broaderscale. For the sameideologi- tinctionbetween "authentic" Marx- cal and pragmaticreasons, it also ists and "dogmatists"who used the wanted to control science much ideologyfor primarilypolitical goals more tightly. Grahamexplains the hides nothing more than a simple complex attitudestoward so-called categorizationof scientistsas "good" "bourgeoisspecialists"-the core of and "bad.""Bad" scientist Lysenko, Sovietscience politics during the first althoughno less sincere a Marxist ten yearsafter 1917. The compro- thanhis opponents,suppressed them mise between scientistsand politi- politicallyin 1948 and is blamedfor cians was basedon mutualrecogni- dogmaticuse of ideology.In a com- tion of theirspheres of competence: parablesituation in 1950,"good" sci- scientistsretained a certainamount entists-comparativelinguists-sup- of professionalautonomy and were pressedwith the help of Stalin's allowedprivately to hold deviating heavy hand the school of Nikolai viewson generalpolitical issues. The Marr,who with his supposedlyanti- "A model of Lomonosov's chemical laboratory in St. Petersburg, the culturalrevolution of 1928-1931put first chemical laboratory in Russia, opened in 1748." [From Science bourgeois"new doctrine" of the de- an end to this compromiseand in Russia and the Soviet Union; courtesy of Institute of the History of velopmentof languageand near mo- markedthe transitionto a totalitari- Science and Technology, Moscow] nopolyon the field was the natural an regime.Communists took admin- candidatefor Lysenkoof Soviet lin- istrativecontrol of virtuallyall scien- guistics. The comparativelinguists tificinstitutions and demanded that scientists new Communist rulers. Ten years later, were as ready as Lysenko to use Marxismas a share their political values. They thought around 1929, it lost its relative autonomy political weapon, but their triumph over they had achievedeffective control of both and became a real Soviet Academy, re- Marr's followers
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 'Mathematical Machines' of the Cold War: Soviet Computing, American
    Special Issue: Science in the Cold War ABSTRACT Soviet science in the post-WWII period was torn between two contradictory directives: to ‘overtake and surpass’ Western science, especially in defence-related fields; and to ‘criticize and destroy’ Western scholarship for its alleged ideological flaws. In response to this dilemma, Soviet scientists developed two opposite discursive strategies. While some scholars ‘ideologized’ science, translating scientific theories into a value-laden political language, others tried to ‘de-ideologize’ it by drawing a sharp line between ideology and the supposedly value-neutral, ‘objective’ content of science. This paper examines how early Soviet computing was shaped by the interplay of military and ideological forces, and affected by the attempts to ‘de-ideologize’ computers. The paper also suggests some important similarities in the impact of the Cold War on science and technology in the Soviet Union and the United States. Keywords computers, ideology, military technology, Russia, Soviet Union ‘Mathematical Machines’ of the Cold War: Soviet Computing, American Cybernetics and Ideological Disputes in the Early 1950s Slava Gerovitch In March 1954, researchers of the Mathematical Institute of the Soviet Academy of Sciences in Moscow were preparing a comprehensive book- length survey of the entire mathematical discipline, Mathematics, Its Con- tent, Methods, and Meaning. An Institute-wide ‘philosophy seminar’, whose mission was to instil the right ideological principles into the researchers’ minds, held a special session devoted to the discussion of a draft introduc- tion to the book. One of the discussants displayed heightened ideological vigilance, and proposed that the introduction should de-emphasize the contributions of American mathematicians.
    [Show full text]
  • Blood, Water and Mars: Soviet Science and the Alchemy for a New Man
    Central Washington University ScholarWorks@CWU All Master's Theses Master's Theses Spring 2019 Blood, Water and Mars: Soviet Science and the Alchemy for a New Man Sophie Y. Andarovna Central Washington University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd Part of the European History Commons, History of Science, Technology, and Medicine Commons, Intellectual History Commons, and the Russian Literature Commons Recommended Citation Andarovna, Sophie Y., "Blood, Water and Mars: Soviet Science and the Alchemy for a New Man" (2019). All Master's Theses. 1201. https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd/1201 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Master's Theses at ScholarWorks@CWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@CWU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BLOOD, WATER AND MARS: SOVIET SCIENCE AND THE ALCHEMY FOR A NEW MAN __________________________________ A Thesis Presented to The Graduate Faculty Central Washington University ___________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts History ___________________________________ by Sophie Yennan Andarovna May 2019 CENTRAL WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Graduate Studies We hereby approve the thesis of Sophie Yennan Andarovna Candidate for the degree of Master of Arts APPROVED FOR THE GRADUATE FACULTY ______________ _________________________________________ Dr. Roxanne Easley, Committee Chair ______________
    [Show full text]
  • Suggestions for Thinking and Talking About Science and Religion from the Soviet Stephen M
    Article Suggestions for Thinking and Talking about Science and Religion from the Soviet Stephen M. Contakes Resonance Controversy, a Chemical Counterpoint to Lysenkoism Stephen M. Contakes and Garrett Johnson Garrett Johnson The Soviet resonance controversy was a chemical counterpart to Lysenkoism in which Soviet ideologues charged that Linus Pauling’s resonance concept was hostile to Marxism. We study it here to illustrate the role of social factors in science-faith dialogue. Because Soviet chemists were attentive to ideological dimensions of the controversy, they were not only willing to engage in public dialogue but also offered a response that decoupled the scientific aspects of resonance from ideological hostility, largely by modifying how they talked about delocalized chemical bonds. This enabled them to criticize and reject a pseudoscientific alternative to resonance and to avoid a Lysenko-like takeover of theoretical chemistry without threatening the wider Soviet social system. A potential lesson is that Christians in science who wish to promote fellow believers’ acceptance of their work would do well to account for the role of ideology in religiously motivated antimainstream science efforts. ne of us recently had the oppor- the images “may or may not be right” Otunity to examine a “creation- as they depended on two “big ‘ifs’”— based” physical science textbook the “correctness” of quantum theory and published by a Christian educational the “theory” governing electron flow ministry.1 Although the book used atoms between the STM probe and tip. to discuss matter, the author considered it important to point out that the scan- At first glance, these rhetorical dis- ning tunneling microscopy (STM) images missals seemed surprising given that commonly cited as evidence for their atoms, quantum mechanics, and theo- existence do not really show atoms.
    [Show full text]
  • Subjects of Freedom: Psychologists, Power and Politics in Postsocialist Russia
    SUBJECTS OF FREEDOM: PSYCHOLOGISTS, POWER AND POLITICS IN POSTSOCIALIST RUSSIA A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE PROGRAM IN MODERN THOUGHT AND LITERATURE AND THE COMMITTEE ON GRADUATE STUDIES OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Tomas Matza June 2010 © 2010 by Tomas Antero Matza. All Rights Reserved. Re-distributed by Stanford University under license with the author. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial 3.0 United States License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/ This dissertation is online at: http://purl.stanford.edu/ht219vj1183 ii I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. James Ferguson, Primary Adviser I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Gregory Freidin I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Matthew Kohrman I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ALEXEI YURCHAK Approved for the Stanford University Committee on Graduate Studies. Patricia J. Gumport, Vice Provost Graduate Education This signature page was generated electronically upon submission of this dissertation in electronic format.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Does Russia Have So Much Trouble Modernizing?
    1 Why Does Russia Have So Much Trouble Modernizing? An STS Approach Loren Graham, MIT and Harvard University I do not have to remind a group like this that trying to modernize is one of the oldest, if not the oldest, theme in Russian history. Going back to Peter the Great the idea of borrowing technology from the West and transferring it to Russia in the hopes that it would take roots has been a perennial theme. Peter tried it, Catherine the Great tried it, Alexander I and II tried it, Nicholas I and Count Witte tried it, Lenin and Stalin tried it (Remember “dognat i peregnat” [catch up and surpass the West]?) and now in post‐Soviet Russia Dmitri Medvedev and Vladimir Putin are trying it. Why is it so difficult for Russia? That is what I want to discuss today, basing myself on research I have done in recent years. This research will be presented soon in a book by me entitled “Lonely Ideas: Russia’s Trap.” At the moment Russia’s leaders are making a major effort to modernize, emphasizing that high technology is the key. The Russian government has asked my university, MIT, to help it create a new “silicon valley,” Skolkovo, near Moscow. Major Western companies, including Intel, Cisco, Siemens, Boeing, and Nokia are investing in facilities in Skolkovo. Unfortunately, Russia’s current leaders are making the same mistake that its past leaders have made, from Peter the Great onward: they have their eyes on the technology, not on the social and economic conditions that cause technology to flourish.
    [Show full text]
  • Functions and Uses of Disciplinary Histories Sociology of the Sciences
    FUNCTIONS AND USES OF DISCIPLINARY HISTORIES SOCIOLOGY OF THE SCIENCES A YEARBOOK Editorial Board: G. B6hme, Technische Hochschule, Darmstadt N. Elias, Universities of Leicester and Bielefeld Y. Elkana, The Van Leer Jerusalem Foundation, Jerusalem L. Graham, Massachusetts Institute of Technology R. Krohn, McGill University, Montreal W. Lepenies, Free University ofBerlin H. Martins, University of Oxford E. Mendelsohn, Harvard University H. Nowotny, European Centre for Social Welfare Training and Research, Vienna H. Rose, University ofBradford Claire Salomon-Bayet, University of Paris P. Weingart, University of Bielefeld R. D. Whitley, Manchester Business School, University ofManchester Managing Editor: R. D. Whitley VOLUME VII - 1983 FUNCTIONS AND USES OF DISCIPLINARY HISTORIES Edited by LOREN GRAHAM Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Program in Science, Technology and Society, Cambridge, Mass. 02139, U.S.A. WOLF LEPENIES Institut {iir Soziologie, Freie Universitdt Berlin and PETER WEINGART Fakultdt {iir Soziologie und Forschungsschwerpunkt Wissenschaftsforschung, Universitdt Bielefeld D. REIDEL PUBLISHING COMPANY A MEMBER OF THE KLUWER • ACADEMIC PUBLISHERS GROUP DORDRECHT/BOSTON/LANCASTER Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Main entry under title: Functions and uses of disciplinary histories. (Sociology of the sciences; v. 7) Includes index. 1. Science-History. 2. Social sciences-History. 3. Classical philosophy-History. I. Graham, Loren R. II. Lepenies, Wolf. III. Weingart, Peter. IV. Series. Q125.F86 1983 907'.2 83-4588 ISBN-13: 978-90-277-1521-0 ISBN-13: 978-94-009-7035-9 001: 10.10071978-94-009-7035-9 Published by D. Reidel Publishing Company, P.O. Box 17,3300 AA Dordrecht, Holland Sold and distributed in the U.S.A. and Canada by Kluwer Academic Publishers, 190 Old Derby Street, Hingham, MA 02043, U.S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Loren Graham and Jean-Michel Kantor a Comparison of Two Cultural Approaches to Mathematics: France and Russia, 1890-19301 “
    1 Loren Graham and Jean-Michel Kantor A Comparison of Two Cultural Approaches to Mathematics: France and Russia, 1890-19301 “. das Wesen der Mathematik liegt gerade in ihrer Freiheit” Georg Cantor, 18832 Many people would like to know where new scientific ideas come from, and how they arise. This subject is of interest to scientists of course, historians and philosophers of science, psychologists, and many others. In the case of mathematics, new ideas often come in the form of new “mathematical objects:” groups, vector spaces, sets, etc. Some people think these new objects are invented in the brains of mathematicians; others believe they are in some sense discovered, perhaps in a platonistic world. We think it would be interesting to study how these questions have been confronted by two different groups of mathematicians working on the same problems at the same time, but in two contrasting cultural environments. Will the particular environment influence the way mathematicians in each of the two groups see their work, and perhaps even help them reach conclusions different from those of the other group? We are exploring this issue 2 in the period 1890-1930 in France and Russia on the subject of the birth of the descriptive theory of sets. In the Russian case we have found that a particular theological view – that of the “Name Worshippers” – played a role in the discussions of the nature of mathematics. The Russian mathematicians influenced by this theological viewpoint believed that they had greater freedom to create mathematical objects than did their French colleagues subscribing to rationalistic and secular principles.
    [Show full text]
  • Ideologically Correct Science
    Mark Walker (ed.), Science and Ideology: A Comparative History (London: Routledge, 2003), 35-65. 3 "IDEOLOGICALLY CORRECT" SCIENCE Michael Gordin, Walter Grunden, Mark Walker, and Zuoyue Wang1 Introduction The historical study of science and ideology is really a twentieth-century phenomenon, for it is only after the First World War that stark differences appeared in political ideology and regime: liberal capitalist democracy, Marxist- Leninist communism, fascism and National Socialism. Furthermore, as the introduction to this volume argues, this historiography has been profoundly influenced by the Cold War, with the result that certain themes have been dominant. This essay will investigate perhaps the most striking examples of science being influenced by ideology, which here will be called "ideologically- correct-science" (ICS). The French Revolution will be included because, as the above-mentioned introduction also describes, it was both the first case study for the interaction of science and ideology, and a surrogate for other Cold War case studies. Not all relevant types of ICS will be, or even could be covered here. Indeed, this article will sacrifice depth in favor of breadth and use the compara- tive approach in order to provide a suggestive analysis of science under different ideological regimes. Scholars have generally assumed that a political environment can influence science, but relatively little is known as to how this functioned in particular circumstances or across national boundaries. ICS refers to attempts by the state (or at least some representatives of, or forces within the state) to not only use science, but also to transform it into a more ideologically acceptable form, both with regard to scientific content and institutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Epigenetics and Russia1
    Epigenetics and Russia1 LOREN GRAHAM Professor of History of Science, Emeritus Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University pigenetics is a controversial but nonetheless booming field in biology worldwide. At the moment, the term is a buzzword that E not only is featured in many scientific journals but is also being celebrated widely and often inaccurately in popular media. Several years ago, the German magazine Der Spiegel featured epigenetics on its cover with the exaggerated announcement “Victory over Genes.”2 According to epigenetics, environmental influences, such as nutri- tion and stress, can cause changes in inheritance in organisms, and this changed inheritance can last several generations, maybe more. Such epigenetic changes are not based on alterations of the underlying DNA but instead on genes that are marked in such a way, often by methyl groups, that they are turned “on” or “off.” In other words, the genes are either expressed or not expressed in further development. One of the reasons why epigenetics is controversial is that it postu- lates that these genes are thus marked by experiences during the lives of individual organisms; therefore, it seems to revive the doctrine of the “inheritance of acquired characteristics,” a view often called “Lamarckism.” Lamarckism was seen as thoroughly discredited by most biologists in the twentieth century but now has some new supporters. A particularly infamous exponent of the inheritance of acquired characteristics in the twentieth century was Trofim Lysenko, the agron- omist who ruled Soviet biology for several decades. With Stalin’s support, he purged the field of his critics. Many well-known Russian biologists were fired, imprisoned, and sometimes even executed.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. 4 (2016) Issue 8 Available for Subscribers Only $4.99
    RUSSIA-DIRECT.ORG VOL. 4 (2016) ISSUE 8 AVAILABLE FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY $4.99 | 31 | CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In an effort to become more competitive globally, Russian universities are attempting to reinvent themselves as new hubs of innovation and entre- 05. A plan for the growth of the preneurship. In this report, we take a closer look at what needs to be done knowledge economy in Russia to complete the transformation of the Russian university system. BY ALEXANDRA ENGOVATOVA AND The report examines the role of the modern university using the frame- EVGENY KUZNETSOV work of University 4.0, a paradigm for innovation and entrepreneurship developed by Russia’s National Technology Initiative (NTI). First and fore- 10. The process of Russian edu- most, Russian universities need to re-think the link between teaching and cational reforms is underway research. For too long, these functions have been separated, and that’s led BY GEORGY LAPTEV to an inability to commercialize new academic innovations, or to inspire students to launch new startups. 12. How universities can become Based on the real-world experience of Russian educational institutions more innovative and entrepre- that are at the forefront of the University 4.0 trend, the report analyzes neurial some of the specific changes that need to be made – such as the introduc- BY KENDRICK WHITE tion of a formal technology transfer office within each university – to encourage more partnerships between business and academia. 22. Interview with Loren Gra- Of course, creating the modern University 4.0 is harder than it sounds. For ham: Why Russia fails to mod- more than a decade, Russian university administrators have struggled with ernize its educational system ways to make their institutions more competitive globally, especially via BY PAVEL KOSHKIN international rankings.
    [Show full text]
  • Naming Infinity: a True Story of Religious Mysticism And
    Naming Infinity Naming Infinity A True Story of Religious Mysticism and Mathematical Creativity Loren Graham and Jean-Michel Kantor The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, En gland 2009 Copyright © 2009 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Graham, Loren R. Naming infinity : a true story of religious mysticism and mathematical creativity / Loren Graham and Jean-Michel Kantor. â p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-674-03293-4 (alk. paper) 1. Mathematics—Russia (Federation)—Religious aspects. 2. Mysticism—Russia (Federation) 3. Mathematics—Russia (Federation)—Philosophy. 4. Mathematics—France—Religious aspects. 5. Mathematics—France—Philosophy. 6. Set theory. I. Kantor, Jean-Michel. II. Title. QA27.R8G73 2009 510.947′0904—dc22â 2008041334 CONTENTS Introduction 1 1. Storming a Monastery 7 2. A Crisis in Mathematics 19 3. The French Trio: Borel, Lebesgue, Baire 33 4. The Russian Trio: Egorov, Luzin, Florensky 66 5. Russian Mathematics and Mysticism 91 6. The Legendary Lusitania 101 7. Fates of the Russian Trio 125 8. Lusitania and After 162 9. The Human in Mathematics, Then and Now 188 Appendix: Luzin’s Personal Archives 205 Notes 212 Acknowledgments 228 Index 231 ILLUSTRATIONS Framed photos of Dmitri Egorov and Pavel Florensky. Photographed by Loren Graham in the basement of the Church of St. Tatiana the Martyr, 2004. 4 Monastery of St. Pantaleimon, Mt. Athos, Greece. 8 Larger and larger circles with segment approaching straight line, as suggested by Nicholas of Cusa. 25 Cantor ternary set.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Scandals”: Soviet Readings of American Cybernetics in the Early Years of the Cold War
    “Russian Scandals”: Soviet Readings of American Cybernetics in the Early Years of the Cold War SLAVA GEROVITCH “Russian scandal” is a parlor game in which players sitting in a circle pass a message from one to another by whisper and finally observe how it has been transformed. In May 1913 a young British psychologist named Frederic Bartlett participated in a series of experiments on visual perception in the newly opened Laboratory of Experimental Psy- chology at Cambridge University. “I was fascinated,” he wrote, “by the variety of interpre- tations which different people then achieved, all of which they said they ‘saw,’ of the same diagrams and pictures” shown to them by the experimentalist.1 Dissatisfied with the ac- cepted “exact” experimental technique, which relied on recollection of lists of nonsense syllables, Bartlett was looking for a new method of studying human memory. He was convinced that memory was a social and cultural phenomenon and wanted cultural associa- tions and behavioral patterns to play a role in the experiment. At that moment, he met Norbert Wiener, a fresh eighteen-year-old Ph.D. from Harvard, who arrived in Cambridge to study mathematical logic with Bertrand Russell. Later Bartlett recalled: We became close friends and had tremendous arguments with one another. One day, when I had been talking about my experiments ... he said: “Couldn’t you do something with ‘Russian Scandal’ as we used to call it?” That was what led to the method I later called “The Method of Serial Reproduction,” one which, in varied form, was to contribute much to the final working out of my experiments.2 I wish to thank Loren Graham, Elizabeth Wood, the participants of the Russian/East-European History Workshop at Harvard University, and the anonymous reader of The Russian Review for their helpful suggestions and criticism.
    [Show full text]